Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Windows 10 a failure by Microsoft's own metric (theregister.co.uk)
71 points by aceperry on July 18, 2016 | hide | past | favorite | 105 comments



I read another article that said that the failure to reach this metric was due to the lack of sales of Win10 on phones.

When I tried a pre-Win10 Lumia in a store I actually found it very impressive, but I heard that the Win10 mobile launch had a rocky start. It seems strange to me that Microsoft was pushing for universal apps, and now that it's close enough to finally happening they've given up on mobile.

Somewhat offtopic, but I wonder if performing the Win10 upgrade itself is scary for users. For instance, on a relatively new i5 laptop the upgrade left the screen entirely black for long periods of time. It also says things like "your files are exactly where you left them" with a color changing background; for me I know that Windows must still be installing, but for an average user (like my dad) he had no clue what was going on at that point and thought that the install had failed since it was stuck on that screen for multiple minutes.

Edit: I swear that I read the article, since the article itself mentions mobile. I just haven't had any caffeine yet...


"Your files are exactly where you left them"

I found something very HALish about that screen. A vague somewhat reassuring statement with an ominous tone. I mean, great, they're right where I left them but will you grant me access them?


The sad thing about that screen is when you login only discover windows has uninstalled some of your software.


I've experienced more loss of data and programs when upgrading minor versions of Android, iOS and OS X than I ever have upgrading to Windows 10, which is running on no less than seven computers in my house.

My wife upgraded her laptop and the TV/Kodi computer that I built for her on her own. She's an elementary school teacher and by no means is she a computer professional. It wasn't scary at all. She didn't lose anything and she has a LOT of apps on her laptop.

If she had lost something, it wouldn't have been lost for long because A) we had backups and B) when Windows removes a program during an upgrade, it doesn't remove all of the app data so at worst you have to run an installer...big deal.


"...but for an hour, you can't get at them. haha.gif"

Priceless. (Especially when you actually need to use the computer and the files. Business hours? Nope, YOU WANT THE X)


> "your files are exactly where you left them"

That was my favorite message during install. Thanks Windows, I had never once worried about that previously but I have to say you specifically mentioning that it wouldn't be a problem definitely made me wonder.


> When I tried a pre-Win10 Lumia in a store I actually found it very impressive, but I heard that the Win10 mobile launch had a rocky start.

It's been solid since, but the first month or so of Windows 10 on a Lumia 950 was rough going. Store was unreliable, battery drained in ~6 hours (same hardware/usage will now last me 24+ hours), and auto-updater got permanently stuck at 0%. Only way to move to a working build was to factory reset the phone.


Roughly the same experience here. I still get more application crashes (wherein the application simply closes and needs to be restarted) than I did with WP 8 and 8.1. However, most apps that exhibit this behavior are holdovers that weren't refreshed for Windows 10 Mobile, such as the Podcasts app. And while app crashes are annoying, the OS is fine and the application restarts quickly enough.

That said, I remain a user who isn't interested in the latest trendy apps. I don't feel an urge to play Pokemon Go (although I find the phenomenon hilariously awesome). For the basics—web browsing, e-mail, text messaging, maps, calendaring—Windows 10 Mobile is great.

Continuum—the feature that converts the phone into a "regular" computer—is quite nice, although I don't use it much since I have more than enough computers already.

I am hopeful that a Surface Phone will eventually arrive and make Continuum more compelling. I could get into the idea of carrying a lightweight keyboard/display thing instead of a laptop. The HP Elite x3 already works this way.

Overall, I remain a bigger fan of Windows Mobile than I was of Android or iOS before that. When I use a modern Android device, Android feels sterile and clunky; meanwhile modern iOS feels too little evolved since iOS 1.


> battery drained in ~6 hours

So, parity with Android then? (I kid, I kid....kinda.)


My Galaxy Note 2 still has a battery life of about a week, still running on the original battery. I just need to remember to enable Wifi only on when needed, or it'll drain the battery in two days.


