Windows 10 - Day 1

On 30/06/2016 11:57, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 29 June 2016 14:49:13 UTC+1, nospam wrote:
[]
windows 10 came out july 29th last year, so it's been exactly 11 months.

Yeah windows is Gay it came out ;-)

Windows-10 has been available to the general public for well over a
year, my first record of using it was 2014-Nov-19. About 19 month by my
reckoning. Plenty of time for issues to be resolved or marked as
"incurable".

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

In article , David Taylor
wrote:

windows 10 came out july 29th last year, so it's been exactly 11 months.

Yeah windows is Gay it came out ;-)

Windows-10 has been available to the general public for well over a
year, my first record of using it was 2014-Nov-19. About 19 month by my
reckoning.

nope. you were wrong the first time you said it and you're still wrong.

what you had was a prerelease version, which was *not* available to the
general public.

windows 10 was released to the public on july 29, 2015.
windows 10 anniversary edition will be released on august 2, 2016.

it's called the 'anniversary edition' because it's the one year
anniversary of its public release.

Plenty of time for issues to be resolved or marked as
"incurable".

it takes a lot longer than one year to resolve all issues or mark them
incurable.

however, at least microsoft realized that tricking people was a bad
idea and redid the update nag box.

On Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:28:46 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:56:04 -0400, PAS wrote:

MS did make the change so that closing the window by clicking the "X"
meant that you accept the update

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonke.../#5ff1482478b0

Here is the latest info on the subject:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06..._win10_policy/
or http://tinyurl.com/z3ayhek

.... and here is the latest latest:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07...py_with_win10/
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sat, 02 Jul 2016 10:00:06 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:28:46 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:56:04 -0400, PAS wrote:

MS did make the change so that closing the window by clicking the "X"
meant that you accept the update

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonke.../#5ff1482478b0

Here is the latest info on the subject:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06..._win10_policy/
or http://tinyurl.com/z3ayhek

... and here is the latest latest:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07...py_with_win10/

But surely it is in their best interests for people not to take the
free upgrade and therefore to have to pay for it over the forthcoming
months when they will be nagged by special half-price offers or even
be blackmailed into "no more nags if you pay by DD".

--
AnthonyL

On Sat, 02 Jul 2016 11:43:19 GMT, lid (AnthonyL)
wrote:

On Sat, 02 Jul 2016 10:00:06 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:28:46 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:56:04 -0400, PAS wrote:

MS did make the change so that closing the window by clicking the "X"
meant that you accept the update

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonke.../#5ff1482478b0

Here is the latest info on the subject:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06..._win10_policy/
or http://tinyurl.com/z3ayhek

... and here is the latest latest:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07...py_with_win10/

But surely it is in their best interests for people not to take the
free upgrade and therefore to have to pay for it over the forthcoming
months when they will be nagged by special half-price offers or even
be blackmailed into "no more nags if you pay by DD".

Not many people will regard paying half price as a better deal than
getting it for free.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 11:14:07 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Sat, 02 Jul 2016 11:43:19 GMT, lid (AnthonyL)
wrote:

On Sat, 02 Jul 2016 10:00:06 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:28:46 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:56:04 -0400, PAS wrote:

MS did make the change so that closing the window by clicking the "X"
meant that you accept the update

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonke.../#5ff1482478b0

Here is the latest info on the subject:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06..._win10_policy/
or http://tinyurl.com/z3ayhek

... and here is the latest latest:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07...py_with_win10/

But surely it is in their best interests for people not to take the
free upgrade and therefore to have to pay for it over the forthcoming
months when they will be nagged by special half-price offers or even
be blackmailed into "no more nags if you pay by DD".

Not many people will regard paying half price as a better deal than
getting it for free.

I think you've missed the irony of my point. If free is such a good
deal why are they having to be so aggressive at giving it away?


