If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On 01/16/16 11:31, edevils so wittily quipped:
On 16/01/2016 18:14, Mr Macaw wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:06:39 -0000, Paul wrote: Fritz Wuehler wrote: So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further. Most of the time, we end up not understanding why they're changing things. If the objective was to in an obvious way, "make Win10 better and better", I might have a more positive attitude to the rolling release idea and what they're actually doing to it. For example, the desktop version uses Windows Update. The latest builds added Update Orchestrator, which sits above Windows Update, a piece of software used on the Enterprise edition. Do consumers need Update Orchestrator ? No. Did the policies in the OS change, because of the presence of Update Orchestrator ? Yes. Is the overall change an improvement for consumers ? No. The desktop version is being used as a testbed, and for ideas that may have no positive impact on the consumer version itself. And that's not really the intention of the rolling release idea. It's an abuse of rolling release. Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's not gone wrong once. It works for me too, but the fact that it is being used as a testbed, like Paul put it, combined with the nearly "unstoppable" automatic updates, makes me a bit unconfortable. I mean, a new feature update could break it any time, could it not? a new feature "update" could *ALSO* **** ME THE **** OFF. You know, like that *****ING* *UGLY* 2D FLAT WINDOWS 1.01 "back to 1985 or worse" appearance, so-called "Modern" look, with its fat-finger-friendly spacing that WASTE MY SCREEN SPACE, and that "Phone OS" start THING that puts "all apps" alphabetized with NO user configuration, and the *ADVERTISING* and the *LIVE* *TILE* billboard and the *SPYWARE* feeding what I do with *MY* computer back to "the mothership", etc. etc. etc. "New" features indeed. what *ELSE* is coming down the pike, without our ability to shut off or remove? |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On 01/16/16 15:51, John Doe so wittily quipped:
"Mr Macaw" wrote: edevils wrote: Most times there weren't any problems, but sometimes there were, and you had to find a fix. What times? I've NEVER had a problem with an update. That's because you are clueless twit who hardly uses a computer. I like to avoid anything but CRITICAL fixes anyway. why install EVERY update just because they exist? and I only scan for updates MANUALLY, when I'm not busy doing something else with the computer. That way it doesn't steal my bandwidth, or computing time. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 19:33:51 -0000, Big Bad Bob wrote:
On 01/16/16 11:38, Mr Macaw so wittily quipped: On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 19:23:03 -0000, Thip wrote: "Mr Macaw" wrote in message news On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:38:35 -0000, Paul wrote: Mr Macaw wrote: Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's not gone wrong once. Yes, I can see your carefully reasoned argument. It's my experience. Windows doesn't annoy me at all. The only thing M$ ever did that irritated me was Metro in Windows 8, which made me use classic shell. Apart from that, M$ have done nothing but improve Windows. What irritates me is that MS is trying to ram 10 down my throat. That's my decision, not theirs. You don't need to have the decision to use the second best Windows. And for ****'s sake it's FREE! It's unbelievable that Microsoft are for once GIVING STUFF AWAY then people STILL bloody complain about it. For crying out loud, get a life! the COMPLAINT is that MICROSOFT uses GWX to SHOVE IT UP OUR ASSES whether we WANT IT or NOT. Of course, the W10 OS *SUCKS* and *STINKS* *ON* *ICE*, but that's another topic. I'd rather have *SOMETHING* *WORTH* *PAYING* *FOR* (like Windows 7) than *FREE* ****** *ON* *A* *STICK*. No Windows has ever been worse than the previous one, with the exception of Windows 8's Metro interface, which was easily disabled. -- Peter is listening to "Who's the best - DJ Mad Dog feat. Tommyknocker" |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 19:37:47 -0000, Big Bad Bob wrote:
On 01/16/16 11:31, edevils so wittily quipped: On 16/01/2016 18:14, Mr Macaw wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:06:39 -0000, Paul wrote: Fritz Wuehler wrote: So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further. Most of the time, we end up not understanding why they're changing things. If the objective was to in an obvious way, "make Win10 better and better", I might have a more positive attitude to the rolling release idea and what they're actually doing to it. For example, the desktop version uses Windows Update. The latest builds added Update Orchestrator, which sits above Windows Update, a piece of software used on the Enterprise edition. Do consumers need Update Orchestrator ? No. Did the policies in the OS change, because of the presence of Update Orchestrator ? Yes. Is the overall change an improvement for consumers ? No. The desktop version is being used as a testbed, and for ideas that may have no positive impact on the consumer version itself. And that's not really the intention of the rolling release idea. It's an abuse of rolling release. Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's not gone wrong once. It works for me too, but the fact that it is being used as a testbed, like Paul put it, combined with the nearly "unstoppable" automatic updates, makes me a bit unconfortable. I mean, a new feature update could break it any time, could it not? a new feature "update" could *ALSO* **** ME THE **** OFF. You know, like that *****ING* *UGLY* 2D FLAT WINDOWS 1.01 "back to 1985 or worse" appearance, so-called "Modern" look, with its fat-finger-friendly spacing that WASTE MY SCREEN SPACE, and that "Phone OS" start THING that puts "all apps" alphabetized with NO user configuration, and the *ADVERTISING* and the *LIVE* *TILE* billboard and the *SPYWARE* feeding what I do with *MY* computer back to "the mothership", etc. etc. etc. "New" features indeed. what *ELSE* is coming down the pike, without our ability to shut off or remove? Did you escape your white coat? -- Waiter, waiter, what's wrong with these eggs? I don't know Sir, I only laid the table. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On 01/16/16 15:50, John Doe so wittily quipped:
edevils wrote: There is a huge difference though. You didn't upgrade to a new Windows version in the middle of a working day. You knew that something *might* sometimes go wrong. So, you took the jump to the new features only if and when you wanted to. If it isn't broke, don't fix it. There have been only rare times when I actually needed to update Windows, at least since Windows XP a very good point. some critical patches are needed to avoid virus infections, but normally 'safe surfing' does a BETTER job of protecting you than anything else [because OF the zero-day vulnerabilities]. so why must W10 *FORCE* us to accept EVERY! SINGLE! PATCH! and EVERY! SINGLE! SERVICE! PACK! [like the November one, that RESET! PEOPLE'S PREFERENCES! FOR! THEM! BACK! TO! DEFAULTS!] whether we WANT them or NOT? Oh, that's right - MICROSOFT KNOWS! BEST!!! They're like a FASCIST GUMMINT ready to TAKE OVER EVERYTHING for the BENEFIT of THE MASSES! [or worse, a MANIPULATIVE CORPORATION that sees us as EXPLOITATION RECEPTION UNITS to be EXPLOITED for whatever purpose, like taking over the world or something] |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 19:41:15 -0000, Big Bad Bob wrote:
On 01/16/16 15:51, John Doe so wittily quipped: "Mr Macaw" wrote: edevils wrote: Most times there weren't any problems, but sometimes there were, and you had to find a fix. What times? I've NEVER had a problem with an update. That's because you are clueless twit who hardly uses a computer. I like to avoid anything but CRITICAL fixes anyway. why install EVERY update just because they exist? Because they improve things. and I only scan for updates MANUALLY, when I'm not busy doing something else with the computer. That way it doesn't steal my bandwidth, You're not still on dial-up are you? What 3rd world country do you live in? I've got 55Mbit fibre with no limits. or computing time. What time? You get a notice saying they're ready and you can restart whenever you wish. -- Saying that she is promiscuous is an understatement. She'll go zero to sixty-nine in under fifteen seconds." |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On 01/17/16 09:52, Mr Macaw so wittily quipped:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 00:32:37 -0000, Jake wrote: "Mr Macaw" wrote in message news On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 22:25:12 -0000, edevils wrote: On 16/01/2016 22:47, Jake wrote: "edevils" wrote in message ... On 16/01/2016 18:14, Mr Macaw wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:06:39 -0000, Paul wrote: Fritz Wuehler wrote: So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further. Most of the time, we end up not understanding why they're changing things. If the objective was to in an obvious way, "make Win10 better and better", I might have a more positive attitude to the rolling release idea and what they're actually doing to it. For example, the desktop version uses Windows Update. The latest builds added Update Orchestrator, which sits above Windows Update, a piece of software used on the Enterprise edition. Do consumers need Update Orchestrator ? No. Did the policies in the OS change, because of the presence of Update Orchestrator ? Yes. Is the overall change an improvement for consumers ? No. The desktop version is being used as a testbed, and for ideas that may have no positive impact on the consumer version itself. And that's not really the intention of the rolling release idea. It's an abuse of rolling release. Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's not gone wrong once. It works for me too, but the fact that it is being used as a testbed, like Paul put it, combined with the nearly "unstoppable" automatic updates, makes me a bit unconfortable. I mean, a new feature update could break it any time, could it not? I've allowed MS to update my machines automatically for years without an issue. Same here. But automatic updates did not include new features, usually, in previous Windows versions. Why would that increase the chances of a monumental ****up? However, a Win 10 update a few weeks ago did change some of my settings. But no problems since then. But since we have no choice, lets see how it plays out. However, Windows 10 *Professional* allows you to defer risky feature upgrades, while still receiving security patches as soon as they are released. That's why I deem Pro safer than Home. Why would anyone have less than the full version? Now that is an interesting question. I've got what the machine came with. Since it's "free", I'm wondering if I can upgrade free? I'm going to sniff around. I'll keep you posted. When you bought the machine, why did you not ask for a better version? because they didn't offer pre-installed Linux? [ok I just *HAD* to do that - LINUX being "the better version" of course, particularly something like MINT, which allows you to configure it YOUR way instead of having it THEIR way, SHOVED UP YOUR ASS] |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 19:46:58 -0000, Big Bad Bob wrote:
On 01/17/16 09:52, Mr Macaw so wittily quipped: On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 00:32:37 -0000, Jake wrote: "Mr Macaw" wrote in message news On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 22:25:12 -0000, edevils wrote: On 16/01/2016 22:47, Jake wrote: "edevils" wrote in message ... On 16/01/2016 18:14, Mr Macaw wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:06:39 -0000, Paul wrote: Fritz Wuehler wrote: So, free Windows is just like Linux now. A lot of code and promising crap that never gets fixed or developed further. Most of the time, we end up not understanding why they're changing things. If the objective was to in an obvious way, "make Win10 better and better", I might have a more positive attitude to the rolling release idea and what they're actually doing to it. For example, the desktop version uses Windows Update. The latest builds added Update Orchestrator, which sits above Windows Update, a piece of software used on the Enterprise edition. Do consumers need Update Orchestrator ? No. Did the policies in the OS change, because of the presence of Update Orchestrator ? Yes. Is the overall change an improvement for consumers ? No. The desktop version is being used as a testbed, and for ideas that may have no positive impact on the consumer version itself. And that's not really the intention of the rolling release idea. It's an abuse of rolling release. Yawn..... it works for me, it's the nicest OS I've ever used. And it's not gone wrong once. It works for me too, but the fact that it is being used as a testbed, like Paul put it, combined with the nearly "unstoppable" automatic updates, makes me a bit unconfortable. I mean, a new feature update could break it any time, could it not? I've allowed MS to update my machines automatically for years without an issue. Same here. But automatic updates did not include new features, usually, in previous Windows versions. Why would that increase the chances of a monumental ****up? However, a Win 10 update a few weeks ago did change some of my settings. But no problems since then. But since we have no choice, lets see how it plays out. However, Windows 10 *Professional* allows you to defer risky feature upgrades, while still receiving security patches as soon as they are released. That's why I deem Pro safer than Home. Why would anyone have less than the full version? Now that is an interesting question. I've got what the machine came with. Since it's "free", I'm wondering if I can upgrade free? I'm going to sniff around. I'll keep you posted. When you bought the machine, why did you not ask for a better version? because they didn't offer pre-installed Linux? [ok I just *HAD* to do that - LINUX being "the better version" of course, particularly something like MINT, which allows you to configure it YOUR way instead of having it THEIR way, SHOVED UP YOUR ASS] If you prefer Linux, why the **** are you using windows and moaning about it? Don't you know how to install it by yourself? -- A doctor held a stethoscope up to a man's chest. The man asks, "Doc, how do I stand? " The doctor says, "That's what puzzles me!" |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On 01/17/16 11:41, Mr Macaw so wittily quipped:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 19:33:51 -0000, Big Bad Bob I'd rather have *SOMETHING* *WORTH* *PAYING* *FOR* (like Windows 7) than *FREE* ****** *ON* *A* *STICK*. No Windows has ever been worse than the previous one, with the exception of Windows 8's Metro interface, which was easily disabled. that should be MY decision, *NOT* Microsoft's, as to what "better" means. For *ME*, "better" is Windows 7 [if it's a microsoft OS], or even XP. I should be able to HAVE that, and *NOT* have the *INFERIOR* **** known as Windows 10 SHOVED INSIDE MY COLON |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 19:51:00 -0000, Big Bad Bob wrote:
On 01/17/16 11:41, Mr Macaw so wittily quipped: On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 19:33:51 -0000, Big Bad Bob I'd rather have *SOMETHING* *WORTH* *PAYING* *FOR* (like Windows 7) than *FREE* ****** *ON* *A* *STICK*. No Windows has ever been worse than the previous one, with the exception of Windows 8's Metro interface, which was easily disabled. that should be MY decision, *NOT* Microsoft's, as to what "better" means. For *ME*, "better" is Windows 7 [if it's a microsoft OS], or even XP. I should be able to HAVE that, and *NOT* have the *INFERIOR* **** known as Windows 10 SHOVED INSIDE MY COLON Just because you like to live in the past doesn't mean others should cater for it. -- A. Top posters. Q. What's the most annoying thing on newsgroups? |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 19:51:00 -0000, Big Bad Bob wrote:
On 01/17/16 11:41, Mr Macaw so wittily quipped: On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 19:33:51 -0000, Big Bad Bob I'd rather have *SOMETHING* *WORTH* *PAYING* *FOR* (like Windows 7) than *FREE* ****** *ON* *A* *STICK*. No Windows has ever been worse than the previous one, with the exception of Windows 8's Metro interface, which was easily disabled. that should be MY decision, *NOT* Microsoft's, as to what "better" means. For *ME*, "better" is Windows 7 [if it's a microsoft OS], or even XP. I should be able to HAVE that, and *NOT* have the *INFERIOR* **** known as Windows 10 SHOVED INSIDE MY COLON USB is not backward compatible with that orifice. -- A. Top posters. Q. What's the most annoying thing on newsgroups? |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day
"Mr Macaw" news
2016 17:57:12 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:
I really don't care about their point of view. Mine is that I maintain business systems which you don't just cavalierly toss operating system upgrades at. I am dealing with cases in which business owners have specifically been told that specialized software they depend on will not work properly on Windows 10 That's the fault of the authors of the software. Everyone else releases patches if they programmed it badly the first time. That's insane! How can an author possibly know MS is going to release an 'updated' OS that breaks some other code in the process? When customized software is in use, if it's not broken, you don't 'fix' it with an OS upgrade. -- Hey listen... On your way back up, bring some popcorn...With salt. |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 21:02:37 -0000, Diesel wrote:
"Mr Macaw" news 2016 17:57:12 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote: I really don't care about their point of view. Mine is that I maintain business systems which you don't just cavalierly toss operating system upgrades at. I am dealing with cases in which business owners have specifically been told that specialized software they depend on will not work properly on Windows 10 That's the fault of the authors of the software. Everyone else releases patches if they programmed it badly the first time. That's insane! How can an author possibly know MS is going to release an 'updated' OS that breaks some other code in the process? When customized software is in use, if it's not broken, you don't 'fix' it with an OS upgrade. There are guidelines on how to write a program. If you make it work with one version of windows, but don't adhere to the guidelines, it's not M$'s fault when they remove that feature and break the program. -- But she was always fat. She was born an only twin. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 UsersTwice a Day
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 21:02:37 -0000, Diesel wrote:
"Mr Macaw" news 2016 17:57:12 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote: I really don't care about their point of view. Mine is that I maintain business systems which you don't just cavalierly toss operating system upgrades at. I am dealing with cases in which business owners have specifically been told that specialized software they depend on will not work properly on Windows 10 That's the fault of the authors of the software. Everyone else releases patches if they programmed it badly the first time. That's insane! How can an author possibly know MS is going to release an 'updated' OS that breaks some other code in the process? When customized software is in use, if it's not broken, you don't 'fix' it with an OS upgrade. Most program vendors release a patch to make it work with the new version of windows. They have plenty time to do so, as pre-release versions of windows are about before us lot get it. -- But she was always fat. She was born an only twin. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
'Get Windows 10' Turns Itself On and Nags Win 7 and 8.1 Users Twice a Day
"Mr Macaw" news
2016 21:09:12 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 21:02:37 -0000, Diesel wrote: "Mr Macaw" news Jan 2016 17:57:12 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote: I really don't care about their point of view. Mine is that I maintain business systems which you don't just cavalierly toss operating system upgrades at. I am dealing with cases in which business owners have specifically been told that specialized software they depend on will not work properly on Windows 10 That's the fault of the authors of the software. Everyone else releases patches if they programmed it badly the first time. That's insane! How can an author possibly know MS is going to release an 'updated' OS that breaks some other code in the process? When customized software is in use, if it's not broken, you don't 'fix' it with an OS upgrade. There are guidelines on how to write a program. If you make it work with one version of windows, but don't adhere to the guidelines, it's not M$'s fault when they remove that feature and break the program. ROFL. You haven't actually done much programming then, I take it... -- Hey listen... On your way back up, bring some popcorn...With salt. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|