Actually in my experience, leaving Wifi on saves the battery, compared to telco network. Wifi seems to be more power-efficient than 3G or LTE.

Of course, if you want a week on the battery, you must have data off, both wifi and mobile.


>given up on mobile

I don't know about that, they sure have been pushing a lot of new builds lately :

https://www.reddit.com/domain/blogs.windows.com/search?q=bui...

though I guess they did sell part of Nokia or something.. Sad because those phones are super durable for someone like me who breaks devices constantly


They gave up by not mentioning it even once at the last BUILD. That's when even as a dev, I realized the platform had been virtually abandoned.


Well, I wasn't there so idk about that, but it looks like 3/7 of the "most important announcements of build 2016" are directly related to windows 10 mobile ^[1]

1. "Microsoft is launching its latest version of Windows 10"

(you realize this is for pc and mobile?)

3. "Facebook committed to bringing native apps to Microsoft's Universal Windows Platform"

7. "Windows 10 Mobile users will be able to "beam" Continuum sessions to compatible monitors."

The point I take from this is that they seem to be considering windows 10 as one platform (desktop and mobile), which makes sense to me since the several apps I've written for UWP worked on mobile/desktop with the same code. Also I think the react-native-windows news isn't listed there, but I personally consider it fairly huge news for win 10 mobile (and desktop) as someone who uses react-native for android / ios

[1] http://www.windowscentral.com/most-important-announcements-b...


Unfortunately, Lumia's are not durable. The screen of my Lumia 620 broke after just a few months of use.

Nokia's legendary durability died with the feature phone.


Well, I haven't used the 620, but my anecdotal experience has been the opposite.

List of recent devices I own that are unbroken:

lumia 521, 950, and Kyocera Rise.

broken:

nexus 7 (screen after 2 months), asus fonepad note 6 (screen after ~1 year), galaxy s4 (won't connect to tower, probably my fault for installing roms incorrectly)

In particular the 950 has been dropped in the river in breckenridge, and the 521 in a natural hotspring / taken on many rainy hikes / dropped more times than I can count.


My 820 took one hell of a beating over the time between purchase and replacement. Its replacement seems pretty hardy too. Though I get the impression the build quality and sturdiness were far more variable between models than found around the 3110/3210/3310 era.


Yes, it will fail TO hit it's own metric (1 billion devices by mid 2018) and thus is a "failure" on that metric. However, saying (as this headline does) that Windows is a failure "by Microsoft's own metric" implies it has failed in the marketplace. Nope--it's reasonably popular (no doubt helped by the free upgrade).

Windows 7 is still king by a long shot, but Apple, for example, would love if MacOS/OSX's market share (all versions!) totalled as many computers as just Windows 10--it would be an approximately 50% increase in Apple's laptop/desktop market share. (Source is https://netmarketshare.com/. No direct link available. Click on "Operating Systems" / "Desktop Share by Version" for details.)


In real dollars, the cost of Macs are extremely low. $1 in 2000 is about $1.40 now. So the cost of a $1000 13" Mac Air which is a very respectable laptop is about $700 in 2000 dollars.

Even IBM has gone to using Macs today. http://www.computerworld.com/article/2998315/apple-mac/every...

So the machines are very cheap, even to IBM they are easier to use and require less tech support. For those that want to do some software development with open source, very useful.

While Office 2016 Mac is not as good as Office 2016 Windows, it works fairly well.

And if you really need the Windows 10 OS, you can invest in a Parallels virtual machine.

Besides, for many of us, Apple has stores where we can take the computer into a Genius Bar to get problems fixed.

In NYC, we even have a 24 hour/367 store (Fifth Avenue). There will be a seventh store in Manhattan soon. There is one in Queens, Statin Island, and one in Brooklyn soon.

Other cities have access as well of course.

So, except in certain important cases like gaming and certain specific applications, or cases where the stylus and touch is really important and the Microsoft Surface would be a best choice, a Mac is a better investment for most.


