Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Edhotmetal on October 08, 2014, 05:16:58 pm
-
I just installed the windows technical preview for windows 10 the other day and I think it's great so far. Has anyone else tried it? What do you think?
-
I'm running it on my desktop - couple of relatively minor issues, but otherwise it's pretty good.
-
I like that windows finally recognizes when you plug in headphones so it doesn't blast your ears out. :)
-
I like that windows finally recognizes when you plug in headphones so it doesn't blast your ears out. :)
Maybe it's a mobo feature, but mine does that. (win 8)
-
Excuse my ignorance, but Windows 10? as in TEN, that comes after NINE..
Or did 9 get renumbered to 8.1 and they decided to count from 10 on?
I'm confused, honestly confused
-
Excuse my ignorance, but Windows 10? as in TEN, that comes after NINE..
Or did 9 get renumbered to 8.1 and they decided to count from 10 on?
I'm confused, honestly confused
There's a very stupid reason for this. See, there are a lot of programs out there which check for the Windows version by retrieving the OS name and checking if it starts with "Windows 9"; if it does, the routines for Windows 95/98 activate. This is obviously not going to work out too well.
-
Interesting. :) Talk about lazy programming, it likely did seem like a good idea at the time, but despite programs being updated, old code often lingers around surprisingly long (especially if concerned with legacy OS support).
-
At least one site explicitly noted that several core Java libraries have this kind of code.
-
Excuse my ignorance, but Windows 10? as in TEN, that comes after NINE..
Or did 9 get renumbered to 8.1 and they decided to count from 10 on?
I'm confused, honestly confused
There's a very stupid reason for this. See, there are a lot of programs out there which check for the Windows version by retrieving the OS name and checking if it starts with "Windows 9"; if it does, the routines for Windows 95/98 activate. This is obviously not going to work out too well.
HA, that is actually rather funny xD
-
So, does Windows blend?
And, does it do back flips?
If not then I'll be sorely disappointed.
-
Excuse my ignorance, but Windows 10? as in TEN, that comes after NINE..
Or did 9 get renumbered to 8.1 and they decided to count from 10 on?
I'm confused, honestly confused
There's a very stupid reason for this. See, there are a lot of programs out there which check for the Windows version by retrieving the OS name and checking if it starts with "Windows 9"; if it does, the routines for Windows 95/98 activate. This is obviously not going to work out too well.
HA, that is actually rather funny xD
It's actually the poorest reason ever. Were I Microsoft impersonated, I'd absolutely troll every single one of these applications and do a Windows 9 anyway. If the apps ****ed up, their problem.
-
It's actually the poorest reason ever. Were I Microsoft impersonated, I'd absolutely troll every single one of these applications and do a Windows 9 anyway. If the apps ****ed up, their problem.
While it's absolutely true, that won't stop the vast majority of people from screeching at Microsoft for it.
-
It's actually the poorest reason ever. Were I Microsoft impersonated, I'd absolutely troll every single one of these applications and do a Windows 9 anyway. If the apps ****ed up, their problem.
Sure. But then MS could basically write off a bunch of business customers. I'll bet you that a lot of this crap code can be found in some business-relevant apps, making businesses that already passed on WIn 8 less likely to switch to 10. From MS' perspective, Win 8 was another Vista in terms of success, they cannot do two Vistas in a row.
-
Yeah I totally know that it would be a massive kluster**** that MS can't cope with, gladly I'm not MS impersonated.
And you really have a measure of how bloated and ridiculous Windows has become when even the name itself has become a legacy programming problem.
-
Remember, the general idea is that Windows is fully backwards-compatible. It's not entirely true, some things (like sound in Supereme Commander...) just plain don't work, but most things do (I'm using a Win 98-era Windows Commander and it runs just fine on 8. Talk about robust). I suppose you could shave off a lot of stuff if you did away with that concept, but it'd likely cause a whole lot of issues for old programs. MS has a good reason to care about legacy stuff, too, businesses wouldn't exactly like rewriting their programs with each Windows upgrade. By now, after 10 or so Windows versions, it's understandable that it accumulated some cruft.
Also, it's not like MS is at fault for that particular legacy issue. It's lazy programmers using Windows name instead of internal version number for identifying system version. It's not a very good practice, but that doesn't mean it isn't common. It's just another example of boneheaded programming decision biting someone after a few years of being "good enough". That's why you write things right from the start, and avoid sloppy solutions like that.
