That depends on whose numbers you read, of course. Netmarketshare still has XP at over 10%, with 10 now up to around 15%. Even if you question the Netmarketshare stats (and I would agree there are reasons you might), another source I've seen cited a few times that puts XP much lower still agrees that 10 has only around one third of the market share of 7 and that 7 retains around half of the desktop/laptop market.
Keep in mind that you can measure marketshare in many ways, so the various sites don't have to be wrong and be different.
That one says Windows 10 hit 20% of the market after 8 months. That actually strikes me as good, considering that it is competing with Windows 7, which also was quite good.
Keep in mind that Windows 10 has 300 million users after 8 months. How many Apple Mac users are there total?
Before you say people are leaving Windows, look at the totals. Apple sold less than 5 million Macs in 2015, total. Windows 10 gained 300 million users in 8 months. Most companies would love to have Microsoft's "failure".:)
Well, firstly, you're assuming that everyone needs to replace MS on the desktop. With the variety of devices available today, it's quite possible that a significant part of the market simply won't buy new PCs at all, preferring other types of device such as tablets for some applications.
That has happened, to some extent, with tablets and smart phones, a market that MS clearly waited too long on. However that market has cooled off a lot in the past year as well, due to people finding that they don't need new versions of those devices either.
The obvious answer for those who do want a more traditional PC set-up is Apple. You say they cost way too much, but plenty of businesses I work with routinely equip their staff with Apple laptops. The TCO isn't so very different, and with Windows 10 the TCO of Microsoft's platform doesn't look nearly as attractive as it used to.
Except, they don't... see the above numbers...
In 2015, 238 million PCs were sold, less than 5 million of which were Macs. It isn't even close.
I don't think wanting privacy and security is nearly as rare as you're making out.
I think you have to define "rare", since we can end up talking past each other if we're not careful.:)
I think people care about it when asked, but it is item number 43 on their care list. Paying the bills, feeding the kids, getting to work on time, etc. are all far more important.
So people care, but not enough to change over it.
Leaving aside personal preferences, numerous small businesses will be bound by contractual and/or regulatory rules that mean they have to handle various kinds of data securely. That may mean Windows 10 in its current form simply isn't an option for those businesses, as it's impossible to control or audit sensibly.
While that sounds reasonable, those businesses are going to use it anyway, they have no other choice. My wife is a doctor, HIPPA laws apply to her. I've seen people make the case that Windows 10 doesn't comply with those privacy laws, but frankly lots of doctors use it so either they are all breaking the rules, or no one cares, or it isn't really out of compliance. Take your pick.:)
Except for all the people still running XP, you mean? Including numerous security-sensitive environments like banks and government departments?
Those are becoming more rare every day... Like I said, Windows XP will continue to be used in edge cases for various reasons, but keep in mind that 1980s and 1990s systems are also still being used in edge cases...
There is no need to upgrade an ATM from Windows XP if it has a secure connection to only one other computer and nothing but custom software is running on it, for example.
I expect if we looked back at the stats, we'd find the majority moved on from Windows XP when Windows 7 arrived and didn't suck as hard as Vista did.
Windows Vista did suck, but not for the obvious reasons... It wasn't that bad by the time SP2 came out and computers got better. Windows 7 is, in many ways, just Vista SP3.
Windows 10 biggest problem is that Windows 7 was so good. A lot of people don't currently see a reason to change. That will not hold forever of course, as new hardware comes out that really doesn't work right on Windows 7, as people buy new computers, the market will shift.
But as the free upgrade to Windows 10 has shown, most people are happy with whatever comes on their computer and don't want to change if they don't have to, because they just don't care that much and don't want to learn something new.
In response to your snark, who purchased it, yer' Dad?
Nope, I did... With a lot of hard earned money... $2,700 for that 386...
The 486 was even more, from a Computer Shopper company called ARES, but I was working on that machine. It had a EISA SCSI controller and a 1.2GB hard drive! Lord was that expensive, but I was doing video work at the time (240x180!) and ended up adding a pair of Micropolis SCSI II drives to that thing. They were like $1,000 each and only 4.3GB, but they were AV drives (back when AV drives were a thing) and of course paid for themselves with the work I was doing.
So I guess it was a business computer (the 386 was just a home computer), but I was lucky enough to be able to afford them.
You clearly never knew fast RAM was incredibly expense at times. Anyone remember when RAM was $400 a MegaByte. That's right, I said $400 PER MegaByte. And that's 400 nineteen nineties dollars, sonny.
