Windows 10 Finally Surpasses Windows 7 in Global Market Share - StatCounter

[Ahhzz]

What exactly is preventing new hardware from running Win7 ?

https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/16/10780876/microsoft-windows-support-policy-new-processors-skylake

the meat:

Spoiler

Soon, when you buy a new PC, it won't support Windows 7 or 8. Microsoft has announced a change to its support policy that lays out its plans for future updates to its older operating systems, and the new rules mean that future PC owners with next-generation Intel, AMD, and Qualcomm processors will need to use Windows 10.

It's not usual for old PCs to fall short of the minimum requirements of a brand new operating system, but in this case, the opposite is happening. Microsoft and its partners will not be putting in the significant work necessary to make new hardware work with older versions of Windows. The old operating systems, at best, will merely lack the latest updates. At worst, they might not function properly.

POLICY STARTS WITH INTEL'S CURRENT PROCESSORS, SKYLAKE

"Going forward, as new silicon generations are introduced, they will require the latest Windows platform at that time for support," Microsoft notes in a blog post published on Friday. "Windows 10 will be the only supported Windows platform on Intel's upcoming 'Kaby Lake' silicon, Qualcomm's upcoming '8996' silicon, and AMD's upcoming 'Bristol Ridge' silicon."

 

[DRDNA]

https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/16/10780876/microsoft-windows-support-policy-new-processors-skylake

the meat:

Spoiler

Soon, when you buy a new PC, it won't support Windows 7 or 8. Microsoft has announced a change to its support policy that lays out its plans for future updates to its older operating systems, and the new rules mean that future PC owners with next-generation Intel, AMD, and Qualcomm processors will need to use Windows 10.

It's not usual for old PCs to fall short of the minimum requirements of a brand new operating system, but in this case, the opposite is happening. Microsoft and its partners will not be putting in the significant work necessary to make new hardware work with older versions of Windows. The old operating systems, at best, will merely lack the latest updates. At worst, they might not function properly.

POLICY STARTS WITH INTEL'S CURRENT PROCESSORS, SKYLAKE

"Going forward, as new silicon generations are introduced, they will require the latest Windows platform at that time for support," Microsoft notes in a blog post published on Friday. "Windows 10 will be the only supported Windows platform on Intel's upcoming 'Kaby Lake' silicon, Qualcomm's upcoming '8996' silicon, and AMD's upcoming 'Bristol Ridge' silicon."

But there are also hacks to bypass that broken stop sign.

 

[newtekie1]

I like windows 10 more than windows 7. I just install classic shell and it fixes 90% if the issues. Seriously though, they should have it automatically built in, it would help a lot.

Exactly. And it is funny that some OEMs do include it pre-installed on their systems(or a similar program). And AsRock even includes Start8 on their driver disks. All the benefits of 10 definitely outweigh the minor inconvenience of needing to install ClassicShell on a fresh install.

Thats exactly right, if hardware still support Windows 7 these stats would be alot different. W10 still plagued with many issues (More so on older hardware) and I get asked all the time if I get a new computer can I get W7? I sadly have to say no sorry you cant. Im selling more used PC's then brand new ones hands down.

Not likely. I'd say a good 90% of the computers people buy are pre-built bluelight specials from Best Buy. and you aren't getting Windows 7 on any of those. The fact is, even before Intel and AMD stopped providing driver support for older versions of Windows, the very large majority of new computers sold were already running Windows 10.

I call it BS...

Meanwhile just now on Steam;

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

"OS Version"
Windows 7 64 bit - 68.80%
Windows 10 64 bit - 24.77%
Windows 8.1 64 bit - 2.44%

1.) The January Steam Survey puts 7 64-bit at 56% and 10 64-bit at 35%. So I'm not sure where you got your numbers from.
2.) Steam survey is not an accurate representation of the world population. If you believe so, then you must also believe that 86% of the world population is running nVidia GPUs, 8% are running AMD GPUs, and only 5% are running Intel. Yeah, those seem like very accurate numbers for the entire world population...

