Windows 10 - Day 1

PeterN wrote:


My two young grandchildren were over today. (Last day of school
yesterday) They were on this computer. I had not told them that I'd
switched from 7 to 10. They jumped right in and used the system just
as they had the week before.



Kids have tech knowledge built it. It you had converted to Linux, they
would have jumped right in and not said a word. ;-)

That is absolutely true. My wife and I are foster carers so we have had a
number of kids living in the house and every single one of them has got on
and used the computer without any issue at all.

--
sid

On Fri, 27 May 2016 09:48:03 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 27 May 2016 09:33:08 -0400, PAS wrote:

On 5/26/2016 4:36 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 5/26/2016 9:59 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Dunno what all the fuss is about from the anti-10 contingent.

most of the fuss is because microsoft is pushing the upgrade *far* too
hard and making it nearly impossible to say no.


Kinda like what Apple does?

nothing at all like apple does. not even remotely close.

Every time I use my iPad a pop-up appears
telling me there's a new IOS available. The pop-up appears more
frequently than the W-10 pop-up did on my desktop.

that popup is for an incremental update, not a major upgrade (yet
another thing you do not understand), and unlike win10, if you say no,
apple won't install anything against your wishes.

installing an incremental update doesn't change anything that the user
would notice, as it's just numerous bug fixes and security fixes, which
is why it's a *very* good idea to update.

installing a major upgrade *does* change stuff, sometimes significantly
so, which is why for a major upgrade (e.g., ios 8-9), you will at most
get *one* popup (sometimes not even that), with a badge icon staying on
the settings app. that's *it*.

that's *very* different than what's going on with win10. very, very
different.

worse, if the user says no to the win10 upgrade, it upgrades *anyway*.

That didn't happen when I said no. But I forgot, you know everything.

What MS has changed was with the recent pop-up notifying a user of the
upgrade to Win10. If the user did nothing but click the "X" to close
the window, MS accepted that as the user's acceptance to upgrade toi Win
10 via automatic update. They actually changed the "meaning" of
clicking the X to close a window.


I deliberately upgraded, but I fail to see the problem. I'm now in
the second day of using W-10. With the exception of the START menu
being different, what I have in 10 is exactly what I had in 7. Any
"under the hood" changes haven't affected me.

My desktop didn't change. All the icons are there exactly where they
were before. I was using Chrome before, and continue to use Chrome.
The icon is there in the task bar. I've checked into Edge and find it
OK but nothing special.

The layout of the START menu is different, but not at all difficult to
work with. Anyone who has been using W-7 for a few months would adapt
to W-10 in a matter of minutes. The most amount of time I've spent
working the START menu has been deleting some of the links that I do
not expect ever to use. There's no problem letting them stay, but the
interface is cleaner without them.

Someone said that a person waking up to find a whole new environment
would be distressed because W-10 suddenly appears. I can't imagine
anyone considering it a problem.

The objections, as far as I can tell, have been in the Chicken Little
"The sky is falling!" area.

Not really. W10 is a moveable feast. It's make up has evolved
significantly since it was first released upon the public in July
2015. At that time W10 was much more fussy about it's hardware than it
is now. There were many minor updates and patches following it's
release with a major update in November 2015. More updates and patches
followed. The third major version (including the first) was released
in December 2015. More updates have followed.

The history has been set out in some detail at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window...ersion_history

You will see that what you have just installed is a very different
animal from the troublesome beast of almost a year ago.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Fri, 27 May 2016 15:04:06 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 27 May 2016 11:08:26 -0400, PAS wrote:

On 5/27/2016 9:48 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Fri, 27 May 2016 09:33:08 -0400, PAS wrote:

On 5/26/2016 4:36 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 5/26/2016 9:59 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Dunno what all the fuss is about from the anti-10 contingent.
most of the fuss is because microsoft is pushing the upgrade *far* too
hard and making it nearly impossible to say no.

Kinda like what Apple does?
nothing at all like apple does. not even remotely close.

Every time I use my iPad a pop-up appears
telling me there's a new IOS available. The pop-up appears more
frequently than the W-10 pop-up did on my desktop.
that popup is for an incremental update, not a major upgrade (yet
another thing you do not understand), and unlike win10, if you say no,
apple won't install anything against your wishes.

installing an incremental update doesn't change anything that the user
would notice, as it's just numerous bug fixes and security fixes, which
is why it's a *very* good idea to update.

installing a major upgrade *does* change stuff, sometimes significantly
so, which is why for a major upgrade (e.g., ios 8-9), you will at most
get *one* popup (sometimes not even that), with a badge icon staying on
the settings app. that's *it*.

that's *very* different than what's going on with win10. very, very
different.

worse, if the user says no to the win10 upgrade, it upgrades *anyway*.
That didn't happen when I said no. But I forgot, you know everything.
What MS has changed was with the recent pop-up notifying a user of the
upgrade to Win10. If the user did nothing but click the "X" to close
the window, MS accepted that as the user's acceptance to upgrade toi Win
10 via automatic update. They actually changed the "meaning" of
clicking the X to close a window.