My first computer was an Apple IIe in 1984, the 80 column card and 64k ram expansion card was about $400 or so back then, so yes, I'm well aware of what RAM used to cost. Now my parents DID pay for that one, so fair enough on that, but I was old enough to appreciate the expense of it.
I had a 486DX33 with 2MB ram for a few weeks because one of the 1MB slot cards had died, and they had to be paired to work.
Sure, but you didn't buy it that way... you bought it with 4MB and you just had to run with 2MB for a little bit...
I remember in 1994 working at a computer store and we had a special for $999 that we sold a lot of. We of course tried to upgrade people, but our basic system was a 486DX/33 with 4MB of RAM and a 200MB Hard Drive. Of course for "only" $50 we'd upgrade you to a DX2/66, and for "only" $50 we'd upgrade you to a 420MB hard drive, and so fourth.:)
The goal was to get the computer price to around $1,500 and we sold a lot of those. Of course, for $1,500 you had a 2x CD-ROM drive, sound card, 420MB hard drive, 8MB of RAM, etc. So it was a fair deal, but we did make profit on those machines, while the $999 had less than $100 in it, it was a loss leader.
My lord... with respect, how in the world did you end up with 2MB of RAM on a 486?
My 386DX/25 purchased in April 1991 from Gateway 2000 had 4MB of RAM. My 486DX/2 66 purchased in 1993 had 16MB of RAM.
In 1994, 2MB was... I wouldn't think that would be very useful. Would that even run Windows 3.1? Ok, 2 MB was the "min system requirements", but that is like saying Windows 10 runs fine in 1GB of RAM (which it doesn't).
I miss those days of the game business... back when companies were small and run by people who cared...
The other cool person I remember was Ken Williams, I had the occasion to meet him once and he was way cool. Never met his wife, but I still follow his blog...
Shame, the games are "flashier" and "better" in some ways, but then we have to deal with EA, which sucks.:(
The only reason there is any need to install updates on an otherwise working system is to mitigate defects in the original software. Software vendors have gotten off very lightly in recent years considering the poor quality of a lot of what they sell, and the only way that's even slightly justifiable under the usual laws about fitness for purpose and the like is because of the way updates are issued for things like security vulnerabilities.
What you want is not possible.
If by chance laws were passed to try and make it so, you'd see almost all future development stop. You'd see prices go way up, you'd see options fall, and you'd be stuck on old unsupported versions of things for a long time.
And what else should everyone do? Pay a few hundred bucks to an accountant every few months in case they're breaking some new tax rule?
If you're making enough money to stand out from the masses, then yes, you should.
Either that, or educate yourself on the tax laws.
Ignorance is not an excuse, the IRS has a rather dim view of that one.
Hire a lawyer to review every legal agreement they ever agree to?
If they are of serious dollar amounts, then yes. You wouldn't (or shouldn't) buy a house without a lawyer, for example. You shouldn't buy or sell a business without one, etc.
Well it does and if you ran a business, you'd understand that.
There is no excuse as a business owner to not understand the mission critical aspects of your company, or to have key employees who do.
Microsoft, and in turn most IT professionals, have spent the better part of 20 years encouraging everyone to keep Windows Update turned on.
For home users, yes... Business users need a bit more advice than just that...
If your systems are mission critical (and a POS checkout system fits that bill), then you need to have a bit more understand than "check automatic updates and hope for the best".
run the risk of installing an entirely new fucking operating system without the user asking for it. There's no reason why a machine running any version of Windows, set to automatically install all categories of updates, should ever install an entirely new fucking operating system without the user asking for it.
The user did ask for it, they asked for all recommended updates to be installed automatically.
Windows 10 is a recommended update to Windows 7 and 8.1.
I'm not disputing that 10 also has some useful advantages over earlier versions, though in my case it's not even a possibility because of the privacy and security implications, and I think the day-to-day UI is significantly worse than what I already have with 7. I'm still waiting to see anything I'd call a killer feature; certainly the high-profile additions like Cortana, Edge and DirectX 12 aren't it.
Two points here:
1. If the security and privacy issues of Windows 10 bother you, well, I think you're in a losing position. Not that I disagree with you from a belief viewpoint, I just think that those days are past. Unless of course you are one of those people who root your android phone, use private encryption, etc. But few people do and will never be a large part of the market.
