That shit stopped being funny in late 2012.

Yeah, Microsoft was genius to introduce a tablet interface and tablet apps on desktop. Most people really needed that. If they're so keen on fixing things, why not try fixing Windows Update, for example?

What's wrong with Windows Update?

wow i just saw this post now and i have copied some quotes i woul like to reply to

same here, i think and many other users also think (just google) that the move to windows 10 as a name has nothing to do with how well it sounds , ten doesnt sound as smooth to me as windows seven, then again eight is also a small word so it still doesnt have a nice ring to it.
windows ninety five/ ninety 98 special editon, those had a nice name.

Plus the well known fact that usually a good or decent windows would get a lousy follower

win95: overal a decent os, since it was the 1st after the 3.11 windows
it had flaws, quite some BOD (blue screen of dead)
and more problems, but i was quite satisfied with the windows when i bought it.
win 98se was better then 95, it was even more stable and had a quite good performance for those days machines.

WIN ME : CRAP....
WIN XP: GOOD (the best in my humble opinion(win7 is a worthy follower once i got to handle it) (UAC was troublesome for me but i got used to it)

VISTA: CRAP

WIN 7: very good

win8: mixed feelings, too many users complain in various fora about games crashing or not working while they did work on win7

then no win9 but win 10

thats a step taken cause 9 would be good again cause 8 was such a miscchief
TEN would be crap again and microsoft would not want to happen that again
so straight to TEN it is...

me too, but then they will come with the big: oops your windows is no longer secure against attacks
plus there will be security holes init that will be discoevrd but wont be filled by microsoft...
so thats the way to force customers to buy a new OS.

well i hope it wont be a subscription service like Adobe has done ...

this way with that cloud service stuff they can keep milking the same cow for milk forever without having to switch to another cow cause it 'ran' out of milk.

They update the stuff with small extras , so they will be able to milk the adobe cow for many decades to come.
Selling retail or paid licenses doesnt make a good profit, casue most european companies wont upgrade when a new version is out, but by using this 'service; principal they get people and companies to fork out more cash then before.

I think its only a matter of time before all software gets the same treat: pay the rest of your life on a subscription base, so you will be stuck for life with those monthly or yearly fees.

There's often a difference between doing changes whose main purpose is to benefit the end-users, or to benefit Microsoft. Sometimes these overlap, but not always.

For example, the obnoxious "Metro" UI in Windows 8. It is clear its main purpose was to get people accustomed to the "touchy-feely" Microsoft interface, so that people would be familiar with it and buy Windows RT tablets and phones (instead of e.g. Android and iOS devices). It was not something that end-users in general really wanted; it was something Microsoft wanted. It was and still is obnoxious to use on a desktop environment, with a mouse and keyboard on a bigger monitor. The only people who probably were happy with it were those poor bastards who ended up really buying (now obsolete) Windows RT devices.

Same for the Windows Store. I don't think there was a strong craving from Windows users to have it on desktop Windows, but it makes perfect sense for Microsoft to introduce it as the default place to buy apps. It is there mainly to benefit Microsoft, not the end-users.

Then again, if you take something like, say, being able to search programs by typing the name in the Windows 7 Start menu, or the alternative way to switch between open programs with Windows-Tab (instead of Alt-Tab; the new way gives a clearer and bigger view on the open programs), I don't recall anyone complaining about those two features specifically. I take it to mean that Windows users in general take those optional new features positively.

That alone puts a big hole in your argument that people automatically hate any new feature that MS introduces. Not so.

To add to my earlier message, I'll give an example of two new features that I personally feel MS should concentrate on bringing to their new OS, things that I really feel would benefit mostly the end-users:

1. Btrfs-like filesystem, something that actively tries to keep file integrity healthy all the time, also during file operations. I don't know if Windows 10 is introducing features like this. I really hope they do, so that I wouldn't have to depend on e.g. Teracopy, dvdsig and other third-party solutions anymore, just trying to keep my files healthy and intact. Still remembering how many of my GOG installers got corrupted apparently when copying them to/from an external USB hard drive. I feel it should be #1 priority that such problems would be automatically detected by the file system (and prevented, if possible).

2. Several virtual desktops, something that has been commonplace in e.g. UNIX and Linux world for... decades? Sometimes the Windows desktop becomes too cluttered with lots of windows.

From minor annoyances like not showing what an update does unless you click on a link, to the more annoying ones, like refusing to install certain updates on new Windows installs, crippling systems with new updates, or installing updates, then requiring more updates to be installed, nothing much.

For Win7 and Win8, use Desktops 2.0 (or any other 3rd party tool). Win10 does support them.
Quick patch notes, extended in the knowledge base. I assume this is what you mean that it doesn't show?

Examples? Windows Update may require a specific installation order, and some updates may have prerequisites, but you are usually able to install the last update at once, skipping the previous. For example, you can install IE11 without installing IE9 or IE10 before hand.

Not Windows update exclusive fault. Bitdefender had it happen, Panda AV had it happen, AVG had it happen, Avast had it happen. And it's a patch problem, not a delivery one.

Yes, if you go for sequential patches instead of cumulative ones. Windows Update is meant to be used often, not once every 6 months. And if you are going to do a fresh installation, it helps to grab the patches and slipstream them on the disc.


Either way, thank you for responding.

Here's one example. Last week I had to deal with a Windows PC with a first time boot install on it, which refused to install I can't remember what update (it was 700mb+ big; that desktop didn't had the 81 updated 1 on it),

Good to hear that Windows 10 is getting this feature. About time. One valid reason then for me to look forward to Windows 10.

EDIT: Well, according to the comments on that page, that is still a very bare-bones implementation of virtual desktops... but at least it is a start. Hopefully MS keeps improving it a lot, also during the Windows 10 lifecycle (and not only until Windows 11/12).

I know there have been third-party solutions for earlier Windows versions, but I prefer having official support for it, and also an official solution is less likely to have issues with rest of the system, or different applications. Same as with e.g. TeraCopy: a third-party solution which occasionally seems have issues with file permissions (when using it for moving files), or having issues with multiple accounts (e.g. I installed TeraCopy on one Win7 account; it became available also on another account (integrated to context-sensitive menus and such), but didn't seem to work correctly there).

Desktops 2.0 isn't a third-party solutions. Sysinternals has been acquired by Microsoft, so Desktops 2.0 is a first party tool, for XP and higher. It just isn't part of the default installation.

Some of these posts... +1 for comedy.

And the newest info.

Any Windows 7 or 8 versions, genuine or non-genuine, can be upgraded to Windows 10.

Quoting the article: And the upgrade paths.

Up to last year, I'd say nothing but twice on Windows 8 I've had it fail getting new updates.
I tried different times and networks and I had to fix it by using the designated utility.

The fact that there is a program from Microsoft exclusively to fix Windows Update problems says something, I think.

EDIT: Scratch the twice and change it for three times.

Remains to be seen what happens to Windows on ARM.

Because they do have builds of Windows running on many different instruction sets even though they are not publicly available.