I deliberately upgraded, but I fail to see the problem. I'm now in
the second day of using W-10. With the exception of the START menu
being different, what I have in 10 is exactly what I had in 7. Any
"under the hood" changes haven't affected me.

My desktop didn't change. All the icons are there exactly where they
were before. I was using Chrome before, and continue to use Chrome.
The icon is there in the task bar. I've checked into Edge and find it
OK but nothing special.

The layout of the START menu is different, but not at all difficult to
work with. Anyone who has been using W-7 for a few months would adapt
to W-10 in a matter of minutes. The most amount of time I've spent
working the START menu has been deleting some of the links that I do
not expect ever to use. There's no problem letting them stay, but the
interface is cleaner without them.

Someone said that a person waking up to find a whole new environment
would be distressed because W-10 suddenly appears. I can't imagine
anyone considering it a problem.

The objections, as far as I can tell, have been in the Chicken Little
"The sky is falling!" area.

The only problem I see is that people aren't approving to receive the
update and they are still getting it.

I don't know how big a problem that is, and the ones I've read about
are due to not reading the pop-up and paying attention to what is
says.

As far as I can tell, the people who this happens to are not
inconvenienced in any way. 10 works so much the same as 7 that there
is no appreciable difference other than the START menu.

It's completely buggered up my ability to back up to and restore from
my old XP system. The restored files come back with some kind of
inheritable hidden attribute which makes it impossible to do anything
other than read them.

My two young grandchildren were over today. (Last day of school
yesterday) They were on this computer. I had not told them that I'd
switched from 7 to 10. They jumped right in and used the system just
as they had the week before.



I find that objectionable. For
myself, I am quite happy with Win 10 as I was with Win 8. I had no
fears about upgrading to either and both OSs work just fine for me. The
change from Win 7 to 8 was a more "drastic" change than the going from
Win 7 to 10.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sat, 28 May 2016 00:07:40 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

It's completely buggered up my ability to back up to and restore from
my old XP system. The restored files come back with some kind of
inheritable hidden attribute which makes it impossible to do anything
other than read them.

Well, sure, but my statement was about people coming from W-7. I
have files still on an old ZIP drive that probably are buggered up.
None that I need, though.

For years I have backed up from computer A to computer B over a
network and vice versa. In the next to latest reincarnation A has been
Windows 7 and B has been XP. I think the first time I did this A was
NT 4 and B was windows 3.5. The A was W 2000 and B was NT4. After that
A was W XP and B was W 2000. Then A was W7 and B was XP. Then I
changed A to W10 while B remained XP. Since then everything has turned
to custard. I can still save files to XP but I cannot recover them in
any useable form back to W10.

The Internet confirms that I am not alone with this problem and all
kinds of patches and setting changes have been proposed to others as a
solution. So far I have not found one which works for me but I have to
admit I have not tried lately.

The path of W10 is straight but only as long as you keep on the
centreline. All kinds of things at the edges have changed, seemingly
mostly as a result of changes derived from improved security.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Fri, 27 May 2016 23:50:03 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

On Sat, 28 May 2016 15:41:24 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Fri, 27 May 2016 09:48:03 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 27 May 2016 09:33:08 -0400, PAS wrote:

On 5/26/2016 4:36 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 5/26/2016 9:59 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Dunno what all the fuss is about from the anti-10 contingent.

most of the fuss is because microsoft is pushing the upgrade *far* too
hard and making it nearly impossible to say no.


Kinda like what Apple does?

nothing at all like apple does. not even remotely close.

Every time I use my iPad a pop-up appears
telling me there's a new IOS available. The pop-up appears more
frequently than the W-10 pop-up did on my desktop.

that popup is for an incremental update, not a major upgrade (yet
another thing you do not understand), and unlike win10, if you say no,
apple won't install anything against your wishes.

installing an incremental update doesn't change anything that the user
would notice, as it's just numerous bug fixes and security fixes, which
is why it's a *very* good idea to update.

installing a major upgrade *does* change stuff, sometimes significantly
so, which is why for a major upgrade (e.g., ios 8-9), you will at most
get *one* popup (sometimes not even that), with a badge icon staying on
the settings app. that's *it*.

that's *very* different than what's going on with win10. very, very
different.

worse, if the user says no to the win10 upgrade, it upgrades *anyway*.

That didn't happen when I said no. But I forgot, you know everything.

What MS has changed was with the recent pop-up notifying a user of the
upgrade to Win10. If the user did nothing but click the "X" to close
the window, MS accepted that as the user's acceptance to upgrade toi Win
10 via automatic update. They actually changed the "meaning" of
clicking the X to close a window.


I deliberately upgraded, but I fail to see the problem. I'm now in
the second day of using W-10. With the exception of the START menu
being different, what I have in 10 is exactly what I had in 7. Any
"under the hood" changes haven't affected me.

My desktop didn't change. All the icons are there exactly where they
were before. I was using Chrome before, and continue to use Chrome.
The icon is there in the task bar. I've checked into Edge and find it
OK but nothing special.

The layout of the START menu is different, but not at all difficult to
work with. Anyone who has been using W-7 for a few months would adapt
to W-10 in a matter of minutes. The most amount of time I've spent
working the START menu has been deleting some of the links that I do
not expect ever to use. There's no problem letting them stay, but the
interface is cleaner without them.