In other words, avoiding Windows 10 doesn't actually solve the problem unless you take extreme measures in all of your digital life, and doing so will get harder, not easier, going forward. You can probably do it if you care enough, but don't confuse the edge of the market with the mainstream.
2. The fear over people leaving Windows when XP finally ended was there too, and it didn't happen. Instead once support finally ended, people did upgrade. In fact, I completely disagree over your viewpoint on Windows 10 being a poor launch, I don't think MS sees it that way at all. It was far superior to Windows 8 and Vista. People aren't going to start buying Apple Laptops, they cost too much. And frankly Linux isn't a serious option for the mainstream.
Windows 10 isn't "barely" above Windows XP in marketshare today, it is not even close. XP has finally dropped to the small single digits and it continues to lose support. Since MS is actually still supporting it for those who pay big bucks, it won't go to zero, but it is already the fringe. Windows 7 will continue for awhile, but MS will weed people off by not supporting anything past Skylake on it, making it not useful for new computers.
Side note: Regarding this comment:
Microsoft probably is finished as a serious player in the industry.
The problem is that viewpoint is from inside a bubble. What would replace MS on the desktop? There just isn't anything there. Macs cost WAY too much, and Linux isn't a reasonable choice. MS has, for all intents and purposes, a monopoly on the desktop.
Your point about drivers is fair for new equipment, but doesn't matter if someone already has a working system and they aren't changing their hardware.
You're correct, if you keep your current system, it doesn't matter. But there is a practical limit to how long you can do that.
Even if you say, "never upgrade your software", unless you plan to leave the Internet, that stops being an option.
Take a 10 year old computer running Windows XP and try to access the internet. A lot of pages are now so complex as to make the experience painful. Yes, on a Core2Quad, it isn't so bad, but try an old Pentium D machine. It is brutal and nearly unusable.
2. People are comfortable with they have and don't see why they need "new".
3. MS probably pushed too hard on Windows 10 and should have rolled out some of the features over time, rather than at launch.
So some people are avoiding it for different reasons. Me? I had most machines on Windows 8.1 Update, but my personal computer was still on 7. Windows 10 finally got me to upgrade, I like it over 7 for many reasons.
Windows will never be perfect, but on balance 10 is superior to 7 all things considered, at least for most people.
Another point to consider... Staying on Windows 7 isn't really an option long term. Drivers slowly won't get updated for it, new hardware won't really be supported, etc.
For the next 2 years or so, Windows 7 remains a sort-of option for many people, but quickly won't as we approach 2020 when all public support ends.
In the age of the Internet, you simply have to stay up to date. If you're unconnected and run local programs only, then it isn't required, but those days are gone for most people.
The available evidence would indicate that to not be a true statement.
Actually, it did/does. I was a little skeptical myself at first, but I am now living proof that Microsoft does indeed do unrequested upgrades to Win 10.
Which means nothing, because you replied to something I did not say.
I said Windows 10 doesn't insert or change passwords, and it doesn't. You had a password from long ago if Windows 10 has one there. Or you set one up without knowing what you were doing.
No, because coffee machines and personal computers are nothing alike...
The real problem here is that people want to own computers, but don't want to take any responsibility for maintaining them or knowing how they work.
Or better yet, for even bothering to read what is on the screen.
Do you blame Ford for your car breaking down because you failed to maintain it? Or are you just an idiot who doesn't understand how a car works and that it needs to be maintained?
Now... YOU personally don't have to know how to fix the car, you can pay someone for that. But for some reason, people don't want to hire anyone to maintain their computer.
I mean, what about developers? What if an auto-upgrade to Windows 10 breaks some of the older development tools they're relying on for the project they're in the middle of developing?
What about them? Any developer stupid enough to not be maintaining his/her computer deserves this.
First, you wouldn't be running (or shouldn't be) the Home version of Windows.
Second, you shouldn't have everything set to auto-install, you should be paying attention to system maintenance.
Finally, if you have specific tool sets that you know you depend on for older tools, then you should have updates off anyway and do them manually in a tested environment.
And a lot of complaints as those XP / Vista machines struggle to boot due to lack of drivers.
Lord why?
Windows 10 installs on 10+ year old machines just fine without any complaint. It will even install on a mid-level Pentium 4 without complaint (32-bit version), abit at performance levels that aren't very useful.
Lots and lots of 2007-2009 machines have XP on them back when Vista sucked and people bought XP boxes instead.
