The Windows 10 Gotcha

[Deleted member 226268]

.

Just an observation .......

When you install a new Microsoft operation system onto your computer, it is necessary to register the licence key with Microsoft, over the internet, to validate the software.
( So they can check that it is a genuine copy, and they have been paid for it )

This licence number, when verified, allows you to continue using their operating system.


Two years ago all support for Windows XP ceased from Microsoft.

That means if you wanted to install an old version of XP you have lying around in a drawer, even with a valid licence key,
Microsoft will no longer accept the licence registration key, and your XP operating system software will stop working after a few weeks.

I suspect that sometime before year 2020, Microsoft will withdraw support for all current versions and variants, Windows 7, 8, 8.1 etc. all those before Windows 10.

Us diehards will continue with their currently installed Windows system software for a few years, until the hard disk crash, the Windows system files corruptions, all requiring a complete re-install.

Then we will all be forced to buy Windows 10.

So Microsoft will win .... eventually.

I hope that Linux will continue to develop, so that it will eventually support all the software that currently relies on Windows to operate.

 

[Graham Tyers]

XP is so unsafe and insecure you'd nead your head testing first if you were going to install it.

 

[ryedale]

I don't blame Microsoft's approach to be honest. XP is what 14 years old now?

There comes a point where you have to force people's hand to move on otherwise it becomes impossible to keep improving standards because people are happy to stick with what they know.

We have a similar situation as web developers.. Internet Explorer 6,7,8 were absolutely dreadful browsers, miles behind the standards of rivals.. but because Microsoft supported them until last year, we had to keep filling sites with legacy code and fallbacks to try and make websites work in the ancient browsers - same applies to software developers with software for old operating systems like XP

When Microsoft finally dropped support for the old browsers, it freed developers to produce far better designs that could fully take advantage of modern standards without having to worry about fallback support.

 

[The Byre]

Windows 10 is full of gotchas, the above being just one of them. In particular, it is incompatible with many of the more advanced sound and video cards.

As for XP, we run a couple of XP-Pro machines and will continue to do so, as they are required for older SW that just cannot run on 7,8 & 10. We also have two DOS machines and will have to keep them going for as long as possible.

7-Pro is pretty good for compatibility.

 

[Clinton]

XP is so unsafe and insecure you'd nead your head testing first if you were going to install it.

That's not the issue. If I paid for something I don't expect someone else to decide when I should stop using it. The EULA didn't say it was a limited time licence.

What if my regular use of a particular PC is offline-only and I therefore don't have the security worries? Or if I have some other need for XP? If they insist on online validation they should keep it open for as long as people want to do that validation. It probably doesn't cost MS anything to validate, so turning this off is simply a cynical move to force users to what Microsoft would prefer them to use.

It is outrageous that Microsoft can get away with this! And the tricks they are playing to force people to upgrade to Windows 10 (which they refuse to back down from)

And where do we draw the line? At what point would you be happy for MS to change their minds and move the goalposts on your current Windows 10 software? And what price would you be willing to pay for that if they decided to hold you to ransom?

Computers have become too critical to modern life to have companies like MS retain the power to turn yours off whenever they want (and they can do that with Windows 10!!).

 

[Clinton]

I hope that Linux will continue to develop, so that it will eventually support all the software that currently relies on Windows to operate.

More than 99% of the population could live with Linux as it is now. Unlike the early days, it's easy to install, has the user-friendly GUI, has drivers, everything.

And they could use Open Office instead of MS Office. And GIMP instead of Photoshop. And Foxit instead of Acrobat Reader. There's plenty of great opensource software.

But people are lazy and the big boys take full advantage.

 

[The Byre]

Across Planet Earth, SW companies are trying to turn one-off 'lumps' of revenue into income streams by making SW something that must be subscribed to, rather than an unlimited licence that we use over a period of years.

