windows 10 next release

On 03/14/2015 08:45 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 14:04:00 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
wrote:

It's not a rule, but it's believed by many people. I completely
disagree. I'm never in favor of waiting for a Service Pack. The point
in time when a service pack is released is at the discretion of
Microsoft and is completely arbitrary. Upgrades and fixes to any
version of Windows are released when needed--once a month, normally,
but more often when necessary. At some arbitrary point, Microsoft
decides to roll up all those upgrades and fixes into one package and
calls the result a service pack.

There's no particular significance to when that service pack is
released, and it doesn't mark a special point of stability. There were
upgrades before it and there will be more upgrades after it. Since it
has no particular significance, treating it as a special event, and
waiting for it, is meaningless.

Thanks, Ken. That was very well said. I've explained essentially the same
thing on many occasions, but probably not as eloquently as you just did.


Hi Char,

XP SP3 and Frankenstein (Windows) 8.1 had a lot of rewrites in them.

I loved XP-SP3. 5% faster (the customer could notice it) and a lot
more stable. M$ did a good job on that one. Seemed to do
a good job on Vista-SP2, if you get get it loaded! My favorite
service pack of all time is XP-SP3

But, what Ken states is usually the case. They are just a
collection of updates.

I love it when the OEM disks include them (XP-SP3, W7-Sp1,
W8.1) so I don't have to fight getting them installed.

Service packs also have all the conflicting updates removed.

-T

On 03/14/2015 11:08 AM, GreyCloud wrote:
I don't know why he keeps calling windows 8.1 a frankenstein os.
It is a way to bridge both the desktop and mobile devices. I don't see any
Linux distro doing that, considering the bloatedness of X11.

Hi Grey Cloud,

I call it Frankenstein because it is stitching a piece of
one dissimilar thing onto another. I am not the first
person that came up with that name for it. And it fits like
a glove.

A lot of folks I know (that did not listen to me and get W7)
are almost in tears over Frankenstein.

And, although Frankenstein is a major marvel of innovation,
it is not something the customers generally (if ever) want.
Tablets and Desktop are used for dissimilar purposes.
Plus M$ did not do either the tablet side or the desktop
side very well. The iPad is intuitively obvious; Frankenstein
has the antidote.

Tablets are great for receiving information but awful for
creating information. They have their place.

There is a reason why Apple has a full professional operating
system (OSx) for their desktops and a separate operating system
for their toy computers (iPhone, iPad) (iOS).

M$ screwed up big time. (Me thinks they were after something
to complete with the Apple store.)

And M$ doesn't listen to anyone. Info World had the most
wonderful proposal called "Windows Red" that would have
kicked ass.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/261...microsoft.html

But M$ chose to stay the Frankenstein course.

-T

Ya, you are kind of right. I do like Linux. My self and
my customers that use it, I mainly help (teach) with
the programs.

On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:53:34 -0700, T wrote:


XP SP3 and Frankenstein (Windows) 8.1 had a lot of rewrites in them.


I hate to complain, but I need to tell you that I'm getting tired of
your calling Windows 8.1 Frankenstein. I don't agree with you that
it's terrible, but even if I did, it might have been mildly funny the
first time, but it's been a long time since it was.

So please, knock it off.

On 03/14/2015 07:01 PM, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:53:34 -0700, T wrote:


XP SP3 and Frankenstein (Windows) 8.1 had a lot of rewrites in them.


I hate to complain, but I need to tell you that I'm getting tired of
your calling Windows 8.1 Frankenstein. I don't agree with you that
it's terrible, but even if I did, it might have been mildly funny the
first time, but it's been a long time since it was.

So please, knock it off.


Hi Ken,

Probably not going to happen. The name fits like a glove.

I am not the first, either

Windows 8 Consumer Preview: 'Windows Frankenstein':

http://www.infoworld.com/article/261...kenstein-.html

Here is a more thorough list:

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Windows+frankenstein

By the way, I am grad you like Frankenstein. None of
my customers do and some are almost in tears over it.

-T

T wrote:

On 03/14/2015 11:08 AM, GreyCloud wrote:
I don't know why he keeps calling windows 8.1 a frankenstein os.
It is a way to bridge both the desktop and mobile devices. I don't see
any Linux distro doing that, considering the bloatedness of X11.