As much as I like my Macs, I don't think you can claim a Mac is cheap now. I was in the market for a new MacBook Pro, but the machine I was looking at was going to cost me over $4000 (Australian, but at today's exchange rates that's still about $3200 USD). Apple really price gouge on SSD & RAM upgrades - there is no way a 1TB SSD costs $800.

I ended up buying a fully-spec'd 2012 MBP instead (more affordable, better keyboard & trackpad than the 2015s) - and shortly after, a friend bought an identically spec'd HP for half the price of my new Mac. I'd love to say I'd bought a more reliable machine, but this MBP has already been back to the Apple Store twice for repairs in just 6 months. Frankly, it's become embarrassing to buy Apple.

So even though I'm that guy who queued up for a day-one iPhone 4, wore Panic Spinner t-shirts into the Apple Store & knew the staff, persuaded clients & work to support Macs... I now recommend PCs and Windows 10 to friends instead. I can't justify the 100% markup anymore. And since Apple stopped updating macOS for my older Macs (a MacBook 1,1 and 3,1) I even run Windows 10 on my old Macs - now I know I'll get security updates until 2020 on those machines, even though Apple insists they're obsolete. (Win10 runs pretty well on them.)


Sorry, you're getting ripped off "Down Under." I've been to Sydney/Melbourne twice and I love it. Bondi Beach Yeah!

But you can get a brand new 15" Macbook Pro Retina for about $1900 total from an authorized dealer. Check out website Appleinsider.com

Besides being able to go to stores for Genius Bar help, you're when you call for customer service or tech support you get Americans who are very helpful and speak English well not people from Philippines, India, whatever. Nothing against these people of course, just when it comes to tech support.

There was a recent NYTimes article about how companies make tech support awful. Apple is not one of them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/04/technology/why-tech-suppor...

My times calling Microsoft Tech support (having to do with Office 2016 Mac and other MS products running in Windows 10 VM) were miserable. Switched to the wrong people, people who can't speak english well, who don't seem to understand what I was talking about. Having to call over and over and over again.

Part of the added cost of Macs is precisely to ensure that you get quality support and is well worth paying for unless you absolutely cannot afford it.


tl;dr my friend's mac broke all macs suck


He doesn't even mention a friend having a broken mac, I think you miss-parsed; or maybe I did. "this" mac broke, not "his"?? Certainly you summary is wrong as a synopsis of his comment.


That's correct - by "this" Mac I meant the one I'm typing on now.

It works at the moment, but it has twice lost the startup drive & refused to start without new replacement components from Apple - not something I expect from brand new hardware bought direct from Apple.


Very sorry to hear that you're having problems. Macs have had problems with GPUs in the past in Macbook Pros (2011 version?) where Apple has ended up replacing the entire insides (this happened recently on a friends 17" 2011).

But (knock on aluminum), I've had 4 macs since 2011 all without hardware problems.


Did you even read the comment?


> In real dollars, the cost of Macs are extremely low. $1 in 2000 is about $1.40 now. So the cost of a $1000 13" Mac Air which is a very respectable laptop is about $700 in 2000 dollars.

This comparison makes no sense to me. It's 2016, not 2000, so the fact that a Mac Air is $700 in 2000 dollars is a completely random and arbitrary number.


You couldn't buy any laptop of any quality for $700 in 2000. Macs have the reputation of being overpriced, but they are much more affordable than computers at the turn of the century. Of course, PCs are still available for less, but the point is that many people previously unable to afford a Mac can.


Macs have a reputation for being overpriced because their hardware is overpriced compared to similarly speced PCs. Just because they are now more affordable doesn't mean that they're not overpriced.

Macs have a value proposition based on the user experience, quality of software, and quality of hardware. This value proposition is relative and certain market segments have never seen it. Graphic designers appreciate the consistency and accuracy of Apple products in their workflows so the value proposition was high. Gamers however saw anemic hardware and limited support so the value proposition was extremely low. With the arrival of OSX and the growth of the internet and *nix based development, and then with iOS, the value proposition for software developers grew significantly.


Reminds me of buying the Toshiba Satellite 1805-s201 in August 2001. It was the first sub $1000 laptop I saw: $995 with $100 manufacturer rebate. Celeron 800 mhz, 128mb, and 20GB of spinning rust. It was the cheapest laptop and ran the current version AutoCAD without a problem [actually, ADT2 which had a much higher load than typical AutoCAD].

To me, the way to weigh value is relative to workload. Few users are hardware bound and today the most likely bottleneck for ordinary people is going to be GPU, not that I'm saying ordinary users are going to run up against it.


Around that time, I would buy "refurbished" Thinkpads around Canal Street in NYC (where many cheap things are sold) from an authorized dealer for much lower than the regular price.

The "refurbished" were generally returns that were reinspected, etc. The company bought a lot of them.

But to have only spent $700 for a 13" Macbook Air type of machine then! :-)


That's a pointless metric to use for affordability, because that $300 difference is purely inflation. It has absolutely nothing to do with Apple making their products cheaper.


If the price in real dollars is less, then then the product is cheaper.


> Even IBM has gone to using Macs today. http://www.computerworld.com/article/2998315/apple-mac/every....

> So the machines are very cheap, even to IBM they are easier to use and require less tech support. For those that want to do some software development with open source, very useful.

This is just untrue at many levels, there is still plenty of early adopter issues going around and there are plenty of people getting new laptops with Windows/Linux OS. It certainly hasn't stopped IBM's contributions to open source before or after.

This is a weird argument to make.


For some reason that link wasn't working: Try this:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/10/15/only-5-of-mac-user...


roughly 40% of American workers earn under 20k.

what percent of laptops sold do you think are under $500? I bet most.

And now chromebooks wax popular.

Macs aren't for the masses, cost wise.


Did you know that a number of "the masses" that earn little money smoke a pack or two of cigarettes per day? How much do you think this costs on a yearly basis?

In NYC they are $12-$14 per pack, but even in the rest of the country at its lowest cost it has to be several dollars per pack * 365.


If only Apple would update them! Grrr! waitingforshellingoutcash


Ironically, Windows 10 is probably the Microsoft OS that is going to push me full time to using Linux. Right now I use Linux for work, but home network, and laptops (except 1 Mac) all run on Windows 7/8. However the underhanded tactics that Microsoft have resorted to in order to try force me to upgrade and the fact that I lose significant (actually all) control on patching, worries about MS spyware etc means that Windows 7/8 is the last Microsoft OS for me.


Windows 10 may be the Windows version that gets me to switch back to Windows from Linux. The interface is gorgeous. I can run a Linux environment. It's got multiple desktops.

Cannonical loves my data as much as Microsoft. Unlike Microsoft, they love sending to Amazon for sales purposes and the search engine du jure for "personalization" and to websites to download their Ubuntu "app" things.

TANSTAAFL.


Linux is not limited to Canonical/Ubuntu, and even if you do use Ubuntu, that is opt-in (now) and only ever applied on the Unity desktop.

With Linux, there is a free lunch.


16.04 changed the behavior to be opt-in. And frankly Windows 10 does much more than Ubuntu ever did, the sleek graphical shell doesn't outweigh everything else.


This false rhetoric is really getting old. The double standards, holding MS to a higher standard than everyone else, and the ignoring of reality really make it hard to sympathize with the one valid argument you actually have.


Are you sure you replied to the right comment? I can neither see false rhetoric nor any form of double standard in the parent. Otherwise, please do explain what you mean with that.


Why is my responsibility to explain how the OP is lying rather than for him to justify his lies? I would ask you to explain to me how the OP's statements are true. The only truth in the OP's original statement was regarding the Windows 10 upgrade program. Everything else is FUD.


Visiting relatives after Windows 10 forced itself upon them. Finding Cortana took liberties as it was found turned on. Flicked Cortana off, flicked half a dozen options off including the keylogger aka the helpful keystroke correction featured that nobody in their right mind would want enabled. Microsoft has irreparably damaged their image, I didn't mind their monopolist shenanigans of 90's or Linux trolling of 00's, in 10's they took a stab at me and here is where we part.


> the keylogger aka the helpful keystroke correction

Why do you naturally assume malicious intent? Is the Android Keyboard (which does the same thing) a keylogger? What about every search engine's suggested searches?

Did you know that OSX's Spotlight feature sends your queries to Bing by default? If Apple is so protective of your personal information, why on god's green earth would they choose big bad Microsoft as their default search provider for OS level search?

There's this dichotomy that exists between Microsoft and everyone else. Microsoft can do no good, and everyone else is given benefit of doubt. Google's search assistant cross references a search you made on your desktop Firefox browser with a contact in your Android phonebook and suggests a Google Now car based on it and your response is "Thanks Google!". Microsoft grants it's search assistant access to it's contacts app on your device so that if you type your friend's name in the Windows 10 search bar it can display his contact info and you lose your mind. How is that fair?


FUD you say?

Please explain how one can permanently or even significantly delay a security update in Windows 10 Home and Professional? While one generally wants security updates, there are time when one does not. There could be something in the new patch that clashes with some hardware combinations and a new patch could render my machine unusable.

As far as privacy and data protection, here are some quotes from a recent article in pcadvisor.com:

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/feature/windows/should-i-upgrade-...

> "After writing this article in June 2015 before Windows 10 was released, there was quite the backlash from people who felt that their privacy was being invaded by Windows 10, and rightfully so. Not only is Microsoft now urging people to upgrade to Windows 10, but it's almost forcing them.

The reason appears to be data harvesting. Windows 10 collects a variety of data, some for improving the effectiveness of features such as Cortana. There are ways (as you can see below), even before installing Windows 10 to disable most of these features and prevent your information from being captured in the first place."

> "By switching them off, you'll have more privacy, but how much more data Microsoft is collecting is anyone's guess. We certainly can't say that you can prevent 100 percent of your data from being sent to Microsoft, but it's safe to say that Windows 10 does have the most data harvesting of any version of Windows yet. By switching them off, you'll have more privacy, but how much more data Microsoft is collecting is anyone's guess. We certainly can't say that you can prevent 100 percent of your data from being sent to Microsoft, but it's safe to say that Windows 10 does have the most data harvesting of any version of Windows yet."


> Please explain how one can permanently or even significantly delay a security update in Windows 10 Home and Professional?

The UI for granular control of updates in Windows 10 has been removed putting more in line with macOS, iOS, Android, etc. The features are still there and configurable in the registry though it's primarily intended for enterprise customers to leverage.

I think the scenario you describe where an individual actively monitors and selectively chooses which updates to install is pretty insignificant. One of the problems with Windows has been that users or software (e.g. AV, AntiMalware, etc) will disable the Windows Update Service or set it to manual and then neglect to update the system. This leaves the user vulnerable. The changes Microsoft has made are to benefit the majority and not to cater to the minority.

In Windows 10 the UI doesn't allow you to disable automatic updates, it only allows you to disable automatic reboots. If you are hell bent on disabling them however you can do it via registry changes or various tools that have been released. That being said it's generally a bad idea to do this.

> As far as privacy and data protection, here are some quotes from a recent article in pcadvisor.com:

None of your quotes are proof of spying, they're reactions to the EULA or default settings. Hell one of your quotes even says "felt". And they use such menacing terms as "data harvesting" to describe pretty routine behavior.


I remember when 7 (and even Vista for a certain number of users who had a powerful machine and the right hardware) came out, there was a lot of them saying how happy they were to upgrade from XP (and definitely Vista for obvious reasons). Finding someone who loved 7 compared to Vista was easy, they were everywhere.

Contrast that with 10, I think I've found maybe 2 people in my group of online and offline friends who "like" it, not love, just like, and the rest are varying degrees of indifference and of course there's a few people who outright hate it.

One of my sysadmin friends is currently looking into if he can rebuild his company laptop with 7 because he just can't stand 10.

I only bring this up because it seems like while people didn't like 8 hardly at all, nobody really seems to love 10 either. They either shrug their shoulders because they don't care, or they tolerate it because it's better than nothing.


I think a big part of the problem is Windows 7 is so good. I have very little incentive to switch at all. I'll probably do it sometime in the next week because free upgrades end July 29th but only because I have Windows 10 on a laptop and I've been happy with it. If I hadn't had that experience I wouldn't risk it.


Yes, Windows 7 is very good indeed, but after upgrading to Win 10 none of my workflows changed, and my 7 year old laptop got noticeably snappier.


That's my experience as well. Windows 10 is significantly less crufty than 7 or 8. The interface is gorgeous to boot. Not sure I'll switch from Ubuntu for day to day, but it's possible.


Make a 32GB-ish partition and activate Windows 10 there. You might need to find something that can defrag at boot to relocate system files to make a big enough space... AOMEI offers their partition resizing tools free even for commercial use: http://www.aomeitech.com/freeware.html


This says more about the prediction process than it does about Windows 10. Overly optimistic sales projections are a dime a dozen.


Sales? It was free. They can't give it away.


Windows is mostly sold as OEM on new computers. For existing/old computers they have minimal sales... so they are giving it for free here...

Gut since they will start with subscriptions very soon I wonder what is their long term plan with these Win10 installations on existing computers...


It's only free if you have a valid Windows 7 or 8 license that you have already paid for so really, it's not free at all.


Curious what sort of Windows license hasn't already been paid for.


Well, I bout my workstation without it so it's not free for me. This is really a big scam by Microsoft, for previous PC's I had to pay this Windows fee even when it was of no use for me.


What sales? most of current installs come from underhanded malware infection.


Why would this comment be voted down? Software that tries to mislead and nag the user into taking an action that damages their computer is malware. The only reason Microsoft doesn't forcibly apply the update to all Windows computers without permission is because that would undeniably be malware. But the net effect is the same - Windows 10 is installed without the owner's knowledge or consent. Windows 10 IS malware.


Windows 10 doesn't (edit: intentionally) damage a computer. Calling it malware is ridiculous.


My coworker's home machine upgraded itself to Windows 10 without his consent, and afterwards he couldn't reliably connect to the internet, or do a few other things that he previously could. He eventually restored the machine back to Windows 7 to get it working again. Sounds like "damage" to me.


neither does a key logger.

I tend to call software that tries to trick users into doing things they explicitly do not want to do malware, but that's just me.


Consider this: "downtime on all workstations at once, during business hours, regardless of consent, and afterwards, peripherals no longer interface (WHICH IS WHY WE WANTED TO TEMPORARILY KEEP W7 WHILE WORKING ON A FIX)" - but no physical damage to computers, so everything is great and wonderful, right? Right? Nope, that's malware by any other name. Including the overreaction by mgmt: "IT shall repave to Win7 from backups, lockdown and disable WU - we literally cannot afford to catch Windows X again." Everyone loses, just because some schmuck at Redmond had the great idea of an unconsented "up"grade.

Edit: Intentionally forces the system to a state where functionality is unknown (as opposed to breaking the system on purpose). Big honking difference, yeah right. "I just pushed him into the pool, you mean I should have checked if he can swim? Wait, what do you mean 'if he even wanted to?' That's ridiculous, of course he did!" The problem (malware-ness, if you wish) isn't with the upgrade (we would have upgraded in a matter of 6-8 weeks), it's the disregard for consent ("you didn't say 'no' often enough, that's a loud and clear 'yes' to me").


I had to install software (GWX) and keep it updated in order to prevent Microsoft from trying to trick me into installing Windows 10 and nagging me every 10 minutes to "upgrade".

Perhaps not malware, but not a huge leap away from it.


Intent to damage is not an absolute requirement to be malware. The infamous Sony rootkit had no intent to damage. However, it overstepped the bounds of its authority and was capable of damage through gross negligence (as overstepping software often is). Software that forcibly dikes out someone's OS without their permission is malware.


It degrades experience for non-experienced users i.e. people who aren't aware they would strongly prefer some options be turned off if asked in clear enough manner who reasonably didn't expect these changes as the change is a gross departure from established practices. I was never foss partisan before Windows 10 and it's the first time for me to call Microsoft's behavior unethical.


Damage plays no part in it, unless it is specifically coded to that end:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malware


The word "most" could probably use some supporting evidence. Otherwise it doesn't contribute much to the conversation.


most "upgrade" installs should be more accurate.


Personally I find it very odd. I've been a Linux-only user for the past 13 years, and Windows 10 was the first time I actually considered trying Windows as my main OS. I guess our metrics are different.


I went to other way. Did mac for about 7 years and became increasingly frustrated with the bloat and stagnant os. Jumped to Win 10 for about 6 weeks before Ubuntu. Didn't mind win 10, just wasn't where i was at.


Similarly, but for me it was Vista. I'm still on Win7 until MS comes up with "better 7", nothing so far...


Anecdotal of course, but for me Windows 10 is a better Windows 7. Virtual desktops, some small upgrades to the shell (stacked, pauseable copy dialogs, ...) make it worth it, and I haven't found anything from Windows 7 that I can't use anymore.


I plan on test driving 10 this weekend. From what I've heard (installation tactics aside), it seems like Win10 is a better Win7. What about it doesn't make it a better Win7?

Edit: Clarification.


My favorite part is the forced upgrades. Didn't want to reboot your computer? WELL TOO BAD MICROSOFT KNOWS BEST.


They're hardly forced. I disabled automatic updates via a Group Policy setting. Here are the instructions for the Pro version of Windows:

1. Run `gpedit.msc`.

2. Navigate to Computer Configuration\Administrative Templates\Windows Components\Windows Update.

3. Locate the “Configure Automatic Updates” setting in the right pane and double-click it. Set it to “Enabled,” and then select your preferred setting. For example, you can choose “Auto download and notify for install” or “Notify for download and notify for install.” Save the change.

If you're running Windows 10 Home you can simply set your ethernet/wifi connection as a metered connection which results in the same exact policy being applied - you get to choose when to install updates...


I can't remember when was the last time I rebooted my Win 10 PC because of an update. With Windows 7, it was like twice a month.


Windows 10 is awesome. Everyone I know was excited to upgrade. I think it's much better than Win 7. I think you'll like it.


From a usability standpoint, Windows 10 is nice.

Do check compatibility before upgrading. My middle-aged Dell Precision laptop with Windows 7 sticker does not officially support Windows 10 according to Dell.

It runs Windows 10 OK but I do get the occasional blue-screen panic from the wireless network interface driver.


Like any major OS upgrade, you are better off with a clean install rather than an upgrade. Let the installer run and activate, and then use a boot disk to nuke the system and install a fresh copy.

I had a few minor twitches like that too, and they've all gone away after doing a clean install.


8.1 is better than 7. 10 is better than 8.1 Both simply require ClassicShell to be installed; the actual underlying OS kernel is actually faster and more stable.


Same - recently switched from Linux to a Windows 10 laptop. Between the virtual desktops and resizable command prompt with clipboard support (along with git tools for Windows that allow ls grep etc in command prompt and along with AHK to implement decent workspace switching) it's almost caught up :)


Anniversary Update in a few weeks will let you run Ubuntu's Bash, too, if you want to.


Whether you considered it or not has nothing to do with whether it's a failure, because Microsoft set a goal post of 1 billion installs by 2018. :P


You're not a non power user who upgraded to Win 10 though.


Surprising given that I've really been enjoying Windows 10. Built a recently and I put it on it just figuring it was stable enough. I'm really liking it and find it so pleasant and seamless I haven't even disabled UAC!


Microsft metrics were always a bit dubious, they used to claim sales for pirated Windows copies as well as any copies that were given away or claimed on MSDN. Anyway, monopoly is not a healthy state for any market and honestly in the near future the exclusivity of Apps will fade and the choice of OS should be based on personal preference. Or how much better they are, not because software is only built for platform X.


I've been using the Lumia 650 for a couple months now and it's a solid device. If only it was their first iteration! Also, for those used to using a Macbook/Ipad/Iphone, consider the Surface lineup is really tablet-and-laptop in one. I have been using a Surface Pro 3 for about 2 years now and really swear by the device. There's nothing like it on the market. The anniversary Win10 update is coming soon too.

Tough to say what their goals are in the mobile space though.. It's a saturated market and people are already plugged into ecosystems so it's tough to pull them out. The plus with Windows 10 Universal though is that for developers, why not make it universal and get added mobile/desktop app for free?

Hard to say where they're going.. The entire market has sort of reached a strange place with shifts to the cloud and attempts at AI (I disable cortana by the way because she eats battery for breakfast).


I think this says more about Microsoft's changed mobile strategy than any deficiencies in the OS. Earlier they were planning to keep pushing mobile and making new devices. Now they've given up. 350 million PCs in just less than a year is no joke.


Ever since I installed it on my work laptop, it's been crashing the file manager every few days, requiring a reboot. Sometimes more often.

I've been refraining from installing it on a bunch of other PCs since then.


If you have Clover installed, that may be the issue.

As soon as I uninstalled it, no more problem.

One of my friends also had Clover installed, but he had no problems.


>> If you have Clover installed, that may be the issue.

I don't, so that's not it...


Microsoft's plan for Windows 10 deployment looks very optimistic. Seems that's why they pushing users to upgrade to Windows 10 so hard.


Sssh! Don't tell them now, else they'll just force-install their thing on Patch Tuesday after June 29 (and claim that the "free upgrade" meant "you are free to decide _when_").


I'm not sure why this is getting downvoted so badly. The top comments to the linked article are about how atrocious MS has been in force-upgrading / no upgrade control / no-option telemetry. I think this is a primary reason MS won't meet their goal. By all other measures and reviews it is a top notch OS. The fact that they are using shady tactics with this OS to start vendor lockin and to jumpstart their only-by-subscription options is why people are jumping ship to the viable alternatives.


It's likely getting downvoted so badly because of the use of "crapware" to describe the product - which is a negative contribution to the discussion here.


There. Better now? Not triggering anyone?

(See this for context - IMNSHO a program which does this fully deserves its accolades, no matter if it's pushed by the OS vendor or not: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11846198 )


Any one think they are cutting off the free upgrade at the deadline?


Why not? Arguments in favor of dropping the free program as promised:

- It would be the same as before.

- Continuing a failed strategy won't suddenly be any more successful. Why should those who didn't upgrade until now suddenly do it? The most likely reason will be because they have to - in which case letting them pay is the better business strategy.

- It sets a bad precedent for the future (from their POV), nobody would take similar announcements seriously any more.

That said, my reason for not upgrading my PC thus far is that on my officially Windows 10 supported Dell XPS 13 9333 (from 2014) ultrabook (which I bought with Windows 8.1) I have quite severe sound driver crash issues (the actual Realtek driver is even worse, but with only the Microsoft High Definition Audio Device driver I have them too, and I'm not alone), and I have to restart explorer.exe (the window manager) occasionally because something hangs. No chance to get anything done from Dell, even though they officially support the upgrade. On my XPS 8500 PC - two years older - it isn't even officially supported, and it also has a Realtek audio chip. So I'm really reluctant to start the upgrade. I'll do it just before end of the month, but I'll be sure to have everything backed up even if they say I will be able to revert the installation.


A metrix where windows does not look like a failure has to be created first. Not even them are able to do so.


What about desktop market share?


If constant decline does not say failure for you i don't know ether.

Given its slow, but consistent non the less.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: