This confirms Microsoft's intentions to support some customers who are unable to switch to more modern OS versions like Windows 10, presumably customers who can afford to pay for extended security on their machines.

there is all kinds of wrong in this, its like paying for stuff in a pay2win game, a game hardly noone wants to even log in anymore. I remember all the crap when m$ got when it wanted to tag EOL onto WinXP, that went over like a charm.

DeathtoGnomesthere is all kinds of wrong in this, its like paying for stuff in a pay2win game, a game hardly noone wants to even log in anymore. I remember all the crap when m$ got when it wanted to tag EOL onto WinXP, that went over like a charm.

Well, XP was a whole different story. Eg. a lot of ATMs all over the world still did run on XP years after the EOL date, so MS had no choice but to extend the security updates.

Not sure why this is news, we've pretty much known about it forever. That's the whole point of the ESU program, it's existed since like Windows 98 went EOL or maybe even longer.

DeathtoGnomesthere is all kinds of wrong in this, its like paying for stuff in a pay2win game, a game hardly noone wants to even log in anymore. I remember all the crap when m$ got when it wanted to tag EOL onto WinXP, that went over like a charm.

They do this for every OS, so I'm not sure why this is a surprise. It is for huge corporations/medical fields/governments where it would cost significantly more to switch OSes than it would to just pay Microsoft to develop security patches.

DammeronWell, XP was a whole different story. Eg. a lot of ATMs all over the world still did run on XP years after the EOL date, so MS had no choice but to extend the security updates.

Windows 7 is not basically in the same situation. All the ATMs that were running XP are now running Windows 7.

But, of course Microsoft has a choice. The moment it becomes not worth it to develop security patches Microsoft will stop. But right now, there are plenty of large organizations that are will to pay Microsoft the cost+some profit for Microsoft programmers to keep developing patches.

DeathtoGnomesthere is all kinds of wrong in this, its like paying for stuff in a pay2win game, a game hardly noone wants to even log in anymore. I remember all the crap when m$ got when it wanted to tag EOL onto WinXP, that went over like a charm.

I refuse 10, so either it is w7 or linux

eidairaman1I refuse 10, so either it is w7 or linux

I can't imagine going back to 7 as my daily driver, it's so terrible compared to 10. It feels like a dinosaur.

newtekie1I can't imagine going back to 7 as my daily driver, it's so terrible compared to 10. It feels like a dinosaur.

That's an interesting perspective. Some of us feel like Windows 10 is an unintuitive, schizophrenic mess which needlessly invades user rights and privacy.

lexluthermiesterThat's an interesting perspective. Some of us feel like Windows 10 is unintuitive, schizophrenic mess which needlessly invades user rights and privacy.

People said Windows 7 was unintuitive when it came out too. You use it for a few days and you get used to it, and then you start to get used to all the extra useful features and you really miss them when you have to go back to Windows 7.

The user rights/privacy issue, well, they added all the telemetry crap into Windows 7 with "critical updates" anyway but no one really made a big fuss about it, so no one really talks about it.

The forced updates sounds like an annoying invasion of user rights, but it's a necessary evil for the world we live in. I don't think any of the main OSes(Linux, OSX, Windows) handles updates perfectly.

lexluthermiesterThat's an interesting perspective. Some of us feel like Windows 10 is unintuitive, schizophrenic mess which needlessly invades user rights and privacy.

I probably wouldn't mind windows 10 if I didn't have 2 system breaking issues with their forced updates on my plex server. I spent hours and extra money to recover data because of them. I've now completely disabled windows 10 from being able to update on my server.

newtekie1People said Windows 7 was unintuitive when it came out too.

I never heard that from anyone. Most people loved 7 from the beginning.

newtekie1You use it for a few days and you get used to it, and then you start to get used to all the extra useful features and you really miss them when you have to go back to Windows 7.

I've been using 10 on my gaming system for RTRT FX for my 2080. It dual boots to Win7. I know 10 very well, just don't like it. It still feels like Microsoft's too-little-too-late answer to mobile computing. It's GUI is needlessly limiting and has stylings that are simply unappealing. You can only escape them if you use a third party theming program. Microsoft has taken the "our way is the only way" mentality about theming to the next level and is simply unacceptable.

newtekie1The user rights/privacy issue, well, they added all the telemetry crap into Windows 7 with "critical updates" anyway

Easily avoided and/or removed.

newtekie1but no one really made a big fuss about it, so no one really talks about it.

Yes we do.

newtekie1The forced updates sounds like an annoying invasion of user rights, but it's a necessary evil for the world we live in.

Gotta disagree there. If Microsoft did proper research and testing before releasing software, most of the "updates" released would be unneeded.

newtekie1I don't think any of the main OSes(Linux, OSX, Windows) handles updates perfectly.

On this we agree somewhat. Though I think most Linux distros do it better.

lexluthermiesterI never heard that from anyone. Most people loved 7 from the beginning.

Well, really it was more when Vista came out. Then they reskinned Vista, leaving all the unintuitive stuff in place, but people were already used to it. But I really just lump Windows 7 growing pains in with Vista, since 7 is just Vista with a theme pack.

lexluthermiesterI've been using 10 on my gaming system for RTRT FX for my 2080. It dual boots to Win7. I know 10 very well, just don't like it. It still feels like Microsoft's too-little-too-late answer to mobile computing. It's GUI is needlessly limiting and has stylings that are simply unappealing. You can only escape them if you use a third party theming program. Microsoft has taken the "our way is the only way" mentality about theming to the next level and is simply unacceptable.

Maybe it's because I don't care to customize the UI. I don't even change my desktop background except on one system. It's just something that isn't necessary to use the system. I care about functionality, I've outgrown useless bling.

lexluthermiesterEasily avoided and/or removed.

Same on 10.

lexluthermiesterYes we do.

No you don't. I see people bitch about 10 spying on them daily. Can you find a single post on this forum in the past week complaining about Win7 spying on people? In the past month? I doubt it.

lexluthermiesterGotta disagree there. If Microsoft did proper research and testing before releasing software, most of the "updates" released would be unneeded.

That isn't even remotely how it works with a piece of software as complex as an OS. Even software much less than an OS. If you think it is that simple, you should develop your own perfect OS and release it, because you'd be richer than Bill Gates. But until you do, you can't make this argument, and making it shows you have absolutely now concept of how software works or how programing works.

But you and I both know we can go on all day about this topic, so we don't need to derail the thread anymore going on about the same thing that's been talked about to death already.

newtekie1Not sure why this is news, we've pretty much known about it forever. That's the whole point of the ESU program, it's existed since like Windows 98 went EOL or maybe even longer.

This. I do not understand why this is news worthy at all. Of course the program meant to continue updates for those who want to pay for them will mean they will receive those updates.
Like, common sense?!

newtekie1Well, really it was more when Vista came out. Then they reskinned Vista, leaving all the unintuitive stuff in place, but people were already used to it. But I really just lump Windows 7 growing pains in with Vista, since 7 is just Vista with a theme pack.

Hardly. There are a lot of under the hood changes that made Win7 faster and better than Vista. It's not just a lazy reskin. I should know as i was a beta tester for it. Sure - it is largely based on Vista and people either forget that or don't want to aknowledge it but calling it a reskin is doing disservice to the improvements Microsoft made to Win7. It will be remembered as one of the best Microsoft operating systems of all time. Those that hate(d) it are a minority. Just like those that like(d) Vista.

newtekie1Same on 10.

Hardly. The cleanest version is 1809 LTSC and even this still has "Basic" telemetry that you can't remove completely. Under Win7 it's as easy as uninstalling a couple of updates.
1909 has worthless junk included like Cortana that likes to run in the background and has to be deleted from disk. Plus other useless "apps" that simply put are inferior to their Win32 counterparts. The only app i use is the Calculator in Win10 because it has dark theme and extra functions comparted to the Win32 version.

newtekie1I can't imagine going back to 7 as my daily driver, it's so terrible compared to 10. It feels like a dinosaur.

It is reverse for me on 10. 10 is too macish or phoneish. I mean what worked for 95 was the same in 7.

I would gladly go back to Win7 but unfortunately getting it to install and run properly on new hardware (X570+Ryzen 3000) takes more tinckering than getting Win10 set up the way i want.
And that's usually the tipping point for me. When getting the older software to run becomes more bothersome than getting the new one to run. It's easier with programs such as games. Much harder with the entire OS.

TomorrowI would gladly go back to Win7 but unfortunately getting it to install and run properly on new hardware (X570+Ryzen 3000) takes more tinckering than getting Win10 set up the way i want.

This is an unfortunate and unavoidable problem of course. However, there are a number of near current level platforms that still have native or compatible support. Windows 10 is an unavoidable future, but Windows 7 will hang on for a few years longer...

I ended up going to LTSC about 2 weeks ago, its been decent so far. Basically same thing as 7 but with some extra GUI crap over the control panel items. I tried consumer 10 a few years ago and hated it.

newtekie1People said Windows 7 was unintuitive when it came out too. You use it for a few days and you get used to it, and then you start to get used to all the extra useful features and you really miss them when you have to go back to Windows 7.

It's funny how I haven't found windows 7 counterintuitive.
I started running W10 from Project Cars days because AMD worked better with 10,that was still the betas.
I carried on running 10 up until 1607 and from 1700+ it just never felt right.
I moved to 7 and every once in a while I will install the latest version of 10 just to see if it's any better and it has improved a bit since 1700+
but it defiantly doesn't feel\look better than 7.

I just tried the latest version of 10 LTSC and it feels snappier than 10 pro but for me Windows 7 is still the better OS in the way it works.

lexluthermiesterThat's an interesting perspective. Some of us feel like Windows 10 is an unintuitive, schizophrenic mess which needlessly invades user rights and privacy.

It's both.

It's basically a privacy invading scizophrenic, on meth, crack cocaine, and a heavy dose of skooma.

Yes it's fast. That doesn't mean I trust it.

Me working on XP or 7

newtekie1I can't imagine going back to 7 as my daily driver, it's so terrible compared to 10. It feels like a dinosaur.

No if you have like hardware from 2014
Better stay in 7, except you have newer hardware

Win 10 is a nice OS in my opinion. It's ways better than Win 8 which was the same huge crap as Win Vista. Win 7 is now the new XP, noone wanted to switch from XP and they were right a few years cause Win Vista was crap. Then Win 7 came and most people switched. Then Win 8 came, the next crap, noone wanted to switch but with Win 10, there is a good alternative and many people switched.
And in a few days there is no alternative to stay at Win 7 safety-wise cause you won't get updates anymore. You can switch to OSX or Linux or WIn 10, that's all. In germany switching to OSX means spending really much money. The "cheapest" iMac will cost you 1299€, with 2.3 GHz dual core CPU, Intel integrated GPU and 8 GB RAM.....
It may be cheaper in the US but here most people can't afford a Mac. Then you can switch to Linux, it's for free and not bad at all, I have Linux Mint on my second PC and Linux Debian on my Server. For Server it's the best OS you can have, on the desktop it has some downgrades. There are not many games out there you can play on this OS and the graphic drivers are not as good as their Win pendants. It don't support as much hardware as Win does.

Updates:
I don't see here a disadvantage in using win 10, my MacBook updates as often and my linux PC also.
Security:
It is not worse than OSX or Linux, the only difference is that most people use Win, so it's the system hackers concentrate more on. The Win defender is a decent tool in Win 10, you don't need an extra anti-virus-tool.
The Look:
In my opinion it's a nice looking OS, you also have features now like the "Dark Mode" or the "Light Mode" where everything looks darker or lighter

Here you can see the price for an 27" iMac in germany:

lexluthermiesterI never heard that from anyone. Most people loved 7 from the beginning.

Well, we can't really argue with such an argument, i.e. how representative was the group you talked to.
Maybe you're just in age that started using PCs in that period and W7 was natural.

Most people don't like changes. So W7 was problematic for people used to XP/2000. It'll always be like that.

I believe the most accurate post in this thread came from @eidairaman1 .
[ICODE]10 is too macish or phoneish.[/ICODE]
This is 100% true. That was the goal.
Windows users who got into PCs in the last 4 years would not accept how Windows used to look and work before.

Older users have to adapt. It's always a problem. And sometimes the new OS turns out to be objectively worse (Vista).
This is not the case. W10 is easily the best Windows we've ever had.
One may have concerns about privacy or how MS decided to locked some settings. It's understandable.
But it's hard to ignore how light, stable, easy to use and packed with features W10 is.

notbWell, we can't really argue with such an argument, i.e. how representative was the group you talked to.

I've been working in the tech retail side of the industry since the late 80's and have a had solid general feel for what PC buyers/users like and don't like.

notbMaybe you're just in age that started using PCs in that period and W7 was natural.

Not even close. My first OS was CP/M.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP/M

notbMost people don't like changes. So W7 was problematic for people used to XP/2000. It'll always be like that.

That is not the experience that my clients of the time expressed. Many of them were delighted with 7 and found it, and the changes, very intuitive and easy to use. This is very much not the same experience people are having with 10. Most people are either indifferent or don't like it. Only a few people are excited about it. This is a very stark and vast contrast to the way 7 was received.

notbI believe the most accurate post in this thread came from @eidairaman1 .

True, but he also said...

eidairaman1I mean what worked for 95 was the same in 7.

...which is very accurate. That same can not be said for 10.

notb[ICODE]10 is too macish or phoneish.[/ICODE]
This is 100% true. That was the goal.

True, and it was 100% a bad idea.

notbWindows users who got into PCs in the last 4 years would not accept how Windows used to look and work before.

Also incorrect. I still get people in my shop asking if I'll wipe 10 and put 7 on their brand new systems.

notbAnd sometimes the new OS turns out to be objectively worse (Vista & 10).

Fixed that for you.

notbThis is not the case. W10 is easily the best Windows we've ever had.

For you. You are easily in the vast minority of users who have that opinion.

notbBut it's hard to ignore how

Let's take these one at a time..

notblight

It's no more or less light than 7. It simply has a better kernel/task scheduling system, admittedly one of it's qualities.

notbstable

Rubbish. Windows 10 is on par with 7 for the number of system/program crashes that take place.

notbeasy to use

That is a matter of opinion, one that most people do not share.

notbpacked with features

As well as a lot of rubbish that is very difficult to remove.

We could debate this back and forth forever...

For all the praise on here for it being faster, the consumer Win 10 Home I installed 2 years ago was slower than 7. Slower boot, slower shut down. I could not tell a difference on an individual app basis but things seemed to load slower on 10 home.

However, I will say LTSC is faster, the shutdown is nearly instantaneous. Applications seem to load quickly. Another nice thing is my C:\ LTSC install only occupies about 40GB.

There was a trend of installing an inexpensive SSD into an older machine, and simultaneously replacing the old 7 or Vista OS with 10, maybe that was why 10 was perceived as being greatly faster than 7, the difference could be attributable to the SSD.

I was running 7 on a 970 Pro and now running LTSC on the same 970 Pro.