-
Windows 7 was the first purchased OS version I ever went for (for DiY system building).
Windows 10, depending on how it shakes out through the Tech Preview and iterations, might just be the next thing to go for with current/future generation hardware.
Still not a fan of the start menu changes, but I do like that there is control over it and that it even exists as it does in the first place without having to require a 3rd party utility. And while I've never used 8/8.1, from observation of their use, the context in 10 is much better.
-
For all their many many faults, blaming the naming change being necessary on Microsoft is like blaming Y2K on Dionysius Exiguus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_Exiguus#Anno_Domini). :p
-
It's actually the poorest reason ever. Were I Microsoft impersonated, I'd absolutely troll every single one of these applications and do a Windows 9 anyway. If the apps ****ed up, their problem.
While it's absolutely true, that won't stop the vast majority of people from screeching at Microsoft for it.
A while back, probably during the Win95 or 98 era, some MS programmers were working on making use of the HLT instruction on Intel chips. It's meant to shut down the CPU until there's significant input from the hardware, so it's useful to lower power consumption on laptops. The problem was, on many of the laptops of the time -- some of them from a major manufacturer -- the instruction would just lock the computer up completely, so they had to drop the feature. Some time after the OS was released some 3rd-party tools were released that could do the same thing, and of course everyone tut-tutted at Microsoft for their laziness and stupidity.
-
For all their many many faults, blaming the naming change being necessary on Microsoft is like blaming Y2K on Dionysius Exiguus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_Exiguus#Anno_Domini). :p
It's absolutely their fault. I can't imagine Apple for instance ever doing anything remotely like this for this same reason. If their new versions of the OS or apps create backward compatibility problems, then either people move on or deal with it. And that's the best attitude for these things. That MS is having to ****ing change the name of their OS because some odd programmers were amazingly lazy 10 years ago is truly astounding. It reflects precisely on how ****ed MS is now that they can't afford to have some weird things happening with some odd moronic programs. They can't afford the small quakes here and there. And they can't afford them because people are just tired of MS shenanigans for decades now.
So yes, it's 100% their fault. And I'm going to laugh about this for years, if not decades. "Hey, remember when Windows went straight from 8 to 10?"
-
Yep. In a way, this is absolutely MS' fault for guaranteeing backwards compatibility with ancient programs; But given that that's the reason why MS is as big as it is, it's really hard to blame them for it.
-
So yes, it's 100% their fault. And I'm going to laugh about this for years, if not decades. "Hey, remember when Windows went straight from 8 to 10?"
No, it's not their fault. In fact, it's nice that they're being considerate about it. Apple would've just said "screw you" and deprecated many programs, probably depriving you of half the programs you used to use. Odd moronic programs? Try your browser in which you're writing it, because it likely uses Jawa, and if not patched, it'd likely crash due to Jawa trying to load 95/98 routines. It's the programmers' fault that they forced MS to do that, this method was never endorsed by anyone from MS (or any decent programmer, for that matter), either. Nobody would use Windows if it ditched backwards compatibility like this. Oh, and a function to get system name does have legitimate purposes, so you shouldn't say it shouldn't have been there in first place.
So, it's funny, but if they didn't do that, you'd probably be annoyed at them breaking stuff, and you'd likely ask "Why couldn't they just skip a number to avoid breaking those programs? They knew it's a widespread practice!".
-
Dragon, modern browsers do not use Java. They use JavaScript, which despite the name is nothing like Java.
-
It's absolutely their fault. I can't imagine Apple for instance ever doing anything remotely like this for this same reason. If their new versions of the OS or apps create backward compatibility problems, then either people move on or deal with it. And that's the best attitude for these things.
Remember that you're saying that on a forum which is most famous for updating but maintaining backwards compatibility with a 15 year old game.
That MS is having to ****ing change the name of their OS because some odd programmers were amazingly lazy 10 years ago is truly astounding. It reflects precisely on how ****ed MS is now that they can't afford to have some weird things happening with some odd moronic programs. They can't afford the small quakes here and there. And they can't afford them because people are just tired of MS shenanigans for decades now.
So yes, it's 100% their fault. And I'm going to laugh about this for years, if not decades. "Hey, remember when Windows went straight from 8 to 10?"