Someone said that a person waking up to find a whole new environment
would be distressed because W-10 suddenly appears. I can't imagine
anyone considering it a problem.

The objections, as far as I can tell, have been in the Chicken Little
"The sky is falling!" area.

Not really. W10 is a moveable feast. It's make up has evolved
significantly since it was first released upon the public in July
2015. At that time W10 was much more fussy about it's hardware than it
is now. There were many minor updates and patches following it's
release with a major update in November 2015. More updates and patches
followed. The third major version (including the first) was released
in December 2015. More updates have followed.

The history has been set out in some detail at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window...ersion_history

You will see that what you have just installed is a very different
animal from the troublesome beast of almost a year ago.

Oh, I'll go along with that. However, follow the discussion here.
It's now about W-10 automatically installing or installing because the
person didn't read the pop-up right. What is being installed is
today's version, and today's version seems to have solved the
problems.

So, when I addressed the statement that a person suddenly has W-10
thrust upon them, I addressed it in the context of what is being
thrust upon them...today's W-10.

In the early days, there was no problem with automatic, unwanted,
downloads of W-10.

I was addressing "The objections, as far as I can tell, have been in
the Chicken Little "The sky is falling!" area". In the early days of
W10 Chicken Little was somewhat right. For that matter, so too was the
original Chicken Little.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2016-05-26 09:59, nospam wrote:
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Dunno what all the fuss is about from the anti-10 contingent.

most of the fuss is because microsoft is pushing the upgrade *far* too
hard and making it nearly impossible to say no.


Kinda like what Apple does?

nothing at all like apple does. not even remotely close.

Every time I use my iPad a pop-up appears
telling me there's a new IOS available. The pop-up appears more
frequently than the W-10 pop-up did on my desktop.

that popup is for an incremental update, not a major upgrade (yet
another thing you do not understand), and unlike win10, if you say no,
apple won't install anything against your wishes.

With iOS Apple are just as annoying (perhaps worse). If you refuse
(cancel) an incremental, you get nagged again the next day or more than
once/day (I haven't tracked it). There is no hard "defer" that turns
off the nagging.

On OS X there is only the Notifcation banner and App Store badge turned
on, so not so annoying. It is designed to encourage updating even when
the purpose of the upgrade is minor and inconsequential.

--
She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics.
-Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

With iOS Apple are just as annoying (perhaps worse). If you refuse
(cancel) an incremental, you get nagged again the next day or more than
once/day (I haven't tracked it). There is no hard "defer" that turns
off the nagging.

again, the difference is that's for bug fixes and security fixes,
versus upgrading to the next version of ios.

upgrading to the next version of ios is optional and always has been.
there was one alert for ios 9 to let the user know it had been released
and then it left a badge on the settings app. that's *it*. i have
several devices that could run ios 9 and do not nag at all.

however, users should *always* install bug/security fixes for their
existing ios version, as some of them are rather major. in fact, the
nagging to do the update came after a rather serious security patch
(don't remember the specifics off hand).

that's very different than what's happening on windows, where it nags
win7/8 users to upgrade to win10 (a major upgrade, not a bugfix) and
then if they say no, it upgrades them *anyway*.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

With iOS Apple are just as annoying (perhaps worse). If you refuse
(cancel) an incremental, you get nagged again the next day or more than
once/day (I haven't tracked it). There is no hard "defer" that turns
off the nagging.

again, the difference is that's for bug fixes and security fixes,
versus upgrading to the next version of ios.

But the difference is *not* in frequency of appearance. It is the
frequency that annoys.

no, the difference is that one should be mandatory and the other is
optional.

On 5/28/2016 10:21 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

With iOS Apple are just as annoying (perhaps worse). If you refuse
(cancel) an incremental, you get nagged again the next day or more than
once/day (I haven't tracked it). There is no hard "defer" that turns
off the nagging.

again, the difference is that's for bug fixes and security fixes,
versus upgrading to the next version of ios.

But the difference is *not* in frequency of appearance. It is the
frequency that annoys.

no, the difference is that one should be mandatory and the other is
optional.


BS If the operator is satisfied with performance, he has no reason to
change. Even if he is just stubborn, it should be his option.

--
PeterN

On Sat, 28 May 2016 11:21:17 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 5/28/2016 10:21 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

With iOS Apple are just as annoying (perhaps worse). If you refuse
(cancel) an incremental, you get nagged again the next day or more than
once/day (I haven't tracked it). There is no hard "defer" that turns
off the nagging.

again, the difference is that's for bug fixes and security fixes,
versus upgrading to the next version of ios.

But the difference is *not* in frequency of appearance. It is the
frequency that annoys.

no, the difference is that one should be mandatory and the other is
optional.


BS If the operator is satisfied with performance, he has no reason to
change. Even if he is just stubborn, it should be his option.

Even if they don't put it into so many words, updates/patches for
security reasons should not be ignored. Apple/MS do not put these
things out just for the hell of it: they do it because someone has
found an exploitable weakness of some kind. I don't want any of that
kind of defect in my system.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens