Slashdot Mirror
First Windows 10 RTM Candidate Appears
Mark Wilson reports that the first RTM candidate for Windows 10 has been spotted: build 10176. Leaks and sources have suggested the company intends to finalize the operating system later this week, perhaps as early as July 9th. This would give Microsoft almost three weeks to distribute it to retailers and devicemakers before the July 29th launch date. "While the RTM process has been a significant milestone for previous releases of Windows, it’s more of a minor one for Windows 10. Microsoft is moving Windows 10 to a 'Windows as a service' model that means the operating system is regularly updated."
Windows 10, Windows 8, Windows 7, Windows Vista, Windows XP, Windows 2000, Windows NT.
While Windows XP had a 64bit version the 32bit version was still popular, as PC's at the time were still mostly under 4 gigs of ram, and most were 32bit processors.
XP lasted too long. There was too much effort in Vista, they wanted to make an ultimate OS, thus failed miserably, a system designed to take advantage of many of the next generation Ideas, that was not implemented.
Windows 7 "the new golden age of Windows?" really took the fact that there was competition with Mac OS and Linux seriously and made one of their most Solid Consumer OS, they fixed Vista's features that were over engineered and made it work well again. Windows 7 was good enough to put an end of the "I'm a Mac and I'm a PC" commercials. Windows 7 is also when people started switching seriously to a 64bit OS. And actually loosing compatibility with many of the old 16bit apps.
Windows 8 and 8.1 isn't that bad. However they tried to make a tablet and PC OS. By in turn making a system that isn't optimal for both. Granted now with the Ultrabooks with touch screens getting more popular, the interface changes are paying off a bit more, however we are missing what we need for a good workstation OS.
Windows 10... From what I have seen so far they seem to be going back to making it more of a workstation OS, with touch capabilities. The Tablet never caught on as well as people hoped. It didn't send the Desktop/Laptop into a doom spiral. However it changed that nature of the desktop to a smaller market share. Those who need to do real computing still needed these systems. And the new Ultrabooks convertible systems have caught on.
Now what about Linux and Macs?
If you don't like windows, there isn't anything wrong with Linux or Macs, so even if Windows 10 is a huge success... It doesn't mean it will kill your favorite OS as I am sure they will be around for decades to come.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Wrong! Stop peddling that nonsense! Microsoft has repeatedly and specifically said you do not and will never have to pay a yearly subscription for Windows once you've purchased it. What it means is that there will be no more windows 'versions', that this will just be in place updates from this point.
Now we wait for the RTFM version so we can start screaming obscenities.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
The Tablet did take off. Just not Windows Tablets. iPad and Android tablets rule that marketplace.
The Windows OS wasn't designed for a tablet, and the changes in Win 8.x were too late and focused on the wrong sector (desktop/laptops). The tablet interface in Win 8 does work, but people don't buy windows tablets. The Convertible Windows laptop/tablets are more expensive than a regular laptop and a separate tablet.
Trying to be the best of both, and being good at neither is a good way to lose market-share. Which is where Windows is now. Windows is declining, and as Microsoft moves to the subscription model, will die even faster.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Whether you trust microsoft or not, the fact remains that trying to push the "you need to buy it every year" line as a fact is in direct opposition to what Microsoft is publicly stating at this point.
Trying to claim that it is a factual statement because "Microsoft is always lying" is just weak.
As of the time of writing Microsoft's stance on this has been repeatedly outlined. Trying to ignore it, dismiss it, or simply state that they're lying to fit your predetermined narrative that anything that comes out of Redmond is bad just makes you look like you're grasping at straws.
I reinstall just-infrequently-enough that I don't maintain an image w/ all the updates slipstreamed in, so it invariably takes 20mins for the initial install, and then hours and hours for all the updates to get it current.
It'd be really nice if MS would be kind enough to provide up-to-date .ISO builds like they've been doing w/ the Win10 insider program
So in other words people will just be expected to buy their security patches and upgrades in the future after a year or so of patches.
No, you just made that up.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
That's an old article and many of the cons have already been debunked.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
This. Apple is bad enough at trying to shoe horn new releases into a set schedule, but for MS to pull that off, given their track record, would take a Parting-the-Red-Sea miracle. Hey MS, here's a crazy idea:
1. Come up with a list of cool features your users and best developers want to see.
2. Implement them.
3. Test them.
4. Bake them into a new OS and release it when it's ready. If it takes 14 months instead of 12, THAT'S OK!!! Really. The number of people jonesing for a new Windows release, even if it's half-baked and buggy, is incredibly close to zero.
5. Profit!
BTW, if any of this is too complicated I'm available to consult at very reasonable rates.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
and they're a huge multinational who doesn't give crap what their consumers want
Wrong. MS has always done things with customers in mind. You would know this if you worked with them at any partner level. It's for the same reason their OS and Office suites carry so much baggage and often makes them look bad. It's because they believe in keeping legacy software compatible with future generations of OS and they generally do a good job at that.
Look at Windows XP. They extended their support twice. They didn't have to but they did.
I often see you flame MS so I'm not surprised by your appearance in on this subject. It's almost as if MS threatens you in some way shape or form. No offense intended.
[... 5 minutes later...]
- Hey, how come I can't run Excel anymore? - Excel doesn't run under Linux, but here, you can use OpenOffice instead. - Screw that, I need to run Excel! Put Windows back on!
Well, there is another alternative: Get a Mac.
That way, you can have your Excel (or Libre Office) and a secure OS. And if you want to mess around in the command-line world, well, you can do that, too.