But there are also hacks to bypass that broken stop sign.

Yep, I've installed Windows 7 on few Kaby Lake systems. There is an easy hack to bypass the Windows Update block, and another to let you install the necessary video drivers to use the Intel iGPU(since these were business systems and had no need for a dedicated GPU).

Of course, most people are just going to buy a system with Windows 10 on it already and never care.

 

[Jermelescu]

Can someone explain me what's the problem with people refusing to use Windows 10?
It's better in every single way compared to Windows 7.

 

[Ahhzz]

Can someone explain me what's the problem with people refusing to use Windows 10?
It's better in every single way compared to Windows 7.

Because every few weeks they push out an update changing where settings are located, or which ones are available.
Because 10 comes loaded with several programs unnecessary for the computer's operation with extremely complicated methods or no path at all, to removing them, especially for the average PC user.
Because they introduced mandatory updates (sometimes crippling computers) with no simple way to prevent or even reduce them.
Because 10 was introduced containing code that provides mass quantities of data to M$ with no way to opt out of most of the tracking, and that only after much consumer noise was raised.
Because I will not be updating my hardware for at least another year, and 10 would just run worse on it.
Because they forced thousands of computers to update to 10 with misleading messages.

Because I disagree with M$'s business practices, and I personally refuse to support them any more than I personally find necessary. I game on my computers a large quantity of the time I'm on them, and that keeps me from being a Linux buff. That doesn't mean I love handing money over to M$. So, the longer I can refuse to support them monetarily, the better I feel about it.

I would also point out that "It's better in every single way compared to Windows 7", is an opinion. With the exception of the final statement regarding my personal feelings, all of the above are statements of actual facts regarding Windows 10, which (excepting the "thousands" of computers, which can be backed up by anecdotal evidence in the media), I've experienced myself, and dealing with users on Windows 10 computers.

 

[StrayKAT]

I think if you're a gamer, like me, you're better off just going 10. I know DX12 or MS App exclusive games aren't a big deal, but they are a nice bonus at least. You have less an excuse than others (like Office only users or content viewers), but I suppose you get by for the most part.


That all said, I was a Mac user for a long time... and I may just get another for general use. And just keep Windows for gaming.

 

[TheOne]

It will be funny if they try making Polaris the main build next year washing away all this effort to pass Windows 7.

 

[Tomorrow]

https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/16/10780876/microsoft-windows-support-policy-new-processors-skylake

the meat:

Spoiler

Soon, when you buy a new PC, it won't support Windows 7 or 8. Microsoft has announced a change to its support policy that lays out its plans for future updates to its older operating systems, and the new rules mean that future PC owners with next-generation Intel, AMD, and Qualcomm processors will need to use Windows 10.

It's not usual for old PCs to fall short of the minimum requirements of a brand new operating system, but in this case, the opposite is happening. Microsoft and its partners will not be putting in the significant work necessary to make new hardware work with older versions of Windows. The old operating systems, at best, will merely lack the latest updates. At worst, they might not function properly.

POLICY STARTS WITH INTEL'S CURRENT PROCESSORS, SKYLAKE

"Going forward, as new silicon generations are introduced, they will require the latest Windows platform at that time for support," Microsoft notes in a blog post published on Friday. "Windows 10 will be the only supported Windows platform on Intel's upcoming 'Kaby Lake' silicon, Qualcomm's upcoming '8996' silicon, and AMD's upcoming 'Bristol Ridge' silicon."

That only pertains to certain new features. Nothing about Win7 prevents it installing or running from new hardware. There are some BIOS changes that need to be made yes like using CSM but actually all nessesary drivers exist (official btw) to get it running on a system with Ryzen/Coffee Lake and NVME or Optane NVME SSD. Even updates are still being made - just blocked by design.