Oh I think it's hilarious that they've painted themselves into a corner in this way. But to be honest I'd rather that they did ensure as much backwards compatibility as possible than simply **** even a small percentage of their users over for something as dumb as the name of a version of their OS.
What I would blame MS for is being so moronic that they called the new OS Windows 10 and didn't realise that this would make them a laughing stock when people started asking why it wasn't called Windows 9.
-
So yes, it's 100% their fault. And I'm going to laugh about this for years, if not decades. "Hey, remember when Windows went straight from 8 to 10?"
No, it's not their fault. In fact, it's nice that they're being considerate about it. Apple would've just said "screw you" and deprecated many programs, probably depriving you of half the programs you used to use. Odd moronic programs? Try your browser in which you're writing it, because it likely uses Jawa, and if not patched, it'd likely crash due to Jawa trying to load 95/98 routines. It's the programmers' fault that they forced MS to do that, this method was never endorsed by anyone from MS (or any decent programmer, for that matter), either. Nobody would use Windows if it ditched backwards compatibility like this. Oh, and a function to get system name does have legitimate purposes, so you shouldn't say it shouldn't have been there in first place.
So, it's funny, but if they didn't do that, you'd probably be annoyed at them breaking stuff, and you'd likely ask "Why couldn't they just skip a number to avoid breaking those programs? They knew it's a widespread practice!".
the internet was made by jawas
confirmed
-
So yes, it's 100% their fault. And I'm going to laugh about this for years, if not decades. "Hey, remember when Windows went straight from 8 to 10?"
No, it's not their fault. In fact, it's nice that they're being considerate about it. Apple would've just said "screw you" and deprecated many programs, probably depriving you of half the programs you used to use. Odd moronic programs? Try your browser in which you're writing it, because it likely uses Jawa, and if not patched, it'd likely crash due to Jawa trying to load 95/98 routines. It's the programmers' fault that they forced MS to do that, this method was never endorsed by anyone from MS (or any decent programmer, for that matter), either. Nobody would use Windows if it ditched backwards compatibility like this. Oh, and a function to get system name does have legitimate purposes, so you shouldn't say it shouldn't have been there in first place.
So, it's funny, but if they didn't do that, you'd probably be annoyed at them breaking stuff, and you'd likely ask "Why couldn't they just skip a number to avoid breaking those programs? They knew it's a widespread practice!".
java on the web is super niche these days, so as usual you have no idea what you're talking about
-
It might be niche, but a very important niche (IRS, government apps, program licence updates, etc., etc.).
I wonder if patching those programs is so hard to do, but still, wouldn't a better option be to have the build be something like 8.7, the name be something like "Windows Nine", and only in bitmaps and so on would it appear like "Windows 9"?
-
At the end of the day, does it really matter what the hell it's called? If it's a good OS, awesome. If it's terrible, then we'll all point and laugh and stay with 7. Either way, it won't affect your average user, because they'll just use whatever came preinstalled on their store-bought system.
-
It might be niche, but a very important niche (IRS, government apps, program licence updates, etc., etc.).
Yeah, government organizations have a very disturbing Jawa fetish.
I wonder if patching those programs is so hard to do, but still, wouldn't a better option be to have the build be something like 8.7, the name be something like "Windows Nine", and only in bitmaps and so on would it appear like "Windows 9"?
Or some made-up word, like whatever comes after 'vista' in a large enough dictionary.
If it's terrible, then we'll all point and laugh and stay with 7.
Nah, it's in the 'flip' phase of the Microsoft's flip-flop model. I'll need to update my mom's old win xp business computers to it (lest Java stops updating on them, of course), so I'm hoping it'll be good.
-
java on the web is super niche these days, so as usual you have no idea what you're talking about
As usual you're talking out of your backside (I'll leave your equally usual problem of missing the whole point to latch onto a relatively minor slip-up aside).
It might be niche, but a very important niche (IRS, government apps, program licence updates, etc., etc.).
Browsers run JavaScript (I sometimes mix up the two), but that doesn't mean Java is "super niche". It is niche, but you'll still run into it pretty often due to that niche being rather important. Breaking it would still mess up a some important sites, even if it wouldn't crash the browser itself. Besides, Java libraries are only one place you can find this kind of shoddy programming. I bet it's not the only place if MS decided to take it into account.
I wonder if patching those programs is so hard to do, but still, wouldn't a better option be to have the build be something like 8.7, the name be something like "Windows Nine", and only in bitmaps and so on would it appear like "Windows 9"?
We're talking government apps here. Getting government to fix anything is hard, at least where I live. "Windows Nine" could be a good idea, though. It's odd that MS didn't think of it (or maybe it did, and rejected it. Remember, they are a corporation afterall...). It'd avoid this problem while being less weird than skipping a number.
As for the build number, it's not really tied to "Windows number". IIRC, for Win 8.1, it was actually 6.3 (with Vista being 6, 7 being 6.1 and 8 being 6.2). Build number is what should have been used in the first place - it's the only proper way to identify which OS you're actually dealing with. And yes, it'd be really, really funny if the "next generation" Windows 10 gets a version number of 6.4...
-
I can't imagine Apple for instance ever doing anything remotely like this for this same reason. If their new versions of the OS or apps create backward compatibility problems, then either people move on or deal with it. And that's the best attitude for these things.
Why do you say that, Luis? Isn't it better for a company to show consideration to their customers when they don't have to name it Windows 9 and create potential problems than just say well tough, we want to call it 9. ? Why do you think it's the better attitude?
Of course, skipping the number does make them look silly. They could have called it something else. If they can come up with Windows Vista they can come up with something else in the same naming style. They're not restricted to numbers. Then they can stick with the new convention or call the next one Windows 10 after that.
-
It is easy to talk **** about how coding is simple and MS is stupid for this and a completely different thing to actually break the code and alienate half your market worldwide.
-
java on the web is super niche these days, so as usual you have no idea what you're talking about
I wouldn't call the overwhelming majority of government web services in North America "super niche." Java is, unfortunately, a necessary evil at present.
-
on a more general note, windows 10 will be nothing more than windows 8.1.1 to me until i see proof that it functions properly as a desktop operating system and i have the ability to NEVER see anything metro-related rear its ugly head.
-
If not, I'm sure there will be a program for that purpose (of nixing Metro). Or you could just get your hands on the Server edition of 10, which will come with metro pre-nixed, I'm betting. :yes: (7's Aero isn't on by default on Server 2008 R2, which is the Server edition of 7.)
-
Maybe, but why would you pay for a broken OS that you have to upgrade with 3rd party applications to make it usable when Windows 7 works perfectly well.
-
I've been using windows 8 on my desktop for over a year and metro does not bother me in the least. I just don't use it. I don't know what the big deal is. On the other hand, metro is very useful on my tablet for simple tablet tasks like what anyone would do on an iPad. It's a lot better than an iPad in that I also get a desktop experience with office and full plugin support whenever I want.
At least it's not a memory hog like iOS.
In windows 10 you can remove the metro-apps in the start menu and be left with a start menu very similar to windows 7 or pin desktop apps there instead.
-
That's the thing though. It's not that Metro on its own is such a horrible idea...it's that there was absolutely no choice given to desktop users on whether or not they wanted to interact with it. The fact that you had to turn to third-party apps just to get a functioning Start Menu again was just ridiculous. That alone will make 10 a massive improvement.
-
Maybe, but why would you pay for a broken OS that you have to upgrade with 3rd party applications to make it usable when Windows 7 works perfectly well.
this. i have no intention of changing from 7 to 10 on my desktop anyway, even if 10 is the most perfect OS ever made. i'm only hoping 10 doesn't blow so i can finally get a decent new laptop. although that's difficult in other areas too. why the **** are smartphone and tablet displays consistently higher resolution than 15" laptops? and what the hell happened to the trackpoint?
-
I know Lenovo's ThinkPad line still has the clit-mouse, but that's the last holdout I've seen.
-
I just wish ms didn't charge money for what they should have otherwise considered a test; being windows 8. Windows 8 by now is just a developmental tangent for microsoft i believe. It'd probably strive in the area where touch screens are useful (and i was thinking kiosks and phones); but not by hyping up **** that doesn't apply to normal computer users. It should have been a windows 7 add on.
It's all still windows vista anyhow. But, the idea of subjecting veteran windows users to what 8 was...how could they not see the problems? The public is not as stupid as they think we are. It's not that no one knew how to use windows 8. ****ing around with it in a non-system trashing way and you'll figure it out pretty fast. It's that it's a stupid operating system to use. Luckily we live in the day where shell replacements for windows exist and can take a ****, and make it polished, but also no longer a turd.
-
I'd be OK with them charging money for 8 if they then gave all it's users Windows 10 for free. :) Same deal as with Vista/7. The latter was a service pack for the former in all but a name. They shouldn't be changing full price just for that. It does seem that 10 is going to go the same route.
-
7 should have been free for Vista users.
-
It'd be cool if microsoft had an experimental release before official release. Oh right, they have had that for years; betas. I mean something similar, but only for the testing of ideas and experimentation, and not for bug testing for official release. That way you can find out what your audience wants first, get it stable at the same time, resulting in an official release of something that's not ****.
Linux does this all the time through official releases of a distro. A lot of distributions are releasing new experimental releases, with the next distro being fine tuned for stability and usability. Mandriva, ubuntu, and other distributions do this. An example i can bring to mind is ubuntu with every xx.04 release (april release) tends to just be a rehash of the previous with maybe some new features offered. I've always considered every april release of ubuntu to be more or less an intended stable product, whereas the previous was just a beta (i do wish that ubuntu openly stated that every october release was a beta; i have considered them a figuratively yearly release distro for a while). They can get away with it because linux is free. And that's more or less how linux gets things done; microsoft is different. Microsoft is where you pay, and if you don't, get ready for loss of support in whatever is microsoft's due time.
-
7 should have been free for Vista users.
It shouldn't even be called "Windows 7". They should've called it "Vista SP3", because that's what it was. A large-ish service pack.
-
7 should have been free for Vista users.
It shouldn't even be called "Windows 7". They should've called it "Vista SP3", because that's what it was. A large-ish service pack.
They knew that with the bad rep that Vista already had, that would never sell. By the time I got Vista, a lot of the issues and drivers had been worked out, and I had no problems with it. Yet I still jumped to 7 when it came out.
If MS is serious about wanting people to get their new OS (and ditch XP), they need to make it free, or at least drastically reduce the cost (under $25). My parent's old PC is running just fine on XP. It even works with Vista (I had it dual-booting for a while) so it should work with newer OS's. They aren't about to plop down a hundred dollars to upgrade a nine-year old PC's OS, but they also are not going to get rid of this PC as long as it works. If the new OS was cheap or free, I could probably convince them. Otherwise they will use XP until the cows come home.
-
If they did make it free, we should beware microsoft big brother terms.
At least windows hasn't moved onto being only monthly subscription based.
-
Funnily enough I think that was the original plan for XP, thus the "XPerience" part of it.
-
If they did make it free, we should beware microsoft big brother terms.
as if they aren't already doing that.
-
Win 98 ftw.
I like 7.
But anything beats iphone.
-
http://www.iclarified.com/41824/pangu-untethered-jailbreak-of-ios-711-has-been-released
Jailbreak it and let your iPhone breath freely. :yarr:
-
They knew that with the bad rep that Vista already had, that would never sell.
Err... how do you sell a free update? :) They could have called it "Vista 2" or something, similar to "Windows 8.1" to boost sales, but that's it. Basically, a name that would not say "We made a new OS!" but one that would say "We finally fixed Vista!". TBH, I didn't see a whole lot of difference between 7 and Vista. Sure, installing it freed some HD space, performance got a slight boost and the calculator is neater, but that's about it.
-
TBH, I didn't see a whole lot of difference between 7 and Vista. Sure, installing it freed some HD space, performance got a slight boost and the calculator is neater, but that's about it.
And the huge UI overhaul
-
and the calculator is neater
I don't like Win7 calc as much as the older versions. It used to be you set it to scientific mode and it had everything; now it's got scientific mode and programmer mode and statistics mode, and they all have different subsets of the features, and you can't switch between them without it losing your stuff.
-
Well, I like the unit converter. Handy when you're modding realistic rockets in KSP and want to convert some weird American/Russian units to SI. For anything that would require anything more elaborate than that and Scientific mode can provide, I just use Mathematica.
And the huge UI overhaul
I didn't like that, TBH. My Vista was highly customized to my liking, and after switching, I simply had to do that again, restore the quick-start bar, etc... Pretty much why I didn't care much for Win8's flaws, I suppose (though, to my annoyance, some things proven unchangeable in that one).