:) the irony is that if MS simply sold that version for $100 I'll bet a number of people would buy it.
Offer the current version for $19 or the super secure and locked down version for $100. Just make it the Enterprise LTSB version, I imagine someone wants it.:)
attempts to include the factual cited details about british empire's mass murders and genocides, ethnic cleansings(well in to 1970s), regime sanctioned slavery and bonded labor, preventable famines that killed millions(in to 1940s), large scale land and resource grabs, destruction and looting of cultural treasures, regular revolts and protests against regime ( both violent and non violent) in almost every colony, and their brutal suppressions, are censored(except for a unavoidable line or two). people who attempt to include any of that are regularly banned from wikipedia.
What part of "history is written by the victors" is so hard to understand?
The United States has killed millions of people in its existence, and continues to do so to this day. This isn't even history, it is current events.
further reading, if you wish to understand how it really works...
I guess they say History is written by the Winner(s). It is sad that people have no respect that they feel they must censor the truth of mass genocide the British Empire engaged in.
It is "mass genocide" when the "other guys" do it, not when you do it.
Slashdot Mirror
That depends on whose numbers you read, of course. Netmarketshare still has XP at over 10%, with 10 now up to around 15%. Even if you question the Netmarketshare stats (and I would agree there are reasons you might), another source I've seen cited a few times that puts XP much lower still agrees that 10 has only around one third of the market share of 7 and that 7 retains around half of the desktop/laptop market.
http://www.digitaltrends.com/c...
Keep in mind that you can measure marketshare in many ways, so the various sites don't have to be wrong and be different.
That one says Windows 10 hit 20% of the market after 8 months. That actually strikes me as good, considering that it is competing with Windows 7, which also was quite good.
Keep in mind that Windows 10 has 300 million users after 8 months. How many Apple Mac users are there total?
Before you say people are leaving Windows, look at the totals. Apple sold less than 5 million Macs in 2015, total. Windows 10 gained 300 million users in 8 months. Most companies would love to have Microsoft's "failure". :)
Well, firstly, you're assuming that everyone needs to replace MS on the desktop. With the variety of devices available today, it's quite possible that a significant part of the market simply won't buy new PCs at all, preferring other types of device such as tablets for some applications.
That has happened, to some extent, with tablets and smart phones, a market that MS clearly waited too long on. However that market has cooled off a lot in the past year as well, due to people finding that they don't need new versions of those devices either.
The obvious answer for those who do want a more traditional PC set-up is Apple. You say they cost way too much, but plenty of businesses I work with routinely equip their staff with Apple laptops. The TCO isn't so very different, and with Windows 10 the TCO of Microsoft's platform doesn't look nearly as attractive as it used to.
Except, they don't... see the above numbers...
In 2015, 238 million PCs were sold, less than 5 million of which were Macs. It isn't even close.
http://www.statisticbrain.com/...
I don't think wanting privacy and security is nearly as rare as you're making out.
I think you have to define "rare", since we can end up talking past each other if we're not careful. :)
I think people care about it when asked, but it is item number 43 on their care list. Paying the bills, feeding the kids, getting to work on time, etc. are all far more important.
So people care, but not enough to change over it.
Leaving aside personal preferences, numerous small businesses will be bound by contractual and/or regulatory rules that mean they have to handle various kinds of data securely. That may mean Windows 10 in its current form simply isn't an option for those businesses, as it's impossible to control or audit sensibly.
While that sounds reasonable, those businesses are going to use it anyway, they have no other choice. My wife is a doctor, HIPPA laws apply to her. I've seen people make the case that Windows 10 doesn't comply with those privacy laws, but frankly lots of doctors use it so either they are all breaking the rules, or no one cares, or it isn't really out of compliance. Take your pick. :)
Except for all the people still running XP, you mean? Including numerous security-sensitive environments like banks and government departments?
Those are becoming more rare every day... Like I said, Windows XP will continue to be used in edge cases for various reasons, but keep in mind that 1980s and 1990s systems are also still being used in edge cases...
There is no need to upgrade an ATM from Windows XP if it has a secure connection to only one other computer and nothing but custom software is running on it, for example.
I expect if we looked back at the stats, we'd find the majority moved on from Windows XP when Windows 7 arrived and didn't suck as hard as Vista did.
Windows Vista did suck, but not for the obvious reasons... It wasn't that bad by the time SP2 came out and computers got better. Windows 7 is, in many ways, just Vista SP3.