We see SW as a replacement for hardware. They want us to see SW as a service that we must pay for every month, like telephones, server space or insurance. Adobe was the first of the big boys to force its users to go down that path, Avid and others are trying to follow.

 

[fisicx]

XP is so unsafe and insecure you'd nead your head testing first if you were going to install it.

No it's not. The applications you run on XP are insecure. You can connect to the Internet with XP and it will sit there quite happy and unhacked. But if you do something with an insecure application (such as Internet Explorer) you now become a target. It's not the OS that's the problem.

 

[Deleted member 226268]

Across Planet Earth, SW companies are trying to turn one-off 'lumps' of revenue into income streams by making SW something that must be subscribed to, rather than an unlimited licence that we use over a period of years.

We see SW as a replacement for hardware. They want us to see SW as a service that we must pay for every month, like telephones, server space or insurance. Adobe was the first of the big boys to force its users to go down that path, Avid and others are trying to follow.

---------

This appears to be rapidly coming true, Software will all be yearly subscription based soon, instead of a one-off purchase that you can use for years and avoid paying for later updates.
We will all be pressured into a pay by the year system.

Microsoft office worked well for years and years, now Office 365 Home will cost £ 80 a year as a subscription.
What happens when your yearly subscription runs out ?
Does Microsoft suddenly shut down your office software by remote control ?


This annual subscription - money making scam has already happened for CAD users,
http://www.solidsmack.com/cad-desig...g-autodesk-solidworks-solid-edge-and-onshape/

and now the Solidworks CAD software company have gone even further, they have recently introduced a crazy idea where if you miss ( can't afford ) updates, then, on the next install of a later version, your company will now have to pay for all the previous updates that you conveniently missed ( could not afford ) before they let you use the later version.
http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/cad-cam/solidworks-changing-renew-policy-307402/

AND we already pay a yearly subscription fee.

It is all a big rip-off because we are trapped in a niche market, because all the CAD software companies are collaborating together
with this new policy.

Even if Linux can run some of this software, there will be no chance of getting around these subscription fees.

.

 

[Clinton]

I beg to differ. There's a way around the subscription fees - don't use the software!

It's not just about whether Linux can run the same old, same old. Switch out of the same old! Use Open Office, use GIMP, use OpenSource CAD.

Insist , where you can, that others use it. So, for example, when I hire freelancers to do work for me I specify my programmes in the description of the job. If their docx file is messed up in Open Office or their psd file doesn't show all the layers when I open it in GIMP, I throw it back and them and tell them to re-do it using proper software! And, yes, sometimes you have to make some compromises to go OpenSource. But, in time, those sacrifices will pay off.

The general population is too lazy to make the switch even from MS Office to Apache / Open Office, so it's unlikely these sheeple will ever wake up to the subscription swindle.

But the next generation is smarter (I hope). Too bad most of them are being taught in schools where the teachers have been trained to be MS pawns. Here's one school that's bucking the trend and has made a big time switch to Open Source, and here's their IT page (have a look at all the software listed there!). Send those links to your children's school and tell the idiots to stop conditioning tomorrow's big brains to be MS puppets.

 

[Ian J]

More than 99% of the population could live with Linux as it is now. Unlike the early days, it's easy to install, has the user-friendly GUI, has drivers, everything.

And they could use Open Office instead of MS Office. And GIMP instead of Photoshop. And Foxit instead of Acrobat Reader. There's plenty of great opensource software.

But people are lazy and the big boys take full advantage.

It isn't just laziness as we aren't all techies and I don't want to learn anything new when what I have is sufficient for my needs.

I did eventually move to Windows 7 three years ago and am happy with it but all of my business stuff is done on Office 2003 which went out with the dinosaurs but does everything that I need it to.

Unfortunately Office 2003 isn't compatible with Windows 10 so that is one excellent reason for me to stick with 7

 

[ffox]

I beg to differ. There's a way around the subscription fees - don't use the software!