--
AnthonyL

On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 11:56:58 GMT, lid (AnthonyL)
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 11:14:07 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Sat, 02 Jul 2016 11:43:19 GMT, lid (AnthonyL)
wrote:

On Sat, 02 Jul 2016 10:00:06 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:28:46 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:56:04 -0400, PAS wrote:

MS did make the change so that closing the window by clicking the "X"
meant that you accept the update

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonke.../#5ff1482478b0

Here is the latest info on the subject:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06..._win10_policy/
or http://tinyurl.com/z3ayhek

... and here is the latest latest:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07...py_with_win10/

But surely it is in their best interests for people not to take the
free upgrade and therefore to have to pay for it over the forthcoming
months when they will be nagged by special half-price offers or even
be blackmailed into "no more nags if you pay by DD".

Not many people will regard paying half price as a better deal than
getting it for free.

I think you've missed the irony of my point. If free is such a good
deal why are they having to be so aggressive at giving it away?

Sorry: I wasn't expecting irony from you :-)

The fact that W10 is being pushed so hard is a measure of MS's
assessment of people's unwillingness to accept new upgrades. That
people should be reluctant is not surprising when you look at what
happened after XP (or even 7). I would not have upgraded when I did
except as a desperate attempt to fix a problem - which eventually
turned out to be due to MS sneaking some aspects of W10 security into
W7. I don't trust those *******s and I too would be reluctant to
upgrade if I had not already done so. I can see W10 becoming another
version of ransom software.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


The fact that W10 is being pushed so hard is a measure of MS's
assessment of people's unwillingness to accept new upgrades.

that, and they want people running the latest version because it's more
secure than what came before it. that helps *everyone*.

That
people should be reluctant is not surprising when you look at what
happened after XP (or even 7). I would not have upgraded when I did
except as a desperate attempt to fix a problem - which eventually
turned out to be due to MS sneaking some aspects of W10 security into
W7.

that's a good thing.

since a lot of people are still using win7/8, it's a good idea to patch
security issues. again, it helps everyone.

I don't trust those *******s and I too would be reluctant to
upgrade if I had not already done so. I can see W10 becoming another
version of ransom software.

ransom software that's free. odd definition of ransom.

On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 17:58:20 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


The fact that W10 is being pushed so hard is a measure of MS's
assessment of people's unwillingness to accept new upgrades.

that, and they want people running the latest version because it's more
secure than what came before it. that helps *everyone*.

That
people should be reluctant is not surprising when you look at what
happened after XP (or even 7). I would not have upgraded when I did
except as a desperate attempt to fix a problem - which eventually
turned out to be due to MS sneaking some aspects of W10 security into
W7.

that's a good thing.

since a lot of people are still using win7/8, it's a good idea to patch
security issues. again, it helps everyone.

But not when they don't tell you what they have done or that it will
change the way installed software works.

I don't trust those *******s and I too would be reluctant to
upgrade if I had not already done so. I can see W10 becoming another
version of ransom software.

ransom software that's free. odd definition of ransom.

I was thinking of the situation if Windows is changed to a
subscription-only model. I know a lot of people say it won't happen
but I dunno ..
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


That
people should be reluctant is not surprising when you look at what
happened after XP (or even 7). I would not have upgraded when I did
except as a desperate attempt to fix a problem - which eventually
turned out to be due to MS sneaking some aspects of W10 security into
W7.

that's a good thing.

since a lot of people are still using win7/8, it's a good idea to patch
security issues. again, it helps everyone.

But not when they don't tell you what they have done or that it will
change the way installed software works.

any software that changes how it works due to security patches is buggy.

blame *that*, not microsoft.

I don't trust those *******s and I too would be reluctant to
upgrade if I had not already done so. I can see W10 becoming another
version of ransom software.

ransom software that's free. odd definition of ransom.

I was thinking of the situation if Windows is changed to a
subscription-only model. I know a lot of people say it won't happen
but I dunno ..

microsoft has said that they aren't going to change to a subscription
only model.