Windows 10 biggest problem is that Windows 7 was so good. A lot of people don't currently see a reason to change. That will not hold forever of course, as new hardware comes out that really doesn't work right on Windows 7, as people buy new computers, the market will shift.
But as the free upgrade to Windows 10 has shown, most people are happy with whatever comes on their computer and don't want to change if they don't have to, because they just don't care that much and don't want to learn something new.
In response to your snark, who purchased it, yer' Dad?
Nope, I did... With a lot of hard earned money... $2,700 for that 386...
The 486 was even more, from a Computer Shopper company called ARES, but I was working on that machine. It had a EISA SCSI controller and a 1.2GB hard drive! Lord was that expensive, but I was doing video work at the time (240x180!) and ended up adding a pair of Micropolis SCSI II drives to that thing. They were like $1,000 each and only 4.3GB, but they were AV drives (back when AV drives were a thing) and of course paid for themselves with the work I was doing.
So I guess it was a business computer (the 386 was just a home computer), but I was lucky enough to be able to afford them.
You clearly never knew fast RAM was incredibly expense at times. Anyone remember when RAM was $400 a MegaByte. That's right, I said $400 PER MegaByte. And that's 400 nineteen nineties dollars, sonny.
My first computer was an Apple IIe in 1984, the 80 column card and 64k ram expansion card was about $400 or so back then, so yes, I'm well aware of what RAM used to cost. Now my parents DID pay for that one, so fair enough on that, but I was old enough to appreciate the expense of it.
I had a 486DX33 with 2MB ram for a few weeks because one of the 1MB slot cards had died, and they had to be paired to work.
Sure, but you didn't buy it that way... you bought it with 4MB and you just had to run with 2MB for a little bit...
I remember in 1994 working at a computer store and we had a special for $999 that we sold a lot of. We of course tried to upgrade people, but our basic system was a 486DX/33 with 4MB of RAM and a 200MB Hard Drive. Of course for "only" $50 we'd upgrade you to a DX2/66, and for "only" $50 we'd upgrade you to a 420MB hard drive, and so fourth. :)
The goal was to get the computer price to around $1,500 and we sold a lot of those. Of course, for $1,500 you had a 2x CD-ROM drive, sound card, 420MB hard drive, 8MB of RAM, etc. So it was a fair deal, but we did make profit on those machines, while the $999 had less than $100 in it, it was a loss leader.
Ahh, the good old days! :)
We initially had 2MB of RAM in that 486 DX/33MHz.
My lord... with respect, how in the world did you end up with 2MB of RAM on a 486?
My 386DX/25 purchased in April 1991 from Gateway 2000 had 4MB of RAM. My 486DX/2 66 purchased in 1993 had 16MB of RAM.
In 1994, 2MB was... I wouldn't think that would be very useful. Would that even run Windows 3.1? Ok, 2 MB was the "min system requirements", but that is like saying Windows 10 runs fine in 1GB of RAM (which it doesn't).
Ouch, the pain, ouch!
Where is my consumer stupidity here, mister, where is my fault?
You set Windows to automatically install recommended Windows updates.
Windows 10 is a recommended Windows update to 7 or 8.1.
I have no idea. If I knew then I'd say so.
You don't, I do... you don't know what you're doing, because what you're suggesting just isn't going to happen randomly...
You either did it, or you have an infected computer, there is no other reasonable answer.
I miss those days of the game business... back when companies were small and run by people who cared...
The other cool person I remember was Ken Williams, I had the occasion to meet him once and he was way cool. Never met his wife, but I still follow his blog...
Shame, the games are "flashier" and "better" in some ways, but then we have to deal with EA, which sucks. :(
The only reason there is any need to install updates on an otherwise working system is to mitigate defects in the original software. Software vendors have gotten off very lightly in recent years considering the poor quality of a lot of what they sell, and the only way that's even slightly justifiable under the usual laws about fitness for purpose and the like is because of the way updates are issued for things like security vulnerabilities.
What you want is not possible.
If by chance laws were passed to try and make it so, you'd see almost all future development stop. You'd see prices go way up, you'd see options fall, and you'd be stuck on old unsupported versions of things for a long time.
And what else should everyone do? Pay a few hundred bucks to an accountant every few months in case they're breaking some new tax rule?
If you're making enough money to stand out from the masses, then yes, you should.
Either that, or educate yourself on the tax laws.
Ignorance is not an excuse, the IRS has a rather dim view of that one.
Hire a lawyer to review every legal agreement they ever agree to?
If they are of serious dollar amounts, then yes. You wouldn't (or shouldn't) buy a house without a lawyer, for example. You shouldn't buy or sell a business without one, etc.
No, and no.
Thanks for playing, better luck next time.
Yes, and Yes.
See, I can do that too!
What in the world would Windows put in for a password if you never had one? Random text? The whole premise makes no sense.
I do this for a living, what you are claiming doesn't ring as true.
It shouldn't matter.
Well it does and if you ran a business, you'd understand that.
There is no excuse as a business owner to not understand the mission critical aspects of your company, or to have key employees who do.
Microsoft, and in turn most IT professionals, have spent the better part of 20 years encouraging everyone to keep Windows Update turned on.
For home users, yes... Business users need a bit more advice than just that...
If your systems are mission critical (and a POS checkout system fits that bill), then you need to have a bit more understand than "check automatic updates and hope for the best".
run the risk of installing an entirely new fucking operating system without the user asking for it. There's no reason why a machine running any version of Windows, set to automatically install all categories of updates, should ever install an entirely new fucking operating system without the user asking for it.
The user did ask for it, they asked for all recommended updates to be installed automatically.
Windows 10 is a recommended update to Windows 7 and 8.1.
I'm not disputing that 10 also has some useful advantages over earlier versions, though in my case it's not even a possibility because of the privacy and security implications, and I think the day-to-day UI is significantly worse than what I already have with 7. I'm still waiting to see anything I'd call a killer feature; certainly the high-profile additions like Cortana, Edge and DirectX 12 aren't it.
Two points here:
1. If the security and privacy issues of Windows 10 bother you, well, I think you're in a losing position. Not that I disagree with you from a belief viewpoint, I just think that those days are past. Unless of course you are one of those people who root your android phone, use private encryption, etc. But few people do and will never be a large part of the market.
In other words, avoiding Windows 10 doesn't actually solve the problem unless you take extreme measures in all of your digital life, and doing so will get harder, not easier, going forward. You can probably do it if you care enough, but don't confuse the edge of the market with the mainstream.
2. The fear over people leaving Windows when XP finally ended was there too, and it didn't happen. Instead once support finally ended, people did upgrade. In fact, I completely disagree over your viewpoint on Windows 10 being a poor launch, I don't think MS sees it that way at all. It was far superior to Windows 8 and Vista. People aren't going to start buying Apple Laptops, they cost too much. And frankly Linux isn't a serious option for the mainstream.
Windows 10 isn't "barely" above Windows XP in marketshare today, it is not even close. XP has finally dropped to the small single digits and it continues to lose support. Since MS is actually still supporting it for those who pay big bucks, it won't go to zero, but it is already the fringe. Windows 7 will continue for awhile, but MS will weed people off by not supporting anything past Skylake on it, making it not useful for new computers.
Side note: Regarding this comment:
Microsoft probably is finished as a serious player in the industry.
The problem is that viewpoint is from inside a bubble. What would replace MS on the desktop? There just isn't anything there. Macs cost WAY too much, and Linux isn't a reasonable choice. MS has, for all intents and purposes, a monopoly on the desktop.
Your point about drivers is fair for new equipment, but doesn't matter if someone already has a working system and they aren't changing their hardware.
You're correct, if you keep your current system, it doesn't matter. But there is a practical limit to how long you can do that.
Even if you say, "never upgrade your software", unless you plan to leave the Internet, that stops being an option.
Take a 10 year old computer running Windows XP and try to access the internet. A lot of pages are now so complex as to make the experience painful. Yes, on a Core2Quad, it isn't so bad, but try an old Pentium D machine. It is brutal and nearly unusable.
That strikes me as possible... but again, that is someone who doesn't know what they are doing and didn't bother to learn.
I know that might sound harsh, but I get sick of people who get popups, click on them, then ask me "what did that do?"
I ask, "well, what did it say?" and they reply, "I don't know, it was a bunch of words and it was in my way so I clicked on it to get rid of it".
I kid you not, hundreds and hundreds of times I've heard that.
A few thoughts:
1. People are afraid of change, good or bad.
2. People are comfortable with they have and don't see why they need "new".
3. MS probably pushed too hard on Windows 10 and should have rolled out some of the features over time, rather than at launch.