Hi Grey Cloud,

I call it Frankenstein because it is stitching a piece of
one dissimilar thing onto another. I am not the first
person that came up with that name for it. And it fits like
a glove.

It isn't... it is called bridging.
The reviewer probably doesn't even have a clue.
Calling it Frankenstein... well, then we can call Linux almost an OS too.
After 20 years and still a small percentage of the market place. And it is
given away for free.


A lot of folks I know (that did not listen to me and get W7)
are almost in tears over Frankenstein.


I'm not.
I like Win7, especially on an HP tower.

And, although Frankenstein is a major marvel of innovation,
it is not something the customers generally (if ever) want.
Tablets and Desktop are used for dissimilar purposes.
Plus M$ did not do either the tablet side or the desktop
side very well. The iPad is intuitively obvious; Frankenstein
has the antidote.

Tablets are great for receiving information but awful for
creating information. They have their place.

There is a reason why Apple has a full professional operating
system (OSx) for their desktops and a separate operating system
for their toy computers (iPhone, iPad) (iOS).

M$ screwed up big time. (Me thinks they were after something
to complete with the Apple store.)

And M$ doesn't listen to anyone. Info World had the most
wonderful proposal called "Windows Red" that would have
kicked ass.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/261...ows/microsoft-
windows-how-windows-red-can-fix-windows-8-the-right-strategy-for-
microsoft.html

But M$ chose to stay the Frankenstein course.

It is a unification of mobile and desktop operating systems. It is cost
effective for MS.

On 03/14/2015 09:57 PM, GreyCloud wrote:
It isn't... it is called bridging.

Hi Grey Cloud,

That is a nice term for ramming two technologies
together that don't belong together.

The reviewer probably doesn't even have a clue.

"probably" means you didn't read it. The writer was dead on.

Calling it Frankenstein... well, then we can call Linux almost an OS too.

You worked on that one, didn't you. Okay an "A" for effort,
which was impressive.

Linux is "obscure", not a kludge of technologies that don't
belong together.

After 20 years and still a small percentage of the market place. And it is
given away for free.


A lot of folks I know (that did not listen to me and get W7)
are almost in tears over Frankenstein.

I'm not.

Someone has to! Then again, I have an ax to grind over
the trouble it has caused my customers. I have known some
of them for years. Weird when their kids glow up and have
kids of their own. I work for one extended family that has
four generations. You get close to them, especially when
they treat you like family. (Some have been known to
feed me!)

I like Win7, especially on an HP tower.

W7 is okay. I wish it was faster and more stable, but it gets
the job done most of the time. XP and W7 are the two platforms
small business typically use. And they don't necessarily care
which platforms they run as long as they can get their Apps
to run on them. M$ has dominated the market in the application
wars. And, unfortunately, I see no sign of that changing
any time soon.

It helps with W7 (or any Windows platform for that matter)
to only install what you need and don't collect programs.
Plus turning them off at night.

But M$ chose to stay the Frankenstein course.
It is a unification of mobile and desktop operating systems. It is cost
effective for MS.

Not when they can't sell the stuff because the buying public
completely rejects it. And from my limited programing
experience, I can say that having the two separate would
have been a lot easier on the programmers. I have done
dual things like that before, they are a nightmare to
keep track of.

And think about it. Windows Red took into account those that
do not have tablets and made Windows Red act like a desktop.
Simple common sense.

Frankenstein kept acting like you had a touch screen, even when you
did not. Metro is badly done and confusing, especially for mousers,
unlike iPad which is marvelously done and intuitively obvious.
(Metro has the antidote.) If M$ was really trying to save money,
they would have gone the Windows Red route and not have tried to
thrust Metro down nontablet users throats.

The market sure spanked M$ over Frankenstein. Trouble is, M$
wasn't the only one that got spanked. HP now offers W7 computers,
finally. Lenovo always did.

SOF preview, on the other hand mostly removes Metro for non-tablet
users, but not completely. But now the rumor is that Metro is
back. Goodness gracious.

Most of the time when I come across someone with Frankenstein,
I ask them why, and they say because the computer was so cheap
(Vendors have to sell them at fire sale prices as no one wants
Frankenstein). Then they say, I thought it couldn't be this bad.
Well guess what, you should have asked ... (I do my best to
make it look like W7, Classic Shell and all. But I can't make
it more stable and stop crashing. 8.1 helps the stability somewhat.)