So don't buy the hype about Win7 not running on new hardware or not recieving updates. That is just fear mongering from MS and hardware vendors to discourage from using one of the best operating systems ever built (because then no one will buy their new shiny hardware). Yes there are some CPU instructions or features like Intel Speed Shift or MS DX12 that do not work but none of those are essential.

Can someone explain me what's the problem with people refusing to use Windows 10?
It's better in every single way compared to Windows 7.

Hardly in every way. That is pink sunglasses talk.

Win7 is still superior when it comes to user privacy. The only Win10 edition that comes close is Enterprise LTSC.
Win7 is still best when it comes to productivity. Win10 tries to use paltry UWP apps that have fraction of the Win32 app functionality.

Win10 has horrible Store, UWP games are crap, forced updates and drivers updates wreak havoc weekly, telemetry can not be turned off truly in non-Enterprise versions, Win10 still resets settings with every major feature update. TLDR - when running Win10 i can never be sure it respects my choices and privacy. It may or it may turn an enable those setting behind my back. To add insult to injury i have to manually reset file associations to use Win32 apps of the included things like paint, notepad etc.

 

[evernessince]

What exactly is preventing new hardware from running Win7 ?

Microsoft made a statement saying they will not update the operating system for processors skylake and newer. You can try to use newer processors but there is no guarantee that it will work, no guarantee that performance will be good, and no guarantee you will get all updates needed. Ryzen performance is better on windows 10 simply because Microsoft will not update Windows 7 to properly handle Ryzen's CCXs.

That only pertains to certain new features. Nothing about Win7 prevents it installing or running from new hardware. There are some BIOS changes that need to be made yes like using CSM but actually all nessesary drivers exist (official btw) to get it running on a system with Ryzen/Coffee Lake and NVME or Optane NVME SSD. Even updates are still being made - just blocked by design.

So don't buy the hype about Win7 not running on new hardware or not recieving updates. That is just fear mongering from MS and hardware vendors to discourage from using one of the best operating systems ever built (because then no one will buy their new shiny hardware). Yes there are some CPU instructions or features like Intel Speed Shift or MS DX12 that do not work but none of those are essential.


Hardly in every way. That is pink sunglasses talk.

Win7 is still superior when it comes to user privacy. The only Win10 edition that comes close is Enterprise LTSC.
Win7 is still best when it comes to productivity. Win10 tries to use paltry UWP apps that have fraction of the Win32 app functionality.

Win10 has horrible Store, UWP games are crap, forced updates and drivers updates wreak havoc weekly, telemetry can not be turned off truly in non-Enterprise versions, Win10 still resets settings with every major feature update. TLDR - when running Win10 i can never be sure it respects my choices and privacy. It may or it may turn an enable those setting behind my back. To add insult to injury i have to manually reset file associations to use Win32 apps of the included things like paint, notepad etc.

So your stance is "hey it's missing all this stuff and is no longer receives mainstream support but that's OK!"? That's an awful stance to take for anyone who is using their computer for anything more than web browsing. Also good to note, the Spectre / Meltdown patches have a larger performance impact on windows 7 / 8. So yay, less performance on top of less performance.

 

[Tomorrow]

Microsoft made a statement saying they will not update the operating system for processors skylake and newer.

Well ofcourse they will not update the OS itself. Why would they? It's on extended support and will not recieve new features. What MS actually said is that systems using Skylake or newer will not recieve updates and that is only partially true. Their wording made it look like no updates would be made when infact updates are made (because security and enterprise users) but simply blocked from installing. Wich in my opinion is like saying "screw you, upgrade to win10 or we will not give you security updates".

You can try to use newer processors but there is no guarantee that it will work, no guarantee that performance will be good, and no guarantee you will get all updates needed.

There are no guarantees in life. Not with Win7 and not with Win10 either regardless of hardware used. Atleast for mainstream users. Enterprise users get better support.

Ryzen performance is better on windows 10 simply because Microsoft will not update Windows 7 to properly handle Ryzen's CCXs.

When the whole CCX thing started i looked at plenty of tests and saw no negative impact on Ryzen running with Win7. Infact it was running better until MS fixed Win10. Inherently the performance of CCX interconnect (Infinity Fabric) depens on memory speed a lot more than on OS.

So your stance is "hey it's missing all this stuff and is no longer receives mainstream support but that's OK!"?

Yes it's ok because extended support still provides all nessesary security fixes including Meltdown/Spectre software fixes.

Also good to note, the Spectre / Meltdown patches have a larger performance impact on windows 7 / 8. So yay, less performance on top of less performance.

No they don't !
MS itself released benchmarks that showed 14 benchmarks or tests. In 7 tests Win10 was faster after fixes than Win7. In 6 tests Win7 fared better than Win10 and one was a draw.

 

[Melvis]

Not likely. I'd say a good 90% of the computers people buy are pre-built bluelight specials from Best Buy. and you aren't getting Windows 7 on any of those. The fact is, even before Intel and AMD stopped providing driver support for older versions of Windows, the very large majority of new computers sold were already running Windows 10.

Thats because those systems hardware will only support Windows 10 regardless of what price it may be. The fact is AMD and maybe intel (I havent checked there 8th Gen) actually still support Windows 7 with there Motherboards X370/B350 etc but its Windows its self that doesnt (CPU not supported BS error) which you just cant sell to a client with that coming up on screen so OEM system builders have no choice but to put W10 on all there computers.

 

[StrayKAT]

One thing worth pointing out is I suspect Windows 10 is going to be a platform in and of itself.... in a sense. The whole rapid update (2 a year) and "Windows as a service" thing seems to be moving it this way. I wonder if we'll even get a "Windows 11" at all. Kind of like how Mac OS X has remained Mac OS X for almost two decades now.

Point is, you might as well just hop on.. If you're going to use Windows at all, it's probably going to be this way for awhile.

 

[newtekie1]

Thats because those systems hardware will only support Windows 10 regardless of what price it may be. The fact is AMD and maybe intel (I havent checked there 8th Gen) actually still support Windows 7 with there Motherboards X370/B350 etc but its Windows its self that doesnt (CPU not supported BS error) which you just cant sell to a client with that coming up on screen so OEM system builders have no choice but to put W10 on all there computers.

No, it has been this way since long before the hardware limits went into affect. Really, the only way to get a system with Windows 7 on it for the past several years(since Windows 8.1 came out basically) has been to special order it. You couldn't walk into a big box electronics store(where almost everyone buys their comptuers) and find a system running Windows 7. And in the past couple years, the only way to get Windows 7 on a system was to buy a business grade computer. Hell, OEMs couldn't even buy licenses to Windows 7 Home after 2014. So they could only sell systems with Windows 7 Pro, which added a instant $100 to the price tag that most normal consumers weren't going to pay.

I wonder if we'll even get a "Windows 11" at all.

I believe they already said their plan is for Windows 10 to be the last version of Windows. It will just constantly evolve. That is why every major update is basically a new OS install on your computer, using the OS upgrade method they created. Every time there is a major update(Creators Update, Fall Creators Update, etc.) the computer does an upgrade to the OS It is the same process as if you were upgrading from Windows 8 to Window 10.

That is why, IMO, for the first time it might actually be worth buying a retail license to a Windows OS. Because, potentially, if you buy Windows 10 now, you'll have it for a really really long time. LIkely long enough to use it on several computers. And that retail license will still be good all those years down the road to activate Windows 10 in 2025 if Microsoft stays with the Windows 10 name. Of course, I also suspect they might catch on to this, and eventually just rename the OS to screw people out of their licenses...

 

[Red_Machine]

Sorry guys, this is my fault. I switched from Windows 7 to Windows 10 in december.

 

[TheOne]

Don't forget downgrade rights with Pro systems, some OEM's used that to sell Windows 8/8.1 systems.

 

[newtekie1]

Don't forget downgrade rights with Pro systems, some OEM's used that to sell Windows 8/8.1 systems.

Yes, that was basically the only way to get Windows 7, but it wasn't really an option for computers sold in stores. It was an option in the business line of computers.

 

[StrayKAT]

I believe they already said their plan is for Windows 10 to be the last version of Windows. It will just constantly evolve. That is why every major update is basically a new OS install on your computer, using the OS upgrade method they created. Every time there is a major update(Creators Update, Fall Creators Update, etc.) the computer does an upgrade to the OS It is the same process as if you were upgrading from Windows 8 to Window 10.

That is why, IMO, for the first time it might actually be worth buying a retail license to a Windows OS. Because, potentially, if you buy Windows 10 now, you'll have it for a really really long time. LIkely long enough to use it on several computers. And that retail license will still be good all those years down the road to activate Windows 10 in 2025 if Microsoft stays with the Windows 10 name. Of course, I also suspect they might catch on to this, and eventually just rename the OS to screw people out of their licenses...

That was part of my thinking too on buying retail. Hopefully they don't catch on though, as you mentioned.

 

[Melvis]

No, it has been this way since long before the hardware limits went into affect. Really, the only way to get a system with Windows 7 on it for the past several years(since Windows 8.1 came out basically) has been to special order it. You couldn't walk into a big box electronics store(where almost everyone buys their comptuers) and find a system running Windows 7. And in the past couple years, the only way to get Windows 7 on a system was to buy a business grade computer. Hell, OEMs couldn't even buy licenses to Windows 7 Home after 2014. So they could only sell systems with Windows 7 Pro, which added a instant $100 to the price tag that most normal consumers weren't going to pay.

Maybe in the USA but not here in Australia and clearly not in China (the biggest market in the world) and I still could get Computers with Windows 7 installed all the way up to about a yr ago on certain manufactures (Lenovo) The fact is if MS didnt screw over everyone with there BS and forced us to move to W10 because of hardware been not supported W7 would still easily be the most used OS today. I still get asked for W7, and I say yes! I can get it but there will be problems.

 

[newtekie1]

Maybe in the USA but not here in Australia and clearly not in China (the biggest market in the world) and I still could get Computers with Windows 7 installed all the way up to about a yr ago on certain manufactures (Lenovo) The fact is if MS didnt screw over everyone with there BS and forced us to move to W10 because of hardware been not supported W7 would still easily be the most used OS today. I still get asked for W7, and I say yes! I can get it but there will be problems.

You can still get them in the US too, but not in big box stores where most people are buying computers. That is the point, the very large majority of new computers sold in the world have Windows 10 on them and it has been this way for years. It has nothing to do with the recent limitations imposed. It has to do with the OEMs not making it easy for a consumer to walk into a store and buy a computer with anything other than Windows 10 on it.

If we went back 2 years, before the hardware limitations were put in place, the stores were not filled with Windows 7 computers and one or two Windows 10 machines. It just wasn't like that. It was exactly the reverse. There might be one or two Windows 7 computers on sale in the store, and 20 different Windows 10 computers to choose from. And the Windows 7 computers were Windows 7 Pro, with a $100 price premium over the same computer with the same hardware running Windows 10. And in a given day at the big box electronics store, I'd be willing to bet 95% of the computers that walked out the door had Windows 10 on them.

The market did not just change overnight when the limitations went into effect. It changed back in 2014 when Microsoft stopped selling Windows 7 Home licenses to OEMs.

 

[Melvis]

You can still get them in the US too, but not in big box stores where most people are buying computers. That is the point, the very large majority of new computers sold in the world have Windows 10 on them and it has been this way for years. It has nothing to do with the recent limitations imposed. It has to do with the OEMs not making it easy for a consumer to walk into a store and buy a computer with anything other than Windows 10 on it.

If we went back 2 years, before the hardware limitations were put in place, the stores were not filled with Windows 7 computers and one or two Windows 10 machines. It just wasn't like that. It was exactly the reverse. There might be one or two Windows 7 computers on sale in the store, and 20 different Windows 10 computers to choose from. And the Windows 7 computers were Windows 7 Pro, with a $100 price premium over the same computer with the same hardware running Windows 10. And in a given day at the big box electronics store, I'd be willing to bet 95% of the computers that walked out the door had Windows 10 on them.

The market did not just change overnight when the limitations went into effect. It changed back in 2014 when Microsoft stopped selling Windows 7 Home licenses to OEMs.

Like i said that might be the case in USA but it wasnt here in AUS and or China, you could still walk into a Harvey Norman or a Dick Smith or Big-W and get yourself a Windows 7 PC, yes there was alot LESS of them but it was still there as an option or as a rollback which seemed to be very popular in laptops with Toshiba and Lenovo I had found.

People would still pay the $100 more for the price premium for W7 over W10 dont you worry about that, if the option was there they would go for it, I get it all the time I say yep its expensive at $200 for a Pro license for W7 but at least you get W7 and there more then happy to pay that little extra to get away from W10 and to be clear over here for W10 pro and W7 Pro it was the SAME cost, only when it has now become almost impossible to get W7 through normal channels that the cost for W10 has got less which then makes the Cost of W7 more but only by about $50.

The day W10 came out big places like Harvey Norman had pulled ALL the copies of W7 off the shelf, why? because MS told them too and said to send them back and they will get destroyed, this is directly from the biggest electronics store in Australia, that to me is just disgusting! and proves my point even more that MS just wanted to force people over to W10 first by getting rid of W7 (destroying what copies it could) and then later forcing people to upgrade because of hardware limitations.

The public wants 7 not 10 thats just a fact, but its how MS has brought it to the market that has made us the consumers have very little choice but to by a new PC that has W10 on it, good luck finding any of this kind of BS in the past 20yrs.

 

[newtekie1]

Like i said that might be the case in USA but it wasnt here in AUS and or China, you could still walk into a Harvey Norman or a Dick Smith or Big-W and get yourself a Windows 7 PC, yes there was alot LESS of them but it was still there as an option or as a rollback which seemed to be very popular in laptops with Toshiba and Lenovo I had found.

That is exactly what I'm saying, and because there was a lot less of them, the large majority of computers sold were Windows 10/8.

The day W10 came out big places like Harvey Norman had pulled ALL the copies of W7 off the shelf, why?

Holy shit, those had to be some old ass copies of Windows 7. You're telling me retailers had unsold copies of Windows 7 sitting on their shelves for a year...Wow, if I was a retailer and had product sitting on the self for a year that wasn't selling, I'd be happy if the manufacturer finally told me to pull it...

 

[Melvis]

That is exactly what I'm saying, and because there was a lot less of them, the large majority of computers sold were Windows 10/8.



Holy shit, those had to be some old ass copies of Windows 7. You're telling me retailers had unsold copies of Windows 7 sitting on their shelves for a year...Wow, if I was a retailer and had product sitting on the self for a year that wasn't selling, I'd be happy if the manufacturer finally told me to pull it...

No no this was the DAY W10 came out to market, that is when they removed it off the shelf. But yes you could still easily get a copy of Windows 7 from big retailers and or online retailers. Online retailers still had copies of them till early last yr which now I can not find.

I dont think the consumer was very happy when they removed them when everyone found out how bad W10 was, people wanted 7 back even more then but they had gone, so to be honest they would of lost money as people refused to buy W10 and then wanted 7, silly move!

 

[newtekie1]

No no this was the DAY W10 came out to market, that is when they removed it off the shelf. But yes you could still easily get a copy of Windows 7 from big retailers and or online retailers. Online retailers still had copies of them till early last yr which now I can not find.

I dont think the consumer was very happy when they removed them when everyone found out how bad W10 was, people wanted 7 back even more then but they had gone, so to be honest they would of lost money as people refused to buy W10 and then wanted 7, silly move!

Yeah, execpt Microsoft stopped selling Retail licenses of Windows 7 in 2014, the only version allowed in big box retail stores, a year before Windows 10 came out. So they were sitting on those copies for a year. So either the demand for Windows 7 wasn't really that great, or they for some reason bought a stupidly large amount of stock and still didn't manage to sell it all in the year after.

Of course, you can still get OEM copies of Windows 7 today from etailers because they are allowed to sell OEM licenses, but big box retailers were not allowed to sell OEM licenses. And even still, the OEM licenses were discontinued over a year ago, and they are still hanging around. So the demand must not have been that great...

 

[navair2]

This will be a long one, so please take a seat and bear with me. I may seem new here, but I once posted on this forum years ago and haven't for quite awhile.
Let's begin:


Here I am sitting on the sidelines and observing Microsoft yet again, taking their customers hostage.
I also know full well that this subject has been beaten to death for quite awhile now, yet I still see the same or similar arguments both for, and against, MS's latest "forceware" ( sorry Nvidia, no offense meant ) offering.

Seriously folks, I was one of "those guys" who held out "forever and a day" to upgrade from Xp to that hiccup known as Vista 64 ( because MS wouldn't enable support for 64 bit hardware for Xp unless you bought Xp Professional ), and suffered some of the same driver troubles that existed even before Service Pack 1 came out; and I waited until it did before buying it. What's worse is, we all know ( or should know ) what happened when Xp made its debut...Service Pack 1 fixed it, for the most part. But through all of that, it seems to me that there weren't as many complaints about functionality and overall "look" as what happened when Win8 came on the scene, which is when Microsoft found out just how many desktop users were balking at the changes in features AND functionality. I mean, trying to get desktop users to migrate onto an OS that looks and acts like a tablet is one thing, but FORCING it on people ( albeit in a different "flavor" and then calling it Win 10 ) with their shenanigans in Windows update? If that doesn't demonstrate their true intentions, I don't know what does.

I'll simplify it if you'll indulge me...I love editorials:



1) Get people hooked on your OS, by whatever means necessary. Mission accomplished, and round about the DOS days, IMO. Examples: Q-DOS and Seattle Computer Products: http://thisdayintechhistory.com/11/06/ibm-signs-a-deal-with-the-devil/

2) License it instead of selling it outright, thereby guaranteeing your company a constant flow of dependents, but don't let the customer actually own the software. Otherwise they would have more standing room to complain if it doesn't work all that well or if you don't like it.

3) Release an entirely "new" OS every 3 years, even if it really isn't much better than the last one, or even worse, make a bad one better by releasing it AS a new one. Example: Win 7 was what Vista should have been all along.

4) If your customer base doesn't go along with the " upgrade-every-3-years-like-it-or-not " program, simply embed a feature in your supposedly trustworthy update mechanism, to coax ( perhaps that's too soft of a term here ) them to abandon something with the features they desire, in favor of one that's meant to "bring them into the 21st century"...kicking and screaming or not.

5) Get hardware AND software manufacturers onboard with them by whatever means necessary, to add more clout as to why you should upgrade. "Software for Windows" anyone? I still don't know of all that many games that have Linux support, for example.

6) Force any dissenters to abandon ship or get with the program...did I mention that? I think I alluded to it in item 4.

7) Make it easier to go along with the program; jumping ship is a frightful thing, and we all know that there are so many reasons why we should sail on Cunard Lines rather than take a chance on White Star Lines ( the ones that sailed the Titanic in 1912 )...even though Cunard's Lusitania got torpedoed by a German U-boat 4 years later.

8) Buy out your competitor, again forcing any potential customers to come to you for their desires. Capitalism 102. Capitalism 101 covers basic rules of buying and selling, whereas Cap 102 covers how to increase market leverage. Add to it forcing out your competitor, even if their product is a better one: Example, Digital Research. All's fair in love, war and business.


OK, enough of that. I think I'm out of breath.


I love and use Win 7. Why? Because it's the best desktop OS I've ever seen come out of Micro$oft's barn, and they can watch me upgrade to yet one more of their OS's unnecessarily, when the sun never rises again or until they offer something *I* like...which isn't Win 10. I had occasion to fight with it on a lady's laptop once, and to me, it's little different than Win 8.1. Frustrated me near half to death, just trying to navigate the file system. Dear reader, I'm a desktop user, not a tablet user, and I don't own one of those portable computers called a "Smartphone", so making my desktop look like one isn't something I care to do.

I also use Linux. Why? Because it's the most stable OS I've ever had my hands on, and based on it's market share, it's not the first target that virus writers love to afflict. Linux Mint 18.3 is the latest, and "Cinnamon" desktop is very nearly my old Xp, all over again. Apologies to all you who might think I'm an old codger, but I've found something that, even though there's a bit of a learning curve associated with it, I like the way it looks, AND I don't have to put up with corporate shenanigans...EVER.


Gamers? You might want to stick with what the industry is basically forcing you to use, and every 3-6 years they will find some way, ANY way, to get you to do it all over again.

 

[newtekie1]

Seriously folks, I was one who held out "forever and a day" to upgrade from Xp to that hiccup known as Vista 64 ( because MS wouldn't enable support for 64 bit hardware for Xp unless you bought Xp Professional ), and suffered some of the same driver troubles that existed even before Service Pack 1 came out; and I waited until it did before buying it. What's worse is, we all know ( or should know ) what happened when Xp made its debut...Service Pack 1 fixed it, for the most part. But through all of that, it seems to me that there weren't as many complaints about functionality and overall "look" as what happened when Win8 came on the scene, which is when Microsoft found out just how many desktop users were balking at the changes in features AND functionality. I mean, trying to get desktop users to migrate onto an OS that looks and acts like a tablet is one thing, but FORCING it on people ( albeit in a different "flavor" and then calling it Win 10 ) with their shenanigans in Windows update? If that doesn't demonstrate their true intentions, I don't know what does.

One thing, you're forgetting Windows 2000. Windows 2000 was the same as Vista. It was the OS that had the majority of the growing pains and kinks in it. Once they got the kinks mostly worked out, they released XP. XP was released and it was "better", but amount to nothing more than fully updated Windows 2000 with different skin.

They have repeated this process several times now.

Windows 2000 was bad, then XP was the better replacement but was just Windows 2000 with a different skin. Windows Vista was bad, then Windows 7 was the better replacement but was really just Vista with a different skin. Windows 8/8.1 was bad, then Windows 10 was the better replacement but is really just 8.1 with a different skin.

I'm a desktop user, not a tablet user, and I don't own one of those portable computers called a "Smartphone", so making my desktop look like one isn't something I care to do.

This line makes me pretty confident that you haven't used Windows 10 for any reasonable length of time. There is really nothing tablet oriented left in the default Windows 10 GUI. They moved all the tabley stuff to the specific Tablet Mode.(I know, how crazy of them!) Yes, there are still large active tiles if you choose there to but if you don't want them there, you don't have to have them there. The biggest complaint about Windows 8 was the fact that you were forced to use the full screen start with the huge active tiles. Now you have the option to use them or not, and having options is better than anything. And heck, if you don't like the stock start menu, you even have the option to go back to the Windows 7 style start menu. Don't like that? You have the option to go back to the Windows XP style start menu. And if you really just can't be bothered to move out of the 1990s, you even have the option to use the Windows 98 style start menu! Despite what diehard anti change people want to believe, options are a good thing! And just because they make the newest thing the default, it doesn't mean you have an argument against the OS because you don't like change and can't be bothered to spend 30 seconds to go back to the old.