So some people are avoiding it for different reasons. Me? I had most machines on Windows 8.1 Update, but my personal computer was still on 7. Windows 10 finally got me to upgrade, I like it over 7 for many reasons.
Windows will never be perfect, but on balance 10 is superior to 7 all things considered, at least for most people.
Another point to consider... Staying on Windows 7 isn't really an option long term. Drivers slowly won't get updated for it, new hardware won't really be supported, etc.
For the next 2 years or so, Windows 7 remains a sort-of option for many people, but quickly won't as we approach 2020 when all public support ends.
In the age of the Internet, you simply have to stay up to date. If you're unconnected and run local programs only, then it isn't required, but those days are gone for most people.
3) I have a pretty good idea what I'm doing.
The available evidence would indicate that to not be a true statement.
Actually, it did/does. I was a little skeptical myself at first, but I am now living proof that Microsoft does indeed do unrequested upgrades to Win 10.
Which means nothing, because you replied to something I did not say.
I said Windows 10 doesn't insert or change passwords, and it doesn't. You had a password from long ago if Windows 10 has one there. Or you set one up without knowing what you were doing.
There is no random password feature.
No, because coffee machines and personal computers are nothing alike...
The real problem here is that people want to own computers, but don't want to take any responsibility for maintaining them or knowing how they work.
Or better yet, for even bothering to read what is on the screen.
Do you blame Ford for your car breaking down because you failed to maintain it? Or are you just an idiot who doesn't understand how a car works and that it needs to be maintained?
Now... YOU personally don't have to know how to fix the car, you can pay someone for that. But for some reason, people don't want to hire anyone to maintain their computer.
Don't want to do that? Don't own a computer.
Why should anyone have to do that?
Because that is how open personal computers work. With freedom comes responsibility.
One of those responsibilities is to maintain the computer properly.
If you don't want to learn, pay someone to do it who will be responsible if it breaks.
I mean, what about developers? What if an auto-upgrade to Windows 10 breaks some of the older development tools they're relying on for the project they're in the middle of developing?
What about them? Any developer stupid enough to not be maintaining his/her computer deserves this.
First, you wouldn't be running (or shouldn't be) the Home version of Windows.
Second, you shouldn't have everything set to auto-install, you should be paying attention to system maintenance.
Finally, if you have specific tool sets that you know you depend on for older tools, then you should have updates off anyway and do them manually in a tested environment.
And a lot of complaints as those XP / Vista machines struggle to boot due to lack of drivers.
Lord why?
Windows 10 installs on 10+ year old machines just fine without any complaint. It will even install on a mid-level Pentium 4 without complaint (32-bit version), abit at performance levels that aren't very useful.
Lots and lots of 2007-2009 machines have XP on them back when Vista sucked and people bought XP boxes instead.
:) the irony is that if MS simply sold that version for $100 I'll bet a number of people would buy it.
Offer the current version for $19 or the super secure and locked down version for $100. Just make it the Enterprise LTSB version, I imagine someone wants it. :)
attempts to include the factual cited details about british empire's mass murders and genocides, ethnic cleansings(well in to 1970s), regime sanctioned slavery and bonded labor, preventable famines that killed millions(in to 1940s), large scale land and resource grabs, destruction and looting of cultural treasures, regular revolts and protests against regime ( both violent and non violent) in almost every colony, and their brutal suppressions, are censored(except for a unavoidable line or two). people who attempt to include any of that are regularly banned from wikipedia .
What part of "history is written by the victors" is so hard to understand?
The United States has killed millions of people in its existence, and continues to do so to this day. This isn't even history, it is current events.
https://youtu.be/K4NRJoCNHIs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
further reading, if you wish to understand how it really works...
I guess they say History is written by the Winner(s). It is sad that people have no respect that they feel they must censor the truth of mass genocide the British Empire engaged in.
It is "mass genocide" when the "other guys" do it, not when you do it.
No one is the villain of their own story. :)
Seriously, WTF were the Indians supposed to do?
Engage in "Bigger Army Diplomacy"...
The idea that somehow we all will hold hands and sing peace and love is a delusion by people who don't know how things really work.
The Indians lost and white-man won because we had a better version of BAD (yes, the irony of that acronym does not escape me).
If anyone in the world wishes to be free from outside influence, they need their own BAD.
North Korea's leader may be nuts, or he might be saner than our media gives him credit for. He can be sane and still evil of course. :)
But then, him being evil doesn't automatically make us good, just less evil.