True, but then again if you've been forced to do a whole upgrade from say 7->10 (which a lot of people were), then you'd come to expect upgrades between Windows 10 versions, at least I would anyway. Like I said, I'm surprised MS hasn't been doing this from day one of the Windows 10 release, as I thought they would do it before now - maybe that's just my cynical side though.
W10 runs quite well on in VMware on my Linux Mint 18.3 Host.
Windows Update is the only source of problems I've noticed.
If it's not updating, it works smoothly and like most of my VMs it seem to run like it was on hardware (apart from boot time).
Windows is too stupid to affect Linux, but it might be able to break a real HDD partition if one is attached (e.g. screw up the file table).
I haven't noticed any issues in the past.
However I wouldn't be surprised to discover that W10 has a self-destruct timer.
MS provided Settings to delay updates/upgrades and then sent out updates to bypass those MS approved tools.
At some point, "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity", ceases to be a valid excuse.
Last edited by lehnerus2000; 09 Mar 2018 at 11:03. Reason: Additional, Quote Added
Of course the automatic update and upgrade policy only applies to the home version. This whole usage demographic is based around the buy a computer like you buy a tv level of user.
It makes sense for the home user to have their system automatically update or upgrade. Most of this market are most likely to be still running the free month of antivirus they were gifted with several years ago when they bought the system.
The "forced" update system can mean that the system is not part of a botnet, trying to infect the pro and enthusiast users of are of course running the pro OS which has far better control of updates and upgrades.
There are some users that I would class as enthusiasts, who run the home version, almost exclusively those who bought a system and then became addicted like the rest of us, but their OS would only upgrade to Windows 10 Home from their original win 7 Home premium.
The pros who have always made a living updating, repairing and upgrading home user systems may actually end up as losers as the systems need less input to keep running. Of course most home users are capable of breaking anything so we may be lucky
Actually, if I had been forced to do an upgrade from 7 to 10 (my father-in-law was, and it bricked his computer), I wouldn't be "expecting upgrades"; I would be really angry at Microsoft for doing that to me.
Knowing that a lot of people were getting Windows 10 forced upon them, I didn't want that happening to me, so I installed GWX Control Panel on all of my home computers, as well as on my father-in-law's computer. I was able to fend off the forced upgrade; but he wasn't so lucky. He got "upgraded" in spite of telling Microsoft that he didn't want it (the presence of GWX Control Panel on his computer was a big "no thank you" to Microsoft, in my opinion; in other words, they knowingly pushed the upgrade to his computer, knowing that he didn't want it).
I agree with you, if you are talking about security updates. But not if you are talking about a whole new OS. Very few if any consumers envisioned that when they bought their Windows 7 computers, especially if they had no control over the process (i.e. they couldn't turn off the automatic, forced update).
The way Microsoft should have handled it was as follows: When it's time to upgrade a computer from 7 (or 8.1) to 10, a screen should have popped up, explaining in simple and clear terms what an upgrade from 7 to 10 would entail. Then give the user a few choices:
1. Upgrade me right now.
2. Upgrade me later.
3. Do not upgrade me.
If Microsoft would have done it that way, and then faithfully honored the choice that the user made, there wouldn't have been any complaints about the upgrade from 7 to 10. In fact, Microsoft probably would have gotten a lot of accolades for respecting the customer's wishes. Instead, they forced the whole issue, making it very difficult to avoid the upgrade.
Believe me, I'd be angry too. In no way am I defending what MS has done. I'm just saying that I've come to expect it now.
Actually a lot of MS decisions (especially with consumer products) have annoyed me lately. This is why I'm slowly ditching their products.
Office is the next thing to go from my systems. I've more or less replaced it with LibreOffice now anyway.
The way things are right now, I have no intention of using Windows after 8.1's EOL.
Well, you've got five more years of support for Windows 8.1. I have been recommending that people who want to keep using Windows 7 switch to Windows 8.1 and install Classic Shell, so that they can have the Windows 7 experience with an additional three years of support from Microsoft. This is literally the last gasp of the "old" Microsoft.
I've already ditched Microsoft. I've switched to Linux Mint on my home computer; and most of what I need is available in Linux. But for those few things I am unable to do in Linux, I have a Windows 8.1 VM. Windows is just a click away if I need it. Then when I am done, I turn it off, and it's back to the truly wonderful world of Linux Mint.
Completely agree. I have a few 8.1 systems and VMs. 8.1 gets a lot of stick, but I actually think it's a decent OS. I've always found it to run my software great. It does have its little annoyances (I still have no idea why they removed the option to restore Shadow Copies from the UI grrr!), but it's easy to tweak and get around those annoyances. Classic Shell is one of the first things I put on it.
Quote