But when I offer to upgrade to W7 (in the customer's minds, "not works
to works" is an upgrade -- they don't care about the revision number),
they tell me they are waiting for SOF. So we need to be ready.

On the bright side SOF preview seems a lot more snappy than
its Father. It was a nice touch to put decorations around
Metro programs. Now if they will de-Metro the desktop
completely and fix a bunch of bugs.

I do love winX and wish W7 had it. I always press it before
I realize my mistake.

-T

On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:15:09 -0700, T wrote:

On 03/14/2015 07:01 PM, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:53:34 -0700, T wrote:


XP SP3 and Frankenstein (Windows) 8.1 had a lot of rewrites in them.


I hate to complain, but I need to tell you that I'm getting tired of
your calling Windows 8.1 Frankenstein. I don't agree with you that
it's terrible, but even if I did, it might have been mildly funny the
first time, but it's been a long time since it was.

So please, knock it off.


Hi Ken,

Probably not going to happen. The name fits like a glove.



That's your view. Not mine and not like that of most of us here. If
you're going to continue, welcome to my killfile.

"Ken Blake, MVP" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:15:09 -0700, T wrote:

On 03/14/2015 07:01 PM, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:53:34 -0700, T wrote:


XP SP3 and Frankenstein (Windows) 8.1 had a lot of rewrites in them.


I hate to complain, but I need to tell you that I'm getting tired of
your calling Windows 8.1 Frankenstein. I don't agree with you that
it's terrible, but even if I did, it might have been mildly funny the
first time, but it's been a long time since it was.

So please, knock it off.


Hi Ken,

Probably not going to happen. The name fits like a glove.



That's your view. Not mine and not like that of most of us here. If
you're going to continue, welcome to my killfile.


*sigh* plus, plus.........

Chris

On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 18:10:49 -0700, T wrote:

On 03/14/2015 11:08 AM, GreyCloud wrote:
I don't know why he keeps calling windows 8.1 a frankenstein os.
It is a way to bridge both the desktop and mobile devices. I don't see any
Linux distro doing that, considering the bloatedness of X11.

Hi Grey Cloud,

I call it Frankenstein because it is stitching a piece of
one dissimilar thing onto another. I am not the first
person that came up with that name for it. And it fits like
a glove.

A lot of folks I know (that did not listen to me and get W7)
are almost in tears over Frankenstein.

IMO, it doesn't help that you're in near tears over it, as well. Your
hysteria fuels their fears, and it becomes a vicious circle. Just try to
settle down a bit and things will be fine.

Stormin' Norman wrote in
:

You guys can do what you like, but I never think it is a good idea to
try and censor what people say just because I don't like their thought
process.


+1

On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 15:04:11 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 07:33:01 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:

On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:15:09 -0700, T wrote:

On 03/14/2015 07:01 PM, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:53:34 -0700, T wrote:


XP SP3 and Frankenstein (Windows) 8.1 had a lot of rewrites in them.


I hate to complain, but I need to tell you that I'm getting tired of
your calling Windows 8.1 Frankenstein. I don't agree with you that
it's terrible, but even if I did, it might have been mildly funny the
first time, but it's been a long time since it was.

So please, knock it off.


Hi Ken,

Probably not going to happen. The name fits like a glove.



That's your view. Not mine and not like that of most of us here. If
you're going to continue, welcome to my killfile.

Personally, I do not think of W8 as Frankenstein but I do see it as Vista redux.


That's fine. You are welcome to your opinion. But even if you don't
like it, you don't go around calling it names, and I respect you for
that.


It takes a lot of work and Classic Shell to bring the GUI back to a logical,
business friendly interface.


That's fine, too. I don't agree with you, but I certainly think you're
entitled to your opinion.

As far as I'm concerned, it takes any of several programs, not
necessarily Classic Shell. In my opinion Classic Shell isn't even the
best of them; Start8 is. And it takes very little work.


After getting two machines with 8.1 and giving
them a fair evaluation period, I decided there were no real advantages to 8.1
for my business so I wiped them and applied a W7 image.

You guys can do what you like, but I never think it is a good idea to try and
censor what people say just because I don't like their thought process.



