richlind33: I am. ;p

zeogold: He literally said that he doesn't want to tinker with it, though. His argument is that convenience is a selling point (which it obviously is, given how much GOG is banking on Galaxy) and that he wants games to work better on Windows 10 without needing to jump through hoops. That's a valid concern.
Again, what you're saying sounds no better than going "if it doesn't work for Linux, don't bother asking for compatibility, just solve it yourself".

JMich: Thank you, that means I can now ignore your posts as attempts at humor and/or troll.

timppu: While I didn't downvote him, I could see some getting annoyed of him starting several threads on the same subject (borderline spamming), and being stubborn by not reading what others are writing to him.

For instance, he keeps suggesting GOG isn't trying to make more games Windows 10 compatible, as if it is only about GOG staff being too lazy to do it. Gee, what if there are real technical obstacles to make many existing games work in Windows 10, especially so that it works for the majority of people and not only some?

He would have a point if GOG was still adding "new" games to GOG.com that are not supported on Windows 10, but I don't think that is the case. When was the last time you saw GOG adding a game which is not supported in Windows 10?

Also, many people don't agree with his suggestion that only 25-33% of GOG games work reliably in Windows 10. Others seem to have much better success, so it may be he has some configuration problem (like not having enabled DirectPlay in the Legacy options), but since he is so stubborn to read other people's suggestions...

richlind33: FU2, bub.

JMich: See, here's the thing. You seem intelligent enough to be able to have a proper discussion. You start with an argument about Linux, and once I post something that doesn't fit said argument, you use a logical fallacy to continue arguing about your point. An intelligent person wouldn't be doing that for a serious argument, so the only thing I can deduce is that you do it for comedic purposes, so I can forget any chances of a proper discussion.

richlind33: You seem intelligent enough to be able to have a proper discussion, but then you claim "logical fallacy" in spite of the fact that linux is a poor choice for peeps that don't know what they're getting into, which leaves me wondering just how intelligent you really are?

tinyE: there are things that I miss about 7

JMich: Which ones? I'm sure there were a few when I switched as well, but I either found out how to enable them or I forgot I was missing them.

tinyE: In Win7 you opened it and were given the option to Empty, with 10 you need to open it and then open 'Manage', and then empty.

tinyE: Also, personalizing your desktop seems a little more complicated. Changing the wallpaper was easy enough but 7 had a really nice step by step on changing everything. It gave you a pic of window and you were able to click on any of part of that pic and it gave you the options to change the color/font/size of whatever you clicked on, be it the active window, the inactive window, the back ground, the primary text etc etc etc.

JMich: The explorer ribbon is hidden by default, but you can click the down arrow on the top right, to the left of the ? button to have it permanently open. But considering most of the tasks there are stuff you don't use often (with the exception of the empty recycle bin), having it always open mostly takes up space.

JMich: Yeah, I'm not sure where those options have gone to, since I was quite happy to let it pick an accent color based on my background. I assume it should be hiding somewhere in themes, but a quick look didn't show anything.

JMich: No True Scotsman is the logical fallacy I meant. You know, the one you said you'd use to continue supporting your argument.
And someone who uses a machine running Linux is a Linux user, isn't it? Or is a Windows user only those that installed Windows on their own machine anddid the legwork themselves?

Unless of course your post is you still trying to be a comedian.

richlind33: Whatever the benchmark is it should apply to both

richlind33: but bear in mind that you referenced a very particular subset of linux users, few -- if any -- of which would fall into the category of "satisfied users that intend to keep using it".

richlind33: I hate windows and do not intend to continue using it, but I hold no illusions as to being a typical win user.

richlind33: I said no such thing, so perhaps you should take a look at your own honesty and intelligence.

richlind33: The crux for me is whether or not someone has *chosen* to use the OS, not whether or not they installed it themself.

richlind33: And I see you've deliberately misquoted yourself

richlind33: which is another indication that you should take a look at your own honesty and intelligence before casting aspersions on anyone else's.

richlind33: What you actually said was, "I got my parent/sibling/child/friend a computer with Linux...", not "parent/sibling/child/friend who had someone install Linux for them to use".

richlind33: No need to confirm that your nose is out of joint, m8. o.O