But what if I want to use the software?
I am a techie, having made my living in the world of IT since 1986 (second career). I develop applications in C#, I do server scripting, I do Database and SQL and I do Office 365 and SharePoint. I have had years of experience with Open Office, and can tell you that it comes nowhere near Office 2016 (or Office 2013 for that matter) in terms of performance, reliability or compatibility with customers who are using MS Office.
I'm not keen on paying top of the range prices for anything. Consequently I run an elderly midrange car, my computer hardware is all midrange and my wrist watch is over 30 years old (it still ticks so why change it?).
So why do I pay MS prices for SW? Simple, my Office 365 subscription is just £176.40 per year. That delivers cloud data storage, online libraries and lists, workflow and task software, email, document storage (EDMS) that knocks the socks of the likes of Documentum, Serengeti and a host of others, plus Office 2016 on five devices (Windows, Android and IoS). I can work on a train, on a plane, on a bus, in a café, in the UK, anywhere abroad where I can get Internet, on customer premises and at home.
If I lose a tablet, smartphone, laptop, or even if one gets stolen, my data is protected. If all of my devices crash or are burned, I'm off line only for as long as it takes to procure another device, fire it up and load from the Internet (Windows 10 is unbelievably simple to configure). The only single point of possible failure in my world is the Internet and if we lose that I will be worrying about things far greater than my small business.
Software and the pricing of such is not about which supplier you like or dislike, it's not about getting the cheapest deal, it's about taking the most cost effective route.
I can also show the way into 21st century business computing for anyone still stuck in the past and I guarantee it will reduce your costs.

 

[The Byre]

I beg to differ. There's a way around the subscription fees - don't use the software!

It's not just about whether Linux can run the same old, same old. Switch out of the same old! Use Open Office, use GIMP, use OpenSource CAD.

It does not work like that!

Every architecture and engineering student gets to learn AutoCAD. The universities get it for free or very cheaply, students get a student version for very little. Large key companies get their versions cheaper.

If you look at media software, key companies (BBC, Disney, ABC, etc.) get massive installations for a loss to the software company. The universities get their versions for nothing or close to nothing. Your recruits know only one audio software, only one or two video packages, only one CGI package.

More to the point - your customers (that's them big boys, like Disney) will insist on getting all work as a project folder within that key software.

Even conversion software does not help, as you have to be working on-line and with them. Often the customer's employee will insist on working with you, often simultaneously and remotely from Hollywood or Pinewood. Telling him or her that you prefer SW package X or Y ain't gonna cut it! You'll be off the job in a heart-beat!

One of the problems is that these key packages are often falling behind the competition, so you need not only to rent Media Composer, ProTools or Premier-AfterEffects, but you still need the competition to be able to do certain things that those packages do not do, or just to have a package that is stable.

That means that companies like Autodesk, Avid and Adobe have you by the balls! At least, if you want to work. If you just want to use SW for a hobby, well, you don't need these packages.

 

[talksalot81]

To some extent it is time that people started deciding what software they actually need and accepting to pay for it. I see no issue with 365 and actually I am very happy with it - considering that I get our mail included, it is costing very little for a whole lot of office software which is updated all the time. If a business cannot suffer £80 per user per year then they need to have a serious think about their profitability! For a personal user, maybe they use office once in a blue moon so just use open office or similar - they don't 'need' MS office.

I think people need to be careful that they don't have their tinfoil hats permanently glued to their heads. Yes, subs are good for the companies supplying but it is good for the consumer too.

 

[Ian J]

To some extent it is time that people started deciding what software they actually need and accepting to pay for it. I see no issue with 365 and actually I am very happy with it - considering that I get our mail included, it is costing very little for a whole lot of office software which is updated all the time. If a business cannot suffer £80 per user per year then they need to have a serious think about their profitability! For a personal user, maybe they use office once in a blue moon so just use open office or similar - they don't 'need' MS office.

I think people need to be careful that they don't have their tinfoil hats permanently glued to their heads. Yes, subs are good for the companies supplying but it is good for the consumer too.

My business is hugely profitable but I object on principle to being forced to buy something that I neither want nor need if what I already have is sufficient for my needs.

How would you feel if your car stopped working after a few years because BMW decided that it was time you upgraded to a new one

 

[ffox]

How would you feel if your car stopped working after a few years because BMW decided that it was time you upgraded to a new one

BMW would offer you a new car that is bigger, better, faster, more economical, made better business sense (choose one or more from the list) and hope you would succumb to the sales pitch. Thus it is with MS. with the car there is the underlying fear that an older car will cost more to keep on the road, with MS there is the underlying fear that the older SW is more vulnerable to risk. Either way, you make your choice. Either way you have to live the risks and costs of your choice.
Office 365 E1 licence is just £60 per user per year and is compatible with both Win 7 and your existing Office 2003 (the interface isn't as tight as E3 which includes Office 2016, but it works well enough). And you can test drive the different O365 on your existing platform. Change is inevitable, embrace it.

 

[ffox]

Windows 10 is full of gotchas, the above being just one of them. In particular, it is incompatible with many of the more advanced sound and video cards.

Windows 10 has been in general release for months now, before that the beta version was readily available, before that compatibility requirements were available for SW and HW providers. If the more advanced sound and video card aren't compatible with Win 10 isn't that the fault of the card manufacturers?

 

[Clinton]

BMW would offer you a new car that is bigger, better, faster, more economical, made better business sense (choose one or more from the list) and hope you would succumb to the sales pitch. Thus it is with MS...

No, it isn't. Ian's point, as you probably know, is that BMW would give you a choice, not twist your arm.

BMW don't make bloated, unnecessarily heavy, constantly breaking down, crap cars that get slower and slower over time and need constant updates and security fixes every Tuesday.

Also, they're not after the power to, at their pleasure, stop your car from working.

They don't trick you into upgrading to their latest version.

They also figure that once you've paid for the car, it's yours. They aren't trying to screw you out of money for as long as you own the car.

But this old joke says it much better. It's unfortunate you choose the car industry to compare Microsoft against.

It does not work like that!

Every architecture and engineering student gets to learn AutoCAD. The universities get it for free or very cheaply, students get a student version for very little. Large key companies get their versions cheaper.

Educational institutions have been selling their students down the river ever since big software manufacturers figured out the long term gain of bribing schools/colleges with discount price "educational licences". Till very recently the only IT goal in schools was to groom children to be Microsoft slaves - IT was simply learning Word and Excel (because schools got MS Office on the cheap). Or maybe you believe Microsoft gave schools this concession out of the goodness of their massive MS hearts.

It may be that university faculties have been similarly seduced / bribed by software companies. You don't need to learn CAD on AutoCAD just as you don't need to learn word processing on MS Word.

I've been using wordprocessors since Wordstar and Wordperfect. There have been numerous new features in wordprocessing software over the years each one less important and less critical than the last. As software manufacturers realised they've reached the point where improvements now are going to be so minimal that people won't want to pay for them, they're switching to the subscription model with the last big feature they believe they can add - online (cloud) storage/sharing.

And muppets who don't use any more features that the early versions of Wordperfect ... are lapping it up and paying the man his subscription rather than switching to Apache.

 

[talksalot81]

My business is hugely profitable but I object on principle to being forced to buy something that I neither want nor need if what I already have is sufficient for my needs.

How would you feel if your car stopped working after a few years because BMW decided that it was time you upgraded to a new one

My example on 365 does not fit into your argument here. You are not forced to buy it. There are other options. For now, you can even purchase the office system outright.

With regards to the XP discussion, I still don't think that it fits. If the world converts to electric cars and petrol is no more - well tough luck. I have an XP machine and it works fine. I have older systems and they work fine. What you are suggesting is taking your BMW, wiping the computer system and then expecting that BMW will care to help you make it operational again. Dream on. If you leave your XP system alone and don't try to re-install, you are fine. You cannot expect MS to retain licensing systems on redundant systems - you aren't paying any money, so why should they? Since they are not running the licensing systems, how could they know if you are trying to install one license on 100 machines? I think it is quite reasonable to say that the vast majority of people are way beyond XP and any discussion is moot. One could argue that they simply shouldn't care - let old XP run on as many machines as a person wants (it shouldn't hurt them, it is redundant). Quite how this stands in terms of their regulatory obligations, I do not know. The system is out dated and is inevitably going to have vunerabilities - legally MS may well have liability on any system which is newly installed. Can you be absolutely certain that is not the case?

 

[fisicx]

But BMW still supports older models. You can get spares for cars that haven't made for 20 years. The car v software arguement doesn't work.

The point of discussion here is MS not allowing you to use an OS that came bundled with the PC you brought. The fact it is outdated and no longer supported is irrelevant. I've got my XP installation disc and a license key. I've just checked the EULA and there is no lime limitation or restriction on it's use.

There is also the issue over Redmond's recording everything you do on your computer. Windows 10 and Office 365 means they are tracking everything you do. This didn't happen with Win7 and Office 2003. And it one of the reasons why people aren't upgrading to Win10, hence the nagware and re-configuration of the close icon.

 

[talksalot81]

But has your XP computer stopped working because of what MS have done? Mine is still working.

You are into semantics when it comes to your expectation to re-install a redundant OS. On one hand we have arguments that MS are forcing you to change by not activating the software yet it seems that this is only the case if you make the conscious decision to re-install the software on a machine which already has the software. You could 'choose' not to do this and then you are not 'forced' to upgrade. It seems to me that you are only forced to do anything if you choose to be. Leave it alone and you are probably OK. It would be ridiculous to suggest that the attempted installation of non-redundant (later) systems then requires you to upgrade - you simply shouldn't be trying to install them on such legacy systems. Arguments to the contrary would be intentionally intransigent on the matter.

I appreciate that there may well be exceptions but they are rare (you have an old system which can only operate with XP and something happens to it, for example). But the truth is that everyone contributing to this thread knows that the problem exists and would be a contributor to their own issue if they are not already putting alternative arrangements into place.

 

[Ian J]

On one hand we have arguments that MS are forcing you to change by not activating the software yet it seems that this is only the case if you make the conscious decision to re-install the software on a machine which already has the software. You could 'choose' not to do this and then you are not 'forced' to upgrade. It seems to me that you are only forced to do anything if you choose to be. Leave it alone and you are probably OK.

I have re-installed XP a number of times on various computers mainly to cure the gradual slowing down of the machine due to the accumulated junk on it and it's wrong of MS to refuse to activate my legally acquired copy.

 

[talksalot81]

I have re-installed XP a number of times on various computers mainly to cure the gradual slowing down of the machine due to the accumulated junk on it and it's wrong of MS to refuse to activate my legally acquired copy.

Strictly speaking, you are probably right. However I doubt you will get much support were you to take this further. The product has done it's job and the world as moved on. No one is paying for the infrastructure to do the activations and it's fairly reasonable to assume that people move with the times, at least approximately. If you truly think you have a case, take them to court. But I'll bet my life on the outcome

 

[The Byre]

Educational institutions have been selling their students down the river ever since big software manufacturers figured out the long term gain of bribing schools/colleges with discount price "educational licences".
SNIP
It may be that university faculties have been similarly seduced / bribed by software companies. You don't need to learn CAD on AutoCAD just as you don't need to learn word processing on MS Word.

So, let's pretend you are an impecunious sound designer working under contract for the BBC. You have several audio software packages, such as Logic ($199) and the incredibly powerful Reaper ($60) and a few other bits and bobs for editing. You have these installed on a fast Apple PowerMac. The BBC got a ProTools and Media Composer turnkey installation for £20m and so all their engineers are now insisting on projects being supplied as MC and PT project folders.