"Censor"? I'm not censoring him or anyone else. I have no ability to
censor anyone. But I do have the ability to not read his vituperative
messages, and that's what I choose to do.

T wrote:

On 03/14/2015 09:57 PM, GreyCloud wrote:
It isn't... it is called bridging.

Hi Grey Cloud,

That is a nice term for ramming two technologies
together that don't belong together.


How do you know that they can't belong together? Looks to me like it
working for a lot of people.

Consider the Gnome / Java bridge in Java Desktop for Solaris.
Or Cocoa / Python template bridge for OS X and Cocoa / Ruby template bridge
for OS X.

The reviewer probably doesn't even have a clue.

"probably" means you didn't read it. The writer was dead on.

Calling it Frankenstein... well, then we can call Linux almost an OS too.

You worked on that one, didn't you. Okay an "A" for effort,
which was impressive.

Linux is "obscure", not a kludge of technologies that don't
belong together.

Linux as an os is one thing, but trying to kludge together X11 with any UNIX
has been eventually a failure. Sun tried to rectify it somewhat but it is
still a kludge. MS saw the problems from the beginning and just wrote their
own GUI from the ground up and does run faster despite what people say.
Apple bought out NextStep os that didn't use X11, and then refined the gui
for ease of use. The vast majority of professionals do not want to tinker
with their PCs so they buy a system that is out of the box ready to run.
These people have other things to do than waste their time trying to figure
out a problem on the PC.

Face it, X11 is getting long in the tooth and is in need of modernization.

After 20 years and still a small percentage of the market place. And it
is given away for free.


A lot of folks I know (that did not listen to me and get W7)
are almost in tears over Frankenstein.

I'm not.

Someone has to! Then again, I have an ax to grind over
the trouble it has caused my customers. I have known some
of them for years. Weird when their kids glow up and have
kids of their own. I work for one extended family that has
four generations. You get close to them, especially when
they treat you like family. (Some have been known to
feed me!)

I like Win7, especially on an HP tower.

W7 is okay. I wish it was faster and more stable, but it gets
the job done most of the time.

Get the best hardware and Win7 is stable. The commodity junk hardware you
see at Wallmart will cause you problems no matter what os you install on it.
I paid a lot more for this HP tower than on any Apple.

XP and W7 are the two platforms
small business typically use. And they don't necessarily care
which platforms they run as long as they can get their Apps
to run on them. M$ has dominated the market in the application
wars. And, unfortunately, I see no sign of that changing
any time soon.

That is because they were there first along with IBM.
I remember the S100 bus days... no change took place until IBM entered into
the PC business and over night the S100 bus market went down the tubes. OTW,
they stagnated, which is happened now for over a decade. That is why Meg
Whitman is pushing to improve cpus and memory for faster speeds and
increased memory capacity in a smaller space. I hope they do make it.


It helps with W7 (or any Windows platform for that matter)
to only install what you need and don't collect programs.
Plus turning them off at night.


I always turn off a computer at the end of the day no matter what os or
brand. It costs money to keep them up if you aren't using them.

Back in the 80s we had to keep the old vax 785 up. Once we shut it off for
a long weekend and came back and powered it back up... broken. The hardware
couldn't take the cold for some reason and then the heat it couldn't take
either... it had to run at 68 degrees F. But those days are over.

But M$ chose to stay the Frankenstein course.
It is a unification of mobile and desktop operating systems. It is cost
effective for MS.

Not when they can't sell the stuff because the buying public
completely rejects it.

They don't reject it. All I see are stores selling PCs and laptops with
win8.1 on them. Plus a few Apples. But I don't see any Linux PCs or
laptops for sale in the usual stores.

And from my limited programing
experience, I can say that having the two separate would
have been a lot easier on the programmers.

Not at all. The programming differences are minor.
OS X is the heavy weight os for Apple and also Xcode supports both OS X and
iOS. iOS has a smaller foot print than OS X. Both run on top of 4.4BSD
UNIX, which runs on top of the micro kernel.

I have done
dual things like that before, they are a nightmare to
keep track of.

And think about it. Windows Red took into account those that
do not have tablets and made Windows Red act like a desktop.
Simple common sense.

