any IT guys here? Are you upgrading to Win 10?

For business use, nope. Its too new to know how things will act with it.

I have upgraded one of my home PC's (months ago) and did a fresh install of it on a new build I did Friday night.

I don't see any issues with home use or even light business use - if you don't rely on anything but office, etc.
 
Anyone who has 10 and hasn't do it yet: go to the Privacy settings window and go to town. Like 90% of the stuff down the column needs to be turned off.

I've never seen such a level of invasion. Not all of us are spazzy 20 year olds who live/breathe/die for some form of external interaction/socialization/culterization.

Otherwise, i am really digging 10. It seems quite polished.
 
atp1916 said:
Anyone who has 10 and hasn't do it yet: go to the Privacy settings window and go to town. Like 90% of the stuff down the column needs to be turned off.

I've never seen such a level of invasion. Not all of us are spazzy 20 year olds who live/breathe/die for some form of external interaction/socialization/culterization.
Click to expand...

GP will likely take care of most of that.
 
I'm a tier 3 system engineer, supporting Windows, SQL Server, Hyper-V and Azure.

I had the tech preview running in a VM when it was first released. By early 2015 I felt comfortable enough to put a build on my wife's and my oldest daughter's computers for them to use daily. And by the 29th I had already upgraded all of the household machines to the RTM build, then I started deploying it for friends and family.

How confident am I with Windows 10? I'm about to go rogue and do a guerrilla update to 10 on my corporate issued laptop that's running 7 Pro. I'll take a backup of it first just in case, but I don't anticipate any issues.

I think 10 is the best version of windows in a very long time.... like 98 SE, perhaps. It should be universally adopted by everyone who is eligible to get it for free.
 
doublejack said:
I'm a tier 3 system engineer, supporting Windows, SQL Server, Hyper-V and Azure.

I think 10 is the best version of windows in a very long time.... like 98 SE, perhaps. It should be universally adopted by everyone who is eligible to get it for free.
Click to expand...

What do you wife, daughter, and friends think of W 10?
 
IT at industrial company with 1000+ computers running production lines... windows 10? hell no

most PCs run windows 7, some are still on XP, some 2000, some windows 95, and few on Japanese DOS.
 
doublejack said:
I think 10 is the best version of windows in a very long time.... like 98 SE, perhaps. It should be universally adopted by everyone who is eligible to get it for free.
Click to expand...

It really does take the best parts of 7 and 8 and makes them whole.
 
x509 said:
What do you wife, daughter, and friends think of W 10?
Click to expand...

The response has been universally positive so far. Both my wife and daughter came from Vista, although my wife also has a tablet hybrid that was running 8.1. From gaming through Steam, to surfing, to productivity apps there have been no problems and much praise. My wife did find one weird quirk, she could not copy something off our file server directly to a folder within the Program Files structure, even with elevated permission. She first had to copy the file locally, she used the desktop, and then she could paste it into a sub folder of Program Files from there. Also, there was a few day period during the Preview phase in April or May where my wife could not launch a game from Steam (the game would say Steam was not running). But that was corrected quickly. I'm not sure if Valve or Microsoft fixed the issue.

Friends have also been enthusiastic. One had purchased a new PC for his small business during the winter, and of course it came with 8.1 (it is a Dell). He absolutely hated 8.1. When I told him Windows 10 was coming and would be free he was skeptical. Well, he could not have been happier with the finished result. He loves having the start menu back, can navigate and find apps once again, and some of the weird issues he ran into with 8.1 were fixed (Office apps were crashing because of an OCR plugin for his printer/scanner for example).

I find users of Windows 7 to be the only ones who are somewhat indifferent. One friend fell in love with 10 because of the game streaming feature, as he's got an xbox one. A couple of others said, more or less, windows 10 is like 7 with a facelift. I think that's a compliment of how polished 10 is right from the start, that you can replace a mature OS with it and not feel a big difference.
 
doublejack said:
I think 10 is the best version of windows in a very long time.... like 98 SE, perhaps. It should be universally adopted by everyone who is eligible to get it for free.
Click to expand...

W98SE was a broken piece of garbage. I had to switch back to 98 and I used that until I switched to XP eventually. SE was almost as bad as ME, only with less bloat.


And you had your wife and daugther on vista? That's torture.

No way I'm taking your word for anything after reading that.
 
j-sta said:
Your post that I quoted stated nothing about "being in a hurry."
I even stated we aren't in a huge rush.

Not all orgs can afford to replace 4,000 machines in a single year; some probably have a hard time spending that much money over a 2 year period.
We are far from "unique."

HIPAA, PCI Compliance, and Safe Harbor is reasoning enough to start planning now, with an anticipated finish date being prior to 2020.
Click to expand...

Fellow healthcare IT here, can confirm these are exact reasons why the W7 rollout was just completed a year ago. Hell, it was only a year and a half ago we finally offlined our green screen TLO.
 
WangChung said:
Fellow healthcare IT here, can confirm these are exact reasons why the W7 rollout was just completed a year ago. Hell, it was only a year and a half ago we finally offlined our green screen TLO.
Click to expand...
You know the struggles. We have one client that is heavily reliant on a non-commercially developed program called ChartWare that only runs on XP or 2003. We had to virtualize their 2003 terminal server as a result and are going to have to isolate it from the internet and let users RDP over a VPN inside the LAN... LOL.

We are letting all of our clients know that there could be unforeseen issues with 10 at the onset so are recommending that nobody upgrades until it has matured. I've started playing with it on a secondary desktop at home and think it's what 8 should have been but still think it is ugly AF.
 
PliotronX said:
You know the struggles. We have one client that is heavily reliant on a non-commercially developed program called ChartWare that only runs on XP or 2003. We had to virtualize their 2003 terminal server as a result and are going to have to isolate it from the internet and let users RDP over a VPN inside the LAN... LOL.

We are letting all of our clients know that there could be unforeseen issues with 10 at the onset so are recommending that nobody upgrades until it has matured. I've started playing with it on a secondary desktop at home and think it's what 8 should have been but still think it is ugly AF.
Click to expand...

I never understood how a company can rely on an ancient non-supported piece of software. Someone seriously screwed up at their IT department lol.
 
B00nie said:
I never understood how a company can rely on an ancient non-supported piece of software. Someone seriously screwed up at their IT department lol.
Click to expand...

Usually, it's because there is no upgrade, or the upgrade is prohibitively expensive.
 
B00nie said:
I never understood how a company can rely on an ancient non-supported piece of software. Someone seriously screwed up at their IT department lol.
Click to expand...

Our door and elevator control system can only be run on windows XP SP3, nobodies fault, it is just very old hardware and the controlling software wont run on anything greater. At least it would allow me to virtualize it. :D
 
Terpfen said:
Usually, it's because there is no upgrade, or the upgrade is prohibitively expensive.
Click to expand...

Yes but if their business is relying on some flaky piece of code that's no longer maintained... Let's just say I wouldn't invest my money in their stock :)
 
B00nie said:
Yes but if their business is relying on some flaky piece of code that's no longer maintained... Let's just say I wouldn't invest my money in their stock :)
Click to expand...

That's not how it works when you have a budget. If you have X amount of money and 50,000 spending requests that are all equally if not more important, then you wait for your upgrade.
 
Terpfen said:
That's not how it works when you have a budget. If you have X amount of money and 50,000 spending requests that are all equally if not more important, then you wait for your upgrade.
Click to expand...

Those are just excuses after the fact. Someone made a serious boo-boo when planning for long term business models. Or most likely, didn't plan at all and just purchased something.
 
B00nie said:
Those are just excuses after the fact. Someone made a serious boo-boo when planning for long term business models. Or most likely, didn't plan at all and just purchased something.
Click to expand...

No, they're not excuses, and they're not after the fact. Budgets are done annually. Revenue is not fixed.
 
Terpfen said:
No, they're not excuses, and they're not after the fact. Budgets are done annually. Revenue is not fixed.
Click to expand...

They could budget the investment and break it down on following years. That is, if they could plan.
 
The other issue is, as said before, adherence to state and federal regulations such as HIPAA. Sure, there's plenty of shiny, open sourced software that could be used, but that means it's... OPEN! Not very good when trying to maintain privacy of healthcare records.

Example: A while back, our company spent over $1m on iPads for field nurses to basically use as virtual patient charts. It wasn't just the cost of the hardware, but also hiring the devs to support the apps and integration into our infrastructure. Just on the hardware alone, they spent 3-4 times the cost buying an iPad vs buying an Android tablet. Yet again, adherence to regulations, and closed source (unfortunately) does that better in most cases.

There's also the differentiation between a "business" license for things like software and a "corporate/enterprise" license. There has to be a cost analysis of buying 40,000 seats for a piece of software, and the vendor health is taken into account. However, the digital age moves significantly faster, and a lot of software companies that were around 10 years ago just no longer exist. So that vendor goes out of business, yet the software they sold you is still closed source and you don't own the patent. So you band-aid what you can to make it work because the band-aids are cheaper than buying another 40,000 seats of another product.

Sometimes, it's a positive. That out-of-date software does EXACTLY what is needed for your business, and nothing within a cost effective range comes close to its capabilities. The OS evolved around and beyond it, but the software itself is rock solid. Its benefit to the business by far outweighs whatever bells and whistles might come with the new OS.

That greenscreen TLO I mentioned before? It only got offlined after 16 years of use because the cost of maintaining the tapes, library, software, and Iron Mountain contract finally exceeded the cost/benefit of having multiple NASes networked in different parts of the country. Replacing a 4+TB drive when it died had dropped below using tape media and shipping it offsite.

/ot
 
Last edited:
WangChung said:
The other issue is, as said before, adherence to state and federal regulations such as HIPAA. Sure, there's plenty of shiny, open sourced software that could be used, but that means it's... OPEN! Not very good when trying to maintain privacy of healthcare records.

Example: A while back, our company spent over $1m on iPads for field nurses to basically use as virtual patient charts. It wasn't just the cost of the hardware, but also hiring the devs to support the apps and integration into our infrastructure. Just on the hardware alone, they spent 3-4 times the cost buying an iPad vs buying an Android tablet. Yet again, adherence to regulations, and closed source (unfortunately) does that better in most cases.

There's also the differentiation between a "business" license for things like software and a "corporate/enterprise" license. There has to be a cost analysis of buying 40,000 seats for a piece of software, and the vendor health is taken into account. However, the digital age moves significantly faster, and a lot of software companies that were around 10 years ago just no longer exist. So that vendor goes out of business, yet the software they sold you is still closed source and you don't own the patent. So you band-aid what you can to make it work because the band-aids are cheaper than buying another 40,000 seats of another product.

Sometimes, it's a positive. That out-of-date software does EXACTLY what is needed for your business, and nothing within a cost effective range comes close to its capabilities. The OS evolved around and beyond it, but the software itself is rock solid. Its benefit to the business by far outweighs whatever bells and whistles might come with the new OS.

That greenscreen TLO I mentioned before? It only got offlined after 16 years of use because the cost of maintaining the tapes, library, software, and Iron Mountain contract finally exceeded the cost/benefit of having multiple NASes networked in different parts of the country. Replacing a 4+TB drive when it died had dropped below using tape media and shipping it offsite.

/ot
Click to expand...

Wang,

You obviously work for some serious enterprise company. ;) To you point about iPads,when I worked for Sun Microsystems (back in the glory days,) there was a saying that for every dollar the customer spent on hardware (with Sun), he spent 3-5 on software (with other vendors). And the customer might spend up to 10 for professional services (again not with Sun).
 
M76 said:
W98SE was a broken piece of garbage. I had to switch back to 98 and I used that until I switched to XP eventually. SE was almost as bad as ME, only with less bloat.


And you had your wife and daugther on vista? That's torture.

No way I'm taking your word for anything after reading that.
Click to expand...

Not only did you bring a belligerent attitude with you, but you brought ignorance and FUD as well. No worries, I'll set you straight.

1. Windows 98 SE is NOTHING like you described. 98 was crap, as was ME and even 95 to a large extent. 98SE was the version of windows that actually worked. Go ahead and look up all of the bugs that were fixed in 98SE. They were not trivial... leave your system on for 50 consecutive days? Not guaranteed with 98, the PC would probably crash (http://www.cnet.com/news/windows-may-crash-after-49-7-days/). 98SE had this fixed, though.

The fact is, MANY businesses continued to use 98SE until the XP service pack 1 days.

2. Using Vista is not torture. It's not optimal, but many would say it is far better than the start-menu-less 8 or 8.1 are. I offered both of them a free alternative, such as Ubuntu or another linux distro, but they wanted to continue to use Windows. Ok then, they'd have to wait for a free upgrade or the replacement of their hardware, assuming it came with a new Windows. It was not worth paying $100 a system to upgrade Vista to 7, when those two perform nearly the same (after years of Vista patches).

I ended up upgrading Vista Pro to Windows 10 Pro for no cost on the machines, by way of both family members joining the insider program, upgrading Vista to Windows 7 temporarily, and then immediately upgrading to 10. Both have since left the insider program and are now running 10 fully activated. Hell, I'm typing this on my wife's PC now, as a matter of fact.

Don't mind me, though. You can just continue on in your dream world where 98SE was a horrible operating system and having a start menu (Vista) is somehow worse than not (8/8.1).
 
WangChung said:
The other issue is, as said before, adherence to state and federal regulations such as HIPAA. Sure, there's plenty of shiny, open sourced software that could be used, but that means it's... OPEN! Not very good when trying to maintain privacy of healthcare records.

Example: A while back, our company spent over $1m on iPads for field nurses to basically use as virtual patient charts. It wasn't just the cost of the hardware, but also hiring the devs to support the apps and integration into our infrastructure. Just on the hardware alone, they spent 3-4 times the cost buying an iPad vs buying an Android tablet. Yet again, adherence to regulations, and closed source (unfortunately) does that better in most cases.

There's also the differentiation between a "business" license for things like software and a "corporate/enterprise" license. There has to be a cost analysis of buying 40,000 seats for a piece of software, and the vendor health is taken into account. However, the digital age moves significantly faster, and a lot of software companies that were around 10 years ago just no longer exist. So that vendor goes out of business, yet the software they sold you is still closed source and you don't own the patent. So you band-aid what you can to make it work because the band-aids are cheaper than buying another 40,000 seats of another product.

Sometimes, it's a positive. That out-of-date software does EXACTLY what is needed for your business, and nothing within a cost effective range comes close to its capabilities. The OS evolved around and beyond it, but the software itself is rock solid. Its benefit to the business by far outweighs whatever bells and whistles might come with the new OS.

That greenscreen TLO I mentioned before? It only got offlined after 16 years of use because the cost of maintaining the tapes, library, software, and Iron Mountain contract finally exceeded the cost/benefit of having multiple NASes networked in different parts of the country. Replacing a 4+TB drive when it died had dropped below using tape media and shipping it offsite.

/ot
Click to expand...

Wow, closed source as reference for security? With open source the company/government can audit every piece of code themselves to see if it contains security problems. Open source does not mean unsecure. Although the distribution model of Android has made it very open for attacks, but that's not because it's open source.
 
I work as an Director of IT for a private school here in Seattle. We are starting to deploy Windows 10 Enterprise on all new laptops, sticking with Windows 7 Pro on all older machines until they reach end of life. Or if the OS blows up, we will switch them to 10.

We are still evaluating Windows 10 for Education.
 
B00nie said:
Wow, closed source as reference for security? With open source the company/government can audit every piece of code themselves to see if it contains security problems. Open source does not mean unsecure. Although the distribution model of Android has made it very open for attacks, but that's not because it's open source.
Click to expand...

Turns out that Open Source = Better Security isn't as great as it sounds. There is the potential that people can review the source for security-related issue, but that doesn't mean that people do. If you were a Linux volunteer, which woudl give you more satisfaction? Adding some new features that got accepted into the next kernel, or spending hours looking for buffer overflows, etc., etc?
 
I am still a bit miffed that there are no RSAT tools. Everything else is golden.
 
We were slow at work for a while and I made Windows 10 my main OS for 3.5 weeks at work. I spend most of my day in a parametric 3d modeling environment and drilling into network shares in explorer.

Windows 10 was sufficiently stable. Nvidia's Quadro drivers were still in need of some refinement. Most of what I like about windows 10 is the visuals..but there really isn't a practical up side for me.

The thing i noticed is that little changes in windows search (from start menu) made it slower for me to drill in to network shared folders. In Win7 and 8, I can get to a deeply buried shared folder in fewer keystrokes than in windows 10. As much as I do this in a day, it can be quiet a slow down. So I stopped using windows search for that, and started going win+r and drilling down into folders the old school way. (I try to do this as much as possible by keyboard to give my hand some relief from the mouse grip)

As far as virtual desktops go, I don't have much need for them. At work I have three good sized monitors that give me more than enough screen real estate. Though, I if I was on a single monitor, virtual desktops would be a must for multitasking.

The thing I am a real stickler for is speed and responsiveness. Which I've felt Windows 10 has been a downgrade for on all systems I've tried. Things like responsiveness of windows search, and startup/shutdown. I know those sound like small things to gripe about. But they are my pet peeves I guess. I've become very spoiled by Windows 8.1's obscenely fast cold boot times and seamless shutdown process. With windows 10, there's like an added 30 seconds of services getting killed off before the damn OS stops. Worse if there's and update to finsh.

Lastly, the real nail in the coffin for me using Windows 10 as a work machine is the forced updates. Unfortunately, right now we don't have resources to setup a WSUS sever. Even if we did, I'm not sure a server 2012/2008 box could be setup to control windows 10 updates. The forced updates wouldn't be much of a concern with me if they'd simply limit them to security/essential updates only. But forcing drivers down people's throats is asking for problems.

Windows 10 is supposed to get a major update in the fall. So I'm going to wait until then to see if my concerns are better addressed. As well, I'm really wanting to see how Server 2016 shapes up.
 
doublejack said:
Not only did you bring a belligerent attitude with you, but you brought ignorance and FUD as well. No worries, I'll set you straight.

1. Windows 98 SE is NOTHING like you described. 98 was crap, as was ME and even 95 to a large extent. 98SE was the version of windows that actually worked. Go ahead and look up all of the bugs that were fixed in 98SE. They were not trivial... leave your system on for 50 consecutive days? Not guaranteed with 98, the PC would probably crash (http://www.cnet.com/news/windows-may-crash-after-49-7-days/). 98SE had this fixed, though.

The fact is, MANY businesses continued to use 98SE until the XP service pack 1 days.

2. Using Vista is not torture. It's not optimal, but many would say it is far better than the start-menu-less 8 or 8.1 are. I offered both of them a free alternative, such as Ubuntu or another linux distro, but they wanted to continue to use Windows. Ok then, they'd have to wait for a free upgrade or the replacement of their hardware, assuming it came with a new Windows. It was not worth paying $100 a system to upgrade Vista to 7, when those two perform nearly the same (after years of Vista patches).

I ended up upgrading Vista Pro to Windows 10 Pro for no cost on the machines, by way of both family members joining the insider program, upgrading Vista to Windows 7 temporarily, and then immediately upgrading to 10. Both have since left the insider program and are now running 10 fully activated. Hell, I'm typing this on my wife's PC now, as a matter of fact.

Don't mind me, though. You can just continue on in your dream world where 98SE was a horrible operating system and having a start menu (Vista) is somehow worse than not (8/8.1).
Click to expand...

I've found its not worth discussing vista with people, vista ushered in the secure windows era.. it doesn't get nearly the credit it deserves.. Windows 7 was pretty much vista with a better start menu..
 
H-street said:
I've found its not worth discussing vista with people, vista ushered in the secure windows era.. it doesn't get nearly the credit it deserves.. Windows 7 was pretty much vista with a better start menu..
Click to expand...

HA. HA HA HA .....

sorry but thats a bit over the top dont you think ?

while Microsoft tried to makes vista more secure all they ended up doing was making a mess of the operating system.

i still wonder in amazement at vista machines that just run so slow compared to their windows xp counterparts.

vistas performance penalty was just unacceptable.

i know there is people who argue that they can run vista just fine . but i have seen the difference far to many times when down or upgrading from vista to either xp or 7 to even lend any credibility to their arguments.

i also bought vista ultimate and even tried to use it on my main computer while it worked, almost every task i performed on it was slower than xp . especially file transfers . and since i do a lot of those vista was maddening.

so no vista does not deserve any praise when something is bad it should be judged as such .

just like win me, vista was poorly executed.


and deserves it poor reputation, what redeeming features it may have had are overshadowed by its poor performance.
 
x509 said:
Turns out that Open Source = Better Security isn't as great as it sounds. There is the potential that people can review the source for security-related issue, but that doesn't mean that people do. If you were a Linux volunteer, which woudl give you more satisfaction? Adding some new features that got accepted into the next kernel, or spending hours looking for buffer overflows, etc., etc?
Click to expand...

Turns out in which way exactly? You have some sort of proof? Studies that have been made have shown that open source code contained on average only a fraction of the errors found in the closed source examples they reviewed. That doesn't mean it's 100% perfect, even NASA can't get bugless software out, at least not all the time.
 
As far as vista goes, I thought the performance improved substantially with SP1. Like 8 to 8.1 and 98 ->98SE, it was pretty shaky at release. A year (give or take) after initial release, MS finally had the OS they intended to release. Win7 was more like Vista SP3...

Seems to be a pretty consistent pattern really. Windows 10 as it sits, to me, isn't worth really evaluating until next year.

The biggest shift is windows as a service...I really want to know more about licencing and server management before I jump in all the way with windows 10. And I expect that, at some point, they'll concede some control over windows update. Right now, Windows 10 is a wobbly chair you bought at wal-mart.
 
I work on the helpdesk for a building controls company. We haven't really talked about Windows 10 much but I suspect that we will be taking our time and only rolling it out to a few individuals to start. Some of our developers have been asking for it, and some of them have already monkeyed with it on VMs using their msdn accounts. We haven't yet rolled out any Window 10 Enterprise installs yet.
 
Yes.
Have on 3 and sometime soon a 4th machine
Work is switching over too - along with a move to Office 2016 (Sep)
 
Until all of our clients upgrade their Cisco and SonicWALL routers so that their VPN clients are compatible with Windows 10, no. A big fat no. Which is a shame because I would actually like to use it on my work laptop.
 
H-street said:
I've found its not worth discussing vista with people, vista ushered in the secure windows era.. it doesn't get nearly the credit it deserves.. Windows 7 was pretty much vista with a better start menu..
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree with you there. However, it's the educated but uncool angle to take.

Thing is most of MS's operating systems are and have been pretty rock solid.

You just have to know what you are doing. Unfortunately, many here just think they do, cos they have some pretty lights in their case or similar crap.:rolleyes:
 
x509 said:
What do you wife, daughter, and friends think of W 10?
Click to expand...

My kids were annoyed with me for upgrading their pc to 10, but I needed at least one machine in the house to play with it. I've since reverted it to 7.

I've had only 2 service calls from users that upgraded to 10 needing to revert. Reverting was fairly painless. No plans on rolling out 10 to replace the W7 machines I support at my businesses. Of course my businesses are in the business of getting work done instead of playing with a new OS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top