Microsoft's Chief Marketing Officer Chris Capossela claims Windows 7 already has serious problems du
103 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Scot;49452602]This is the stupidest complaint I've ever heard. If you don't want it, don't use it. It's there for people who may not be very tech literate to find programs that are safe and easy to install. How could that possibly be a bad thing?[/QUOTE]
If there isn't an option to remove it, then i would complain too.
I will upgrade to Win10 when [b]i[/b] decide to, not by microsoft forcing it down my throat.
And by the amount of reports i've read about it online, it won't happen soon.
And the scare tactics used by Microsoft is laughable.
[QUOTE=Lurr;49452624]What's wrong with wanting a functional and aesthetically pleasing interface?
On performance, you're just outright wrong. W10 runs any number of totally unnecessary background processes that serve to cause massive slowdown.
Compatibility is hit or miss. I have had issues, as have others here. You might not have, but it's very much a problem.[/QUOTE]
Sorry I don't run a pocket calculator as my computer; I do heavy video/photo editing as well as gaming and never have any slowdown.
Wait, just a few months ago I read a lot of good reports about Win10, what changed?
[QUOTE=icarusfoundyou;49452653]Sorry I don't run a pocket calculator as my computer; I do heavy video/photo editing as well as gaming and never have any slowdown.[/QUOTE]
It's good for you that you have a fully capable machine. Most people have considerably weaker or older hardware, though. MS should optimize their software, not count on powerful hardware (such as yours).
[QUOTE=CrossNgen;49452663]Wait, just a few months ago I read a lot of good reports about Win10, what changed?[/QUOTE]
Not much changed, people just have wildly polarizing opinions on the whole 7/10 split while 8 just sits in the corner where people pretend it never existed.
[QUOTE=EskillV2;49452631]If there isn't an option to remove it, then i would complain too.
[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/wFeGXNV.png[/IMG]
Now you can pretend that you uninstalled it.
It's hardly as annoying as 8.1, but there are a few gripes I have with it.
First off, it handles audio drivers in a strange, unpredictable manner. If there are audio drivers that didn't install properly, it will silently ignore errors.
Second, the driver updates automatically deployed by windows update are janky guesswork as all hell. At one point my built-in keyboard drivers (?) had been replaced by PS2 keyboard drivers (which my laptop doesn't support). And I had to reinstall my old ones using an on-screen keyboard. Of course this could have been bloat from the manufacturer, but since there was no confirmation I had no idea this change had occurred.
Aside, it's okay, I guess.
[QUOTE=EskillV2;49452631]If there isn't an option to remove it, then i would complain too.
I will upgrade to Win10 when [b]i[/b] decide to, not by microsoft forcing it down my throat.
And by the amount of reports i've read about it online, it won't happen soon.
And the scare tactics used by Microsoft is laughable.[/QUOTE]
If there isn't a way to remove the control panel, which I do not use, I'm never going to upgrade to Windows Whatever. Why do you need to remove the store in particular? It's completely arbitrary.
[QUOTE=Lurr;49452669]It's good for you that you have a fully capable machine. Most people have considerably weaker or older hardware, though. MS should optimize their software, not count on powerful hardware (such as yours).[/QUOTE]
I guess that'd apply if it were actually true.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/p4dvS28.png[/img]
My computer has been up for 4 days and 20 hours; less than 10 minutes of CPU time combined is [i]nothing[/i].
EDIT: Actually according to taskmgr that is resource usage since May last year. So it is doubly nothing.
[QUOTE=Lurr;49452669]It's good for you that you have a fully capable machine. Most people have considerably weaker or older hardware, though. MS should optimize their software, not count on powerful hardware (such as yours).[/QUOTE]
Both space and RAM requirements are exactly the same as Windows 7's. Considering the march of hardware efficiency, it's now comparably easier to run Windows 10 (or 8 for that matter).
Microsoft might try to spread FUD (though I don't think they'd seriously expect to do so succesfully via a podcast with an average of ~5000 viewers/listeners. Why do you think this article popped up 10 days after the interview with one very specific quote?), but so is the general media as well.