Because the £20m installation involved many years of maintenance and upgrades, as well as the integration of sophisticated hardware, parent company Avid actually made a considerable loss on that deal. But if they are to 'tilt' the market into accepting their SW as standard, they absolutely HAVE to be in the major broadcasters, film studios and large TV production units.

Both Reaper and Logic are far, far superior to ProTools in just about every aspect, from feature set to stability. ProTools costs about £8,000 for a full setup and a $50 a month subscription.

The BBC gets its updates as part of that loss-leader deal, as do the major universities and film schools around the World that teach that stuff. The thousands and thousands of freelance engineers that need work from Disney, Viacom, the BBC, ZDF, RAI, ITV, RTL, ABC, Sat-1, Pro7 and all the other hundreds of TV stations and production facilities around Planet Earth have to de-trouser that subscription fee if they are to get any work.

Yes, there are work-arounds and conversion packages for nearly all types of applications, but when you are bouncing projects around and having to add a few tracks here and a few effects there, constantly converting back and forth (and all the hazards that entails) converting each and every time becomes very difficult, if not impossible.

That's just one example - repeat the same thing for Adobe CS, Autodesk AutoCAD, Autodesk Maya, MS Office and all other key systems.

And they are not asking for pennies here - Maya (CGI SW) costs $185 a month!

 

[Ian J]

Strictly speaking, you are probably right. However I doubt you will get much support were you to take this further. The product has done it's job and the world as moved on. No one is paying for the infrastructure to do the activations and it's fairly reasonable to assume that people move with the times, at least approximately. If you truly think you have a case, take them to court. But I'll bet my life on the outcome

I'm sure that it isn't beyond the wit of Microsoft to install a piece of software that checks the licence is valid and if so will automatically activate it

 

[Deleted member 226268]

Other Windows 10 users will be allowed to access your computer files ......
Is this TRUE ?

Or just more scaremongering from the Daily Express "news" paper.

Any Windows Wizards here ?

http://www.express.co.uk/life-style...File-Sharing-Delivery-Optimisation-Switch-Off

 

[ffox]

Other Windows 10 users will be allowed to access your computer files ......
Is this TRUE ?

Dave. If it causes you concern you can switch it off or set it to use your local network -

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows-10/windows-update-delivery-optimization-faq

 

[Hireday.com]

Microsoft are a victim of their own success. Their prevalence in big business, government and healthcare organisations who do not respond quickly to changes in technology (for security, deployment and educational reasons) means that the uptake of newer OS or browsers is much slower then they would like.

They are trying to force their customer base to update so that they can deliver a better user experience, but if you are going to go to the effort of updating you might as well look at the alternatives on offer - which could mean a net loss for W10/IE11/Edge/Bing/Word/Excel.....

 

[ffox]

They are trying to force their customer base to update so that they can deliver a better user experience, but if you are going to go to the effort of updating you might as well look at the alternatives on offer - which could mean a net loss for W10/IE11/Edge/Bing/Word/Excel.....

Err. Not really. The CEO of MS is on record as declaring that MS future lies 'in the cloud', as does the future of all computing. So far as end user cloud computing is concerned MS are a long way from being at the head of the pack. Rightly or wrongly, people prefer Android and IoS to Windows 10. To counter this MS offer cloud server services, such as Office 365 and Azure and make access to those services available to Android and IoS users. This is evident in the fact that you can get MS Office apps (Word, Excel, etc.) for both these tablet/smart phone operating systems free of charge. If you want client Office apps for a Windows 10 machine you have to pay, either outright purchase or by subscription. You can, of course, use the browser based Office Apps on any machine with a browser, but these are seriously cut down versions of Word, Excel etc. and are okay for occasional use but not for serious daily operation.
The thing about Windows 10 is that the integration between MS cloud services and the device is extremely tight. This in turn leads to a very much better user experience and as we know user acceptance is the biggest factor in successful change.