Windows 10, is it better than the rest?

[Neale]

I'm currently going through the Win7/Win10 debate with myself at the moment, and I could do with some clarification of one or two of the points raised here. I haven't sold my soul to Microsoft out of any kind of religious belief - I'm currently using LinuxCNC for my router - but the new machine will use a CSMIO external motion controller for various technical reasons which aren't relevant here. However, that means Mach3 or Mach4 (I'm going Mach3, but again that's not relevant here) and that in turns means Windows. Obviously, I'm going to be free of any 32-bit parallel port issues, so it's Win7/64 (which I already have on my garage PC dual-booting with the LCNC system) or upgrade to Win10. I have heard two issues mentioned which seem to be particularly relevant.

1. Win10 will go off by itself and download and install upgrades. Is this true? What if you disconnect the network connection to the outside world? Will Win10 sit and sulk and refuse to play, or will it carry on running and defer any updates until the network reappears? Is this a way around the "it might stop and restart all by itself" problem for a machine running a router? I've only just (earlier today) upgraded my first PC, a laptop, to Win10 so I have no direct experience of this.

2. Win10 might install updates which either break existing software, are themselves broken and hence can disable the machine, or are incompatible with older hardware. Or hardware that Microsoft decides that it doesn't like any more, however you wish to look at it. My garage PC is one I rebuilt recently with a fairly new AMD-based motherboard and a cheap but big-name graphics card, which are probably the most relevant bits to become obsolete. However, they are new enough that it seems unlikely that this will happen within a reasonable estimate of the hardware lifetime anyway. Before retirement, I spent the best part of 40 years in the IT industry, and I am aware that big customers were paranoid about the possibility of their applications breaking after an OS or application software update. However, as a home user, I can't remember this happening. OK, a new OS might break an application, but that's not quite the same thing. If I ran a business that was critically dependent on 24/7 system availability, I might take a different view but as a home/hobby user, how likely is this to happen? As a small business, should I worry that much, or just keep my production machine isolated? One of the main reasons why I like to run the latest version of any OS and keep it updated is that my speciality used to be around IT security, and one general recommendation for any system connected to anywhere else was to keep it updated with at least security updates; the feeling was that as soon as a fix was published, someone was going to reverse engineer it to create exploit code, so you needed the fix to try to stay on top of things.

I look forward to comments for and against, but please, with reasoned arguments to support the position

[Ger21]

1) Not sure about regular Windows 10, but you have two options in Windows 10 Pro.
a) You can specify your network connection as "metered", and Windows won't download updates while connected to a metered connection.
b) You can "defer" updates in Windows 10 Pro. http://www.computerworld.com/article...ws-10-pro.html

2) Isn't this true of any version of Windows?
I'm running Windows 7 Pro at work, and I can't update unless I want to spend $2500 for a new plotter that works with Windows 10.
Does anyone seriously think that microsoft will come out with an update that makes hardware obsolete? Keep in mind that the vast majority of Windows users run pretty low spec machines.
I have a few 10 year old software programs that work fine in Windows 10. If you want to run programs older than that, than you may want to hang on to your copy of XP.

[magicniner]

Microsoft have announced that future Intel processors will not support anything older than Windows 10.
They also pushed W10 out as a "recommended" update so that thousands of people who don't want it.
I wouldn't put anything past a set of utter shysters like that, they're as bad or worse liars and thieves than politicians.

[Boyan Silyavski]

Its a fact that w8 is faster than w7, and win10 is faster than w8. Yeas, i play games when i am tired of forums, machines, projects, etc..and know it for a fact from my experience with graphic heavy games.

But there was nothing wrong with win7, i would say it was perfect. It's the windows that convinced me to stay with windows. Still have it on 2 pcs in the workshop. You know- mach3 serial port driver - win 32bit ....

The w7, 8 and 10 are very stable and if one doesn't mess with pirated software and has ADBLOCk Plus on his browser, there is nothing to do months and years.

[Ger21]

Microsoft have announced that future Intel processors will not support anything older than Windows 10.

First, I'm not sure why one company would give press releases on another companies products.
Second, why would they. Companies don't make new products to be compatible with old technology, unless that's there specific market.

Go play with your Linux box and stop whining about Windows, since you obviously have an agenda.

The w7, 8 and 10 are very stable

There's really very little difference between them. Except that Microsoft screwed up the interface in 8, but you could fix it in 5 minutes, if you wanted to. I've been running 8.1 for 18 months, and have zero problems with it. I was hesitant to update to 10, until I got a new laptop with 10. It's almost the same as 8, but yes, it's faster.

[magicniner]

First, I'm not sure why one company would give press releases on another companies products.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/micros...ews-52211.html

http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/16/10...essors-skylake

If you read you will find that what Microsoft have taken the decision to do is force early obsolescence on their older operating systems within their stated support life by ensuring the processors in new PCs will not run them.
It's not referred to in the industry as a Wintel platform for nothing, they might not be married but they are definitely in bed ;-)

Comparing a new version of Windows on a new laptop to an old version of Windows one on an old laptop is like comparing a new fuel in a new car to an old fuel in an old one, meaningless, of course something in newer faster hardware will be faster!

- Nick

Mach3 on W7 BTW, no cigar! ;-)

[Ger21]

If you read you will find that what Microsoft have taken the decision to do is force early obsolescence on their older operating systems within their stated support life by ensuring the processors in new PCs will not run them.

What percentage of PC buyers intend on running an older OS on their new PC? I'd think that it's much less than 1%.

Comparing a new version of Windows on a new laptop to an old version of Windows one on an old laptop is like comparing a new fuel in a new car to an old fuel in an old one, meaningless, of course something in newer faster hardware will be faster!

Except that I'm comparing an $800 laptop running 10, to a $3000 desktop running 8.1.

Mach3 on W7 BTW, no cigar! ;-)

I would say that most new Mach3 users in the last 3-5 years are running 7, and a lot are now running Mach3 on 10.

[magicniner]

Microsoft state

A device may not be able to receive updates if the device hardware is incompatible, lacking current drivers, or otherwise outside the Original Equipment Manufacturer’s (“OEM”) support period.

;-)