[QUOTE=Lurr;49452669]It's good for you that you have a fully capable machine. Most people have considerably weaker or older hardware, though. MS should optimize their software, not count on powerful hardware (such as yours).[/QUOTE]
Hi, I installed 10 on a 6 year old PC that was low-mid range when I bought it. It received a significant performance increase over 7. I would go so far as to say 10 has given the PC license for another 2-3 years of use as a family machine. I did the same on a laptop that's one foot in the grave and it too is running better since I installed 10, it isn't running well but it doesn't freeze constantly any more.
I'm not saying 10 is perfect, there are certainly cases where it has compatibility issues or just refuses to work for some people, but that applies to every OS.
Most of what people hate about 10 can be turned down, turned off, or hidden easily enough. When you install it you have a choice to disable all forms of metadata being sent to Microsoft, and there are plenty of resources showing you how to block most of Microsoft's access to your PC if you're paranoid about it. All the store stuff and the default apps like Groove Music or whatever can be hidden, if not uninstalled outright. And from what I've observed there's nothing that runs in the background that would cause performance loss by default.
I do think the way Microsoft are trying to force people onto 10 is shitty, and the inability to deny updates is aggravating, but other than that it's a solid OS which is basically 7 but running better. Provided you're not the rare case that has compatibility problems.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49452906]Both space and RAM requirements are exactly the same as Windows 7's. Considering the march of hardware efficiency, it's now comparably easier to run Windows 10 (or 8 for that matter).
Microsoft might try to spread FUD (though I don't think they'd seriously expect to do so succesfully via a podcast with an average of ~5000 viewers/listeners. Why do you think this article popped up 10 days after the interview with one very specific quote?), but so is the general media as well.[/QUOTE]
I think an addition to what Lurr said is that people also have improperly specced computers.
A computer 5 years ago with 4GB of RAM? Sure.
A computer 3 years ago with 8GB of RAM? Sure.
Today? 16GB should be the absolute minimum and it doesn't even cost that much.
[QUOTE=icarusfoundyou;49452915]I think an addition to what Lurr said is that people also have improperly specced computers.
A computer 5 years ago with 4GB of RAM? Sure.
A computer 3 years ago with 8GB of RAM? Sure.
Today? 16GB should be the absolute minimum and it doesn't even cost that much.[/QUOTE]
RAM requirements in typical scenarios haven't risen that much. Having 4GB in a computer today should definitely be a minimum if you have a choice, but 8GB is totally fine in most cases. I've edited a large 80GB project in Premiere with 8GB and it was generally a pleasant experience. 16GB is nice, but it really isn't needed in my opinion, and it's definitely not the absolute minimum. Either way the point is that Windows 10 definitely isn't a RAM hog.
[QUOTE=Lurr;49452669]It's good for you that you have a fully capable machine. Most people have considerably weaker or older hardware, though. MS should optimize their software, not count on powerful hardware (such as yours).[/QUOTE]
Windows 8 and 10 both optimized themselves more, partly in a bid to make windows 8 usable on lower end tablet hardware, which has paid dividends in lowering both RAM and CPU requirements from 7
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49452933]RAM requirements in typical scenarios haven't risen that much. Having 4GB in a computer today should definitely be a minimum if you have a choice, but 8GB is totally fine in most cases. I've edited a large 80GB project in Premiere with 8GB and it was generally a pleasant experience. 16GB is nice, but it really isn't needed in my opinion, and it's definitely not the absolute minimum. Either way the point is that Windows 10 definitely isn't a RAM hog.[/QUOTE]
For grandma or basic computer usage? Sure.
For anything that is semi-serious 8GB is not sufficient in 2015.
Usually the bottleneck when it comes to Premiere is what kind of footage you're actually editing; if it isn't especially taxing then RAM shouldn't be too much of a problem.
It more comes down to money vs time; want to sit around with your thumb up your ass waiting ages for shit to page around your harddisk? Go for it. But RAM is so cheap nowadays that you would be a fool to run with less than 16GB.
Want to run games or do editing without having to close your 40 Chrome tabs?
And yes, I run an SSD (in fact two)--but I will never willingly use a system with less than 16GB of RAM*
I'm on 16 at the moment, but TBH I will move to 32GB as soon as I'm financially able to.
* Ok my Surface Pro 3 has 8 GB, and I can a lot on it that I can do on my normal PC, but it reaches the limits of that amount of RAM fairly quickly.
How? I use chrome, Skype, steam, and several background programs simultaneously on my windows 10 machine with 16 GB of RAM on an SSD and I almost never go above 6 GB usage
[QUOTE=icarusfoundyou;49452957]For grandma or basic computer usage? Sure.
For anything that is semi-serious 8GB is not sufficient in 2015.
Usually the bottleneck when it comes to Premiere is what kind of footage you're actually editing; if it isn't especially taxing then RAM shouldn't be too much of a problem.
It more comes down to money vs time; want to sit around with your thumb up your ass waiting ages for shit to page around your harddisk? Go for it. But RAM is so cheap nowadays that you would be a fool to run with less than 16GB.
Want to run games or do editing without having to close your 40 Chrome tabs?
And yes, I run an SSD (in fact two)--but I will never willingly use a system with less than 16GB of RAM*
I'm on 16 at the moment, but TBH I will move to 32GB as soon as I'm financially able to.
* Ok my Surface Pro 3 has 8 GB, and I can a lot on it that I can do on my normal PC, but it reaches the limits of that amount of RAM fairly quickly.[/QUOTE]
I was editing 38.6MBps ProRes from a BM Cinema and an URSA (39.9). I don't know how taxing that is, but it isn't like cell phone video. I don't do video editing for a profession at all, and sure I'd get more RAM (and probably a whole new rig) if I did.
I've honestly [I]never[/I] encountered RAM problems when playing a game (with 8GB), Chrome open or not. I don't think my usage counts as basic, but even if it was basic obviously 16GB isn't the absolute minimum then. Most people, grandma or not, just browse the web, and most people are also incredulous that I have as many open tabs as I have. That points in the direction that 4GB or 8GB definitely still is enough for them. Saying 16GB is the absolute minimum tends on snobbery in my honest opinion.
[QUOTE=icarusfoundyou;49452957]Want to run games or do editing without having to close your 40 Chrome tabs?[/QUOTE]
no
I've used Windows 10 on older hardware, a laptop from 2009. Core 2 Duo @ 2.4 GHz, 4GB RAM, no discreet GPU.
Startup and shutdown were faster - everything else was utterly terrible compared to Windows 7, or Vista.
The UI was unresponsive (and glitchy), the machine would quickly become very hot, the disk was perpetually grinding away, I never had less than 2GB RAM occupied.
Much the same happens with any older or lower-end hardware - A Pentium D desktop, an early i3 laptop, a C2D desktop, a (modern) Pentium laptop. W10 is nice and smooth if you have 8GB RAM and an i3/i5/i7 or better.
If W10 genuinely improved performance on your older hardware, you're an exception - not what's normal. Windows Defender running in the background + dozens (perhaps hundreds) of Metro "apps" that I will never use quite literally mean fresh W10 will [I]always[/I] be slower than fresh W7/Vista
[QUOTE=Lurr;49453298]I've used Windows 10 on older hardware, a laptop from 2009. Core 2 Duo @ 2.4 GHz, 4GB RAM, no discreet GPU.
Startup and shutdown were faster - everything else was utterly terrible compared to Windows 7, or Vista.
The UI was unresponsive (and glitchy), the machine would quickly become very hot, the disk was perpetually grinding away, I never had less than 2GB RAM occupied.
Much the same happens with any older or lower-end hardware - A Pentium D desktop, an early i3 laptop, a C2D desktop, a (modern) Pentium laptop. W10 is nice and smooth if you have 8GB RAM and an i3/i5/i7 or better.
If W10 genuinely improved performance on your older hardware, you're an exception - not what's normal. Windows Defender running in the background + dozens (perhaps hundreds) of Metro "apps" that I will never use quite literally mean fresh W10 will [I]always[/I] be slower than fresh W7/Vista[/QUOTE]
Why would the - not hundreds - of Metro applications running slow you down? What proof do you have that we are the exception and you aren't? I haven't really seen any concrete evidence either way.
[QUOTE=Lurr;49453298]I've used Windows 10 on older hardware, a laptop from 2009. Core 2 Duo @ 2.4 GHz, 4GB RAM, no discreet GPU.
Startup and shutdown were faster - everything else was utterly terrible compared to Windows 7, or Vista.
The UI was unresponsive (and glitchy), the machine would quickly become very hot, the disk was perpetually grinding away, I never had less than 2GB RAM occupied.
Much the same happens with any older or lower-end hardware - A Pentium D desktop, an early i3 laptop, a C2D desktop, a (modern) Pentium laptop. W10 is nice and smooth if you have 8GB RAM and an i3/i5/i7 or better.
If W10 genuinely improved performance on your older hardware, you're an exception - not what's normal. Windows Defender running in the background + dozens (perhaps hundreds) of Metro "apps" that I will never use quite literally mean fresh W10 will [I]always[/I] be slower than fresh W7/Vista[/QUOTE]
I find this very difficult to believe. I'm currently using 2GB of RAM (out of 16) and over 50% of that is Firefox, Windows 10 is using only a few hundred MB of RAM. I've never experienced unresponsiveness or glitches. Also Metro apps don't tun on if you don't use the Metro start screen, I have none currently active and have never launched them.
From my experience, windows 10 works perfectly if you use recent hardware with supported drivers. Otherwise, things get clunky. This was exactly the case for every other OS ever
[QUOTE=Lurr;49453298]I never had less than 2GB RAM occupied. [/QUOTE]
Unused RAM is wasted RAM, remember the mantra kids "if it's not in use why do I even have it?". The OS is more than capable of freeing up that RAM from any background services the instant it is needed and is sure as shit better at managing resources for general use than 90% of the user base. Hence why it does it.
Let the OS do its thing, turning off services willy nilly is asking to break it. They are usually running for some reason or another.
As for the machine you were running it on, a C2D from '09 isn't exactly the hottest shit on the market even for its time. But it's more than capable of running any Windows OS, the discreet GPU not being there might impact performance, but the W10 DWM is lighter than 7 by a wide margin as it isn't having to manage blur and reflection effects on the fly. You don't need the newest high spec machine to run this. If the laptop was genuinely suffering running it, perhaps the laptop itself needed maintenance?
[QUOTE=Lurr;49453298]I've used Windows 10 on older hardware, a laptop from 2009. Core 2 Duo @ 2.4 GHz, 4GB RAM, no discreet GPU.
Startup and shutdown were faster - everything else was utterly terrible compared to Windows 7, or Vista.
The UI was unresponsive (and glitchy), the machine would quickly become very hot, the disk was perpetually grinding away, I never had less than 2GB RAM occupied.
Much the same happens with any older or lower-end hardware - A Pentium D desktop, an early i3 laptop, a C2D desktop, a (modern) Pentium laptop. W10 is nice and smooth if you have 8GB RAM and an i3/i5/i7 or better.
If W10 genuinely improved performance on your older hardware, you're an exception - not what's normal. Windows Defender running in the background + dozens (perhaps hundreds) of Metro "apps" that I will never use quite literally mean fresh W10 will [I]always[/I] be slower than fresh W7/Vista[/QUOTE]
2006 era laptop, first Core 2 Duo, runs Win10 legitimately better than 7. In fact fixed a few power management related issues. And that laptop has a GPU that doesn't even support hardware transform and lighting and handles to Metro UI fine at 60 fps.
I've found that 10 very rarely makes a system perform worse if it could handle Vista and 7. On the couple dozen machines I've installed it on anyway.
I couldn't make it through 10 minutes of that guy talking... everything he says is "incredible, amazing", then again he is from marketing so what did I expect.
Last time I tried to upgrade to windows 10 my harddrive started making a horrifying screeching noise.
I think I might hold off on the upgrade until I get a new computer.
"marketing"
"officer"
Terms that should never ever be combined in any context.
Windows 10 has basically nothing the average layperson wants. The average Joe wants to browse the web, watch Netflix, and check their email. They can do all that on 7. Hell they can do all that on XP. Task view, virtual desktops, snap assist, only power users care about that stuff.
The default apps are garbage. The Photos app is shit, Groove Music is shit, Edge is okay but regular users have no need for its highly praised "Draw on webpages" feature, you need 3rd party software to watch DVDs or pay $15 for a shit DVD player on the store, most people I've tutored don't give a rats ass about Cortana (or even Siri/S Voice/Google Now) and view it as a gimmick.
The install process is not as simple as people claim, other than driver issues, visual glitches, bsods and the like for some people a lot of people have their desktops or taskbars reorganized or other simple stuff and that throws them off completely, whereas a simple power user knows how to easily fix that. A lot of people rely on their passwords being saved by their browser and when Edge doesn't have IE's saved passwords there they get stuck and freak out.
Most people are not, and don't know how to be, computer savvy, and Windows 10 to them seems like such a huge change with no payoff. And a lot of people like things to stay the same as they are, so change, especially forced change, is viewed as a bad thing.
[QUOTE=SleepyAl;49455190]Windows 10 has basically nothing the average layperson wants. The average Joe wants to browse the web, watch Netflix, and check their email. They can do all that on 7. Hell they can do all that on XP. Task view, virtual desktops, snap assist, only power users care about that stuff.
The default apps are garbage. The Photos app is shit, Groove Music is shit, Edge is okay but regular users have no need for its highly praised "Draw on webpages" feature, you need 3rd party software to watch DVDs or pay $15 for a shit DVD player on the store, most people I've tutored don't give a rats ass about Cortana (or even Siri/S Voice/Google Now) and view it as a gimmick.
The install process is not as simple as people claim, other than driver issues, visual glitches, bsods and the like for some people a lot of people have their desktops or taskbars reorganized or other simple stuff and that throws them off completely, whereas a simple power user knows how to easily fix that. A lot of people rely on their passwords being saved by their browser and when Edge doesn't have IE's saved passwords there they get stuck and freak out.
Most people are not, and don't know how to be, computer savvy, and Windows 10 to them seems like such a huge change with no payoff. And a lot of people like things to stay the same as they are, so change, especially forced change, is viewed as a bad thing.[/QUOTE]
How much of this is specific to Windows 10? As you said, most users might as well run XP (if it was still updated), so why would anyone ever upgrade to Windows 7? Specific to Windows 10, this version is actually [I]free[/I].
[QUOTE=icarusfoundyou;49452957]For grandma or basic computer usage? Sure.
For anything that is semi-serious 8GB is not sufficient in 2015.
Usually the bottleneck when it comes to Premiere is what kind of footage you're actually editing; if it isn't especially taxing then RAM shouldn't be too much of a problem.
It more comes down to money vs time; want to sit around with your thumb up your ass waiting ages for shit to page around your harddisk? Go for it. But RAM is so cheap nowadays that you would be a fool to run with less than 16GB.
Want to run games or do editing without having to close your 40 Chrome tabs?
And yes, I run an SSD (in fact two)--but I will never willingly use a system with less than 16GB of RAM*
I'm on 16 at the moment, but TBH I will move to 32GB as soon as I'm financially able to.
* Ok my Surface Pro 3 has 8 GB, and I can a lot on it that I can do on my normal PC, but it reaches the limits of that amount of RAM fairly quickly.[/QUOTE]
8GB leaves you with almot 6gb of RAM free.
Good fucking luck using that up unless you're doing something professionally.
Stop pulling stuff out of your ass.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.