Microsoft to remove GWX from Windows 7 and 8.1

[AresKrieger]

4 minutes ago, Sauron said:

snip

Yeah if linux had software support for things like games I'd be using mint right now, but it doesn't it's a catch 22 situation where no one will adopt it since there isn't any software but their isn't any software since no one will adopt it.

[GoodBytes]

2 minutes ago, ShadowCaptain said:

When you buy a PC from a store, that comes with windows, you pay for it too, or a windows phone, winows tablet or many other things, lets not forget having to pay lots of money for office too

Its still considerably expensive

if somebody is still on 7 or 8, its a LOT of money for them to pay to upgrade

On OEM Windows is around free to 50$ depending on the cost of the system. Apple makes more money out of their systems sold, especially these days, where it for the same price you can get, for the same build quality, and similar after sale service/warranty, better systems.

[Centurius]

3 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

Yes, such as Siri on the new MacOS where it is more of an independent app, not integrated to Spotlight or third party installed software, and you can't type to ask things. Half baked much? I mean I know Windows has bugs, but at least things are more complete. How many iteration are needed to get it like Cortana?

Apples and oranges, there were 3 years between Windows 8 and Windows 10. In that same time Mac moved from Mountain Lion to El Capitan with several incremental updates. That is an honest comparison.

[Sauron]

1 minute ago, AresKrieger said:

Yeah if linux had software support for things like games I'd be using mint right now, but it doesn't it's a catch 22 situation where no one will adopt it since there isn't any software but their isn't any software since no one will adopt it.

Exactly, which is why I think those "in the know" should make an effort to use it whenever possible, maybe in a dual boot or with KVM if your hardware supports it.

[GoodBytes]

2 minutes ago, Centurius said:

Apples and oranges, there were 3 years between Windows 8 and Windows 10. In that same time Mac moved from Mountain Lion to El Capitan with several incremental updates. That is an honest comparison.

And so did Windows. Windows 8 had 8.1, Windows 10 has Threshold 2, Redstone 1 and in March Redstone 2. Not to mention continuous security and bug fixes updates in between.

[Centurius]

4 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

And so did Windows. Windows 8 had 8.1, Windows 10 has Threshold 2, Redstone 1 and in March Redstone 2. Not to mention continuous security and bug fixes updates in between.

Yes, the update policies and feature-level improvements per iteration are indeed basically the same, thanks for acknowledging the point.

[Rune]

2 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

And Microsoft has set the price of Windows 10 Home to $119 USD for EVERYONE.

Well, not everyone....we've still got it listed for $89 or $99 depending on the week....

[laminutederire]

44 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

and MacOS is free while being more advance then Windows will ever be. Same for Fedora.

Except MacOs can't run on all hardware properly.

[suicidalfranco]

Just now, laminutederire said:

Except MacOs can't run on all hardware properly.

And when it does you don't have to pay for it 

[laminutederire]

Just now, suicidalfranco said:

And when it does you don't have to pay for it 

How unpractical it is to have to change of hardware to have it for free. When you do the maths, you better have an OS which you pay for, which won't force you to change hardware rather than the opposite. In any big institution it works better like that.

And as other people mentioned, support is important for those institutions, and Apple isn't supporting machines where you installed MacOs as well as the machine they sell you. To have their support you'd have to buy the machine from them, at which point it becomes more expensive to do so.

[jaggysnake57]

2 hours ago, ShadowCaptain said:

MS should lower the price, heck if it was £60 not like £100 that would be better too, it would probably result in less piracy too

55 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

120$ is too much for a software that is used for a minimum 3 years on people systems. I mean it is only the most complex and used software in every ones system running Windows mainly. They should cut the price.

 

But that $80 game for this 4h gameplay experience, with mode bugs than Windows Me.... NOW! that is a deal! Let me pre-order the 180$ deluxe premium edition where it is the same as the original game, but I can play my character with a white coat instead of black. Best purchase EVAR!

there he is the MS defender come to save the thread

49 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

and MacOS is free while being more advance then Windows will ever be. Same for Fedora.

[Misanthrope]

2 hours ago, Pohernori said:

 

Oh yea this especially. I have a semi-dead 6970m in my work laptop so I uninstall the AMD driver and only use the basic ms driver so that i can use normal screen functions. 

 

But every fucking time i uninstall the driver, win 10 reinstalls that shit back again. i can't stare at a screen that is at max brightness for 12 hours everyday. Disabling all auto updates and win 10 just completely ignores it. Why? 

MS Rep: Cause Screw you, that'd be $120 please, thanks.

[Misanthrope]

37 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Yeah if linux had software support for things like games I'd be using mint right now, but it doesn't it's a catch 22 situation where no one will adopt it since there isn't any software but their isn't any software since no one will adopt it.

I know it still seems pitiful but gaming in Linux has basically exploted with like a thousand times more games available natively than 5 years ago.

 

I'm just saying you can't expect miracles but advances are being made.

 

[ShadowCaptain]

2 minutes ago, jaggysnake57 said:

 

 

People would happily spend like £120 on battlefield 1 with the DLC but spending the same on Windows is not treated the same way to the average person

I have a few old laptops that I wanna put windows 10 on, but I dont want to pay £100 per device

I dont pirate so currently they are on ubuntu but I hate linux, but Im not spending like £400 on some windows licences
 

[Misanthrope]

2 hours ago, Sauron said:

But Microsoft won't care until the sales (and more importantly the user base) drop. It's not even about stifling piracy because they don't care. Every overpriced copy they sell is a sweet bonus but their market relies on how many people actually use the damn thing. Sure, you can complain, but you won't obtain anything. Look at how MS reacted to the slow adoption of windows 8 - they gave windows 10 away for free to make sure people installed it this time around.

Agreed. Since moving to Linux is an irrealistic proposition for most that's why I encourage just stagnation: Windows 7 should still work and be perfectly serviceable for almost all users, they should not move on.

[jaggysnake57]

4 minutes ago, ShadowCaptain said:

 

People would happily spend like £120 on battlefield 1 with the DLC but spending the same on Windows is not treated the same way to the average person

I have a few old laptops that I wanna put windows 10 on, but I dont want to pay £100 per device

I dont pirate so currently they are on ubuntu but I hate linux, but Im not spending like £400 on some windows licences
 

yeah its just so easy and free to get a pirated copy of windows...well it was last time i looked, im on the insider preview so i have a free windows but ill get it eventually

[Misanthrope]

8 minutes ago, ShadowCaptain said:

 

People would happily spend like £120 on battlefield 1 with the DLC

Umm no. The ammount of people who do that is a tiny fucking minority dude. That's precisely why I said 60 on my initial reply: Make it a cost of a normal retail price game I'd consider it. Otherwise there's no reason to upgrade.

[ShadowCaptain]

40 minutes ago, jaggysnake57 said:

yeah its just so easy and free to get a pirated copy of windows...well it was last time i looked, im on the insider preview so i have a free windows but ill get it eventually

i dont do, like or agree with piracy

36 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Umm no. The ammount of people who do that is a tiny fucking minority dude. That's precisely why I said 60 on my initial reply: Make it a cost of a normal retail price game I'd consider it. Otherwise there's no reason to upgrade.

yeah I agree thats a better example

[Doobeedoo]

Well, whoever didn't live under a rock within last year or so got/could've got Win10 for free, and since that's larger majority I'd say it's (read: was) free for certain time for very large portion of people. But whatever. When I look at Windows 10 retail prices, it is expensive, but many games with whatever added crap cost as much and are not worth 1/10 of the price in the end, you ask yourself a bit, yet this is OS you'd pay for.

While I'd like to see different type of Windows tier editions and pricing, I guess it works for them how they managed it.

Maybe would've been better like having just two editions: one being "Enterprise Pro" edition with extras. priced as usual but including full office too, maybe? And other one being simple "Home" that would be for most and priced way lower. And only 64-bit ones.

That looks great to me.

[Derangel]

2 hours ago, suicidalfranco said:

But you can go and download the latest version or previous versions and install them on any Mac. Got El Capitan running on a 2006 iMac, how much did i pay for that? nothing. And it wasn't an update, add to use my Macbook to download El and burn it to a USB to install on the iMac

Huh. That's really cool. Thanks for the information.

[Derangel]

2 hours ago, Sauron said:

There are paid support options for Linux, ever heard of Red Hat, SuSe, Oracle? Again, most of your points revolve around the fact that Linux is much less used than Windows on the desktop. This is a problem that stems from the root, not something you can easily fix now. 

 

The Linux kernel and architecture is vastly superior to Windows, what it lacks is commercial software and highly sophisticated desktop solution - this is exclusively because the low user base makes it a risky investment. In the end Mac OS works on similar principles, but I don't think you would call it not viable as a consumer os. Android is based on the Linux kernel. iOS is based on Unix. It's nonsense to say it will "never" be viable. All it takes is investments and adoption.

As far as I'm aware none of those companies are set up for education. They have business support (and I recall hearing it's not bad support either) but schools still have their specialized needs.

 

As I said, Linux is a great OS for specific groups and situations. That isn't a bad thing. However even as a mass consumer OS you still have to mess around in the Terminal from time to time to do thing. First thing I did when installing Mint on my laptop (thankfully it had support for all my hardware) was download Steam and then try to figure out why Steam was refusing to launch. The solution to that problem required the use of the Terminal. It doesn't bother me because I'm used to command line. I taught myself DOS when I was 8. You ask the average user to mess with the Terminal though and most of them will run away screaming in terror. You can make the excuse that Linux is poorly supported due to the lack of users but that lack of major support is one of the big things that keeps it from getting a lot of users. This is a much bigger issue when we're talking about schools and businesses. A school should use OSes that students are likely to run into when they're working. Unless you're going to college for compsci, networking, security, or any other higher-level computer based major your chances of running into Linux while working are fairly slim. The ideal goal of schools should be to prepare people for life, not confuse them with tech they will never use again.

[Sauron]

8 minutes ago, Derangel said:

As far as I'm aware none of those companies are set up for education. They have business support (and I recall hearing it's not bad support either) but schools still have their specialized needs.

 

As I said, Linux is a great OS for specific groups and situations. That isn't a bad thing. However even as a mass consumer OS you still have to mess around in the Terminal from time to time to do thing. First thing I did when installing Mint on my laptop (thankfully it had support for all my hardware) was download Steam and then try to figure out why Steam was refusing to launch. The solution to that problem required the use of the Terminal. It doesn't bother me because I'm used to command line. I taught myself DOS when I was 8. You ask the average user to mess with the Terminal though and most of them will run away screaming in terror. You can make the excuse that Linux is poorly supported due to the lack of users but that lack of major support is one of the big things that keeps it from getting a lot of users. This is a much bigger issue when we're talking about schools and businesses. A school should use OSes that students are likely to run into when they're working. Unless you're going to college for compsci, networking, security, or any other higher-level computer based major your chances of running into Linux while working are fairly slim. The ideal goal of schools should be to prepare people for life, not confuse them with tech they will never use again.

Again, all things that could be solved if someone made the investment required for a full feature desktop environment. Android and MacOS are prefectly functional without needing to touch the command line, and it could be the same for Linux if there was enough interest from the public.

[Derangel]

2 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Again, all things that could be solved if someone made the investment required for a full feature desktop environment. Android and MacOS are prefectly functional without needing to touch the command line, and it could be the same for Linux if there was enough interest from the public.

The problem is without the user base it's not going to get the support and without the support it's not going to get the user base. Desktop Linux isn't going to be the dominate OS and the chances of it ever being a viable consumer OS are incredibly slim. Especially with the desktop and laptop markets shrinking as more and more people are using their phones for everything. Linux has come an incredibly long way just in the past five years but by the time all the major issues are worked out most of the market will be gone.

[alexyy]

Paying for windows on a personal computer. ok.

[Mira Yurizaki]

5 hours ago, Sauron said:

The Linux kernel and architecture is vastly superior to Windows

I dunno, monolithic kernels don't really appeal to me.