Frankenstein kept acting like you had a touch screen, even when you
did not. Metro is badly done and confusing, especially for mousers,
unlike iPad which is marvelously done and intuitively obvious.
(Metro has the antidote.) If M$ was really trying to save money,
they would have gone the Windows Red route and not have tried to
thrust Metro down nontablet users throats.

They know that the industry is going deeper into mobile. If they don't keep
up, they'd start sliding downhill and they can't afford to do that.


The market sure spanked M$ over Frankenstein. Trouble is, M$
wasn't the only one that got spanked. HP now offers W7 computers,
finally. Lenovo always did.

Those are usually offered on the smaller Tower based models. There really
is no need for a touch screen on those. But the tablets and mobile devices
all use touch screens and there are a lot of them on the market now.


SOF preview, on the other hand mostly removes Metro for non-tablet
users, but not completely. But now the rumor is that Metro is
back. Goodness gracious.

Most of the time when I come across someone with Frankenstein,
I ask them why, and they say because the computer was so cheap
(Vendors have to sell them at fire sale prices as no one wants
Frankenstein). Then they say, I thought it couldn't be this bad.
Well guess what, you should have asked ... (I do my best to
make it look like W7, Classic Shell and all. But I can't make
it more stable and stop crashing. 8.1 helps the stability somewhat.)

But when I offer to upgrade to W7 (in the customer's minds, "not works
to works" is an upgrade -- they don't care about the revision number),
they tell me they are waiting for SOF. So we need to be ready.

On the bright side SOF preview seems a lot more snappy than
its Father. It was a nice touch to put decorations around
Metro programs. Now if they will de-Metro the desktop
completely and fix a bunch of bugs.

I do love winX and wish W7 had it. I always press it before
I realize my mistake.


X11 is bloated and old. It does have its issues and isn't that easy to
correct a problem. MS knew that a long time ago.

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?XwindowProtoc...tabbedAndBurnt

"People who defend X completely misunderstand how graphics work in the
modern world. (Modern, as in "developments in the last 25 years".)

More precisely, you need to differentiate the different and separate layers
of a graphics architectu

The display driver -- something that simply pushes instructions to the
GPU and bitmap data to texture RAM.

The composition engine -- for composing lines, circles, polygons,
rendering fonts, etc.

The network protocol and GUI toolkit.

The 3D and physics engine.

All four parts are absolutely necessary and at the same time are built from
different principles and use completely different APIs.

X tries to meld all four into one steamingly monstrous pile of crud. While
this is a typical approach for a college sophomore term project like X,
trying to build a modern system capable of "supporting GTA3" on top of X is
simply laughable to anybody with any experience in the industry at all.

In short, if you defend X, you really do need to go educate yourself: it is
a sure-fire sign of misunderstanding how multimedia software works. --
IvanTkatchev"

On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:01:03 -0700, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:

On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:53:34 -0700, T wrote:

XP SP3 and Frankenstein (Windows) 8.1 had a lot of rewrites in them.

I hate to complain, but I need to tell you that I'm getting tired of
your calling Windows 8.1 Frankenstein. I don't agree with you that
it's terrible, but even if I did, it might have been mildly funny the
first time, but it's been a long time since it was.

So please, knock it off.

Try my method: as soon as I see the word "Frankenstein" or the symbol
"M$", I press the spacebar. That takes me straightaway to the next
unread post.

I've been doing that for a long time, since before Todd became T - and
not just for T...

I even mentioned it in a post some time ago.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 15:04:11 +0000, Stormin' Norman wrote:

I suspect the use of
"Frankenstein" as a pseudonym will get old for him soon enough.

There's no evidence of that.

But I do read and enjoy his calmer posts.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On 03/15/2015 07:33 AM, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:15:09 -0700, T wrote:

On 03/14/2015 07:01 PM, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:53:34 -0700, T wrote:


XP SP3 and Frankenstein (Windows) 8.1 had a lot of rewrites in them.


I hate to complain, but I need to tell you that I'm getting tired of
your calling Windows 8.1 Frankenstein. I don't agree with you that
it's terrible, but even if I did, it might have been mildly funny the
first time, but it's been a long time since it was.

So please, knock it off.


Hi Ken,

Probably not going to happen. The name fits like a glove.



That's your view. Not mine and not like that of most of us here. If
you're going to continue, welcome to my killfile.


That is probably for the best Ken.