[kadajawi]

I don't think most casual computer users understand this. I imagine the few MS users in the entertainment industry will finally switch to MAC instead of upgrading to Windows 10.

I can't imagine enterprise users that deal with sensitive information are going to blindly allow MS to tamper with their installs either and if MS loses enterprise to Apple, it's done. It's the one market that Apple hasn't been able to supplant MS in. In addition, if software developers find that their products are constantly being made to appear unreliable due to MS updates they will stop developing for Windows in order to preserve their own reputations. Many developers already refuse to subject their products to the myriad hardware configurations inherent in the Windows ecosystem on order to insure their software works reliably across a large user base.

People in the entertainment industry are switching from Mac to Windows Windows runs better, has better software, ...

And I am sure Microsoft has talked to enterprises, they aren't stupid. They know their core business.

Oh yeah, and guess what. Macs are full of security holes. Apple is notoriously bad at updating their OS, taking forever to provide patches. And they don't push the updates onto users. Which means if Macs ever reach critical mass, if they ever turn into viable targets for hackers, Mac users are going to get screwed really hard. Think Windows in the 90s or early 00s. Even worse, because the attackers are much more focused on extortion and making money than they used to be. Macs only have been relatively safe because they haven't been a big enough target.

---

Last edited by kadajawi; 08-04-2015 at 02:55 AM.

[atupdate]

You know how the FBI is always whining about how Apple is keeping it's customers data private? Maybe this is why...

Windows 10 comes with built-in spyware. If your work requires confidentiality, DO NOT INSTALL.

Here is an article to help plug the Windows 10 privacy problems.

Windows 10 privacy problems: Here’s how bad they are, and how to plug them.

Tim

[csa]

Tim, great link, thanks!

When I have to get a new computer, I have a question; when I bought my current desktop, it was just before the launch of W7. Upgrade to 7 was free, and I still have the 7 installation DVD. Can this be used, rather than going with W10? What about all the updates accumulated since 7 launched, I would have to install them also, wouldn't I? What do all of you recommend?

[vonBaloney]

Tim, great link, thanks!

When I have to get a new computer, I have a question; when I bought my current desktop, it was just before the launch of W7. Upgrade to 7 was free, and I still have the 7 installation DVD. Can this be used, rather than going with W10? What about all the updates accumulated since 7 launched, I would have to install them also, wouldn't I? What do all of you recommend?

Well Win7 is definitely better than Vista (pre-Win7), so yeah I'd do that (if the upgrade will still work, somewhat doubtful) and get all the updates. (I would have done it a long time ago -- Vista, eeeck.) If you bring it up to date (SP1), you'll be eligible for the free Win10 upgrade also (for the next year). If you don't want to do that, Win7 will have basic support for a number of more years.

[csa]

if the upgrade will still work, somewhat doubtful) and get all the updates. (I would have done it a long time ago -- Vista, eeeck.

I wondered if the upgrade would still work. I don't know why most don't like Vista; I've not had any problems with it at all! I'd probably just go with W10, when I have to upgrade my computer.

[kadajawi]

You won't have a 7 license for your new computer. That license is already blocked by your current computer that came with Vista and 7.

However it might be possible to use the 10 license to install 7.

[csa]

When the time comes for a new computer, I'll just go with W10, to save a bunch of confusion for me.

[MD Optofonik]

People in the entertainment industry are switching from Mac to Windows

I'm not seeing that in my part of the world, ymmv.

[osv]

I'm not seeing that in my part of the world, ymmv.

not sure how long you've been in the biz, or if you even really are, but it happened big time with fcpx: "There's Nothing Pro about Final Cut Pro X
FCPX fails because Apple insists on controlling the experience, something that doesn't work with a professional audience." There's Nothing Pro about Final Cut Pro X - Streaming Media Magazine

apple lost a sizable chunk of market share with that debacle, people where jumping ship for premiere pro all over the place.

then pp went subscription, and because of that a few people jumped back to an improved version of fcpx.

i fiddled with fcp on a hackintosh, but there is no way that i'll ever use apple in any situation... not phone, not computer, etc.

vegas pro has been a rocky road, but that's what i settled on years ago.

[kadajawi]

not sure how long you've been in the biz, or if you even really are, but it happened big time with fcpx: "There's Nothing Pro about Final Cut Pro X
FCPX fails because Apple insists on controlling the experience, something that doesn't work with a professional audience." There's Nothing Pro about Final Cut Pro X - Streaming Media Magazine

apple lost a sizable chunk of market share with that debacle, people where jumping ship for premiere pro all over the place.

then pp went subscription, and because of that a few people jumped back to an improved version of fcpx.

i fiddled with fcp on a hackintosh, but there is no way that i'll ever use apple in any situation... not phone, not computer, etc.

vegas pro has been a rocky road, but that's what i settled on years ago.

You don't HAVE to use CC, you can also use CS6, which is perfectly fine and will be for quite a while. And then there's Avid, Edius, Vegas, Hitfilm and many many more that are really good. Many of those not available on Mac. Also for content creation powerful hardware is necessary, and if you want that from Apple you really need to spend. The Mac Pro is expensive and very limited, you'll end up with a trash can on the desk + a ton of devices hanging from it. A PC that is just as powerful can have everything inside the box, and costs significantly less. And what justifies the price tag? Most software runs on Windows before it runs on Mac (though there is this new Photoshop alternative which does only run on Mac...). Apple has pretty much stopped making professional content creation software, they are aiming at consumers these days. Windows is not the crappy, unstable and dangerous OS anymore it was in the 90s. It is mature, stable, fast, easy to use and if kept up to date pretty damn safe.

You don't want Windows to phone home? Fine. Windows 10 doesn?t offer much privacy by default: Here?s how to fix it [Updated] | Ars Technica UK

[bossa]

Here is an article to help plug the Windows 10 privacy problems.

Windows 10 privacy problems: Here’s how bad they are, and how to plug them.

Tim

NSA has embedded spyware in Hard Drives that cannot be removed:
Spyware Linked To NSA Discovered In Hard Drives Across World | The Daily Caller

[kadajawi]

Yeah. The NSA is the big issue here.

Anyway, as I go through Windows 10 I also discover features that improve privacy... you can deactivate your microphone and camera, or select which programs are allowed to access it. And as for the spying features of Windows... you can deactivate pretty much all of them. Not sure where the problem is. Would it be nice to have to opt-in? Yes. But opt-out works for me, too.

Oh yeah, and being able to tell Windows that the current WiFi network is metered, so you want it to be frugal with data usage is pretty awesome. As are many things.

It clearly is the best version of Windows, with plenty of usability improvements etc. Is it perfect? No. I hate to have to wait for the start menu for example to load before I can type the name of a program... And there are bugs. Otherwise though... best Windows ever.

[rawr]

MS seems hell bent on their self destruction

As a long-time MS user (and yes, another Win-95 beta tester too. And NT beta tester. And I was even in on the ill-fated Microsoft Network beta, and have a T-shirt to prove it ) I am starting to agree. Old MS was run by some amazing software engineers and impressive managers. The new MS bosses (inc the ones who acquired Nokia at huge expense and have run it into the ground) seem less capable. Windows 8 in particular was a serious failure of strategy, design and implementation. I am optimistic about Windows 10, but will upgrade a test PC before I upgrade any critical PCs.

And yes, I always set Windows to notify me about updates, but ask me about which ones to install. It's routine for updates to fail, and often Windows needs some human guidance to get the update process right.

[kadajawi]

As a long-time MS user (and yes, another Win-95 beta tester too. And NT beta tester. And I was even in on the ill-fated Microsoft Network beta, and have a T-shirt to prove it ) I am starting to agree. Old MS was run by some amazing software engineers and impressive managers. The new MS bosses (inc the ones who acquired Nokia at huge expense and have run it into the ground) seem less capable. Windows 8 in particular was a serious failure of strategy, design and implementation. I am optimistic about Windows 10, but will upgrade a test PC before I upgrade any critical PCs.

And yes, I always set Windows to notify me about updates, but ask me about which ones to install. It's routine for updates to fail, and often Windows needs some human guidance to get the update process right.

I don't think old MS was that capable. They were anti-competitive bullies (like Google is now). They released software that shouldn't even carry the beta status (Windows Meh?!). It improved since 2000, then XP, but those days it was still pretty bad, they didn't know how to do a good UI. That has improved a lot with Vista, 7, 8 and 10. And ever since Vista the hardware requirements have gone down, which is quite impressive IMHO. The person responsible for 8 was fired/left the company as it got clear that he screwed up with his "everything is going to be a tablet!" idea. That was stupid. I don't understand why Ballmer didn't intervene. But 10 is actually very smart, with an UI that adapts to the hardware. It looks different on my 10" netbook with low res screen than it does on my proper laptop. On a tablet it would again look different. etc. It's the the anti-8. 8 done right, understanding that different hardware requires different UIs.

While there are some bad decisions with 10, they are in the minority. They are doing a lot right here.

As for Nokia... it was run into the ground by the Nokia management that decided to stick to Symbian long after Symbian was done. The engineers and management who thought hardware that was barely good enough for the software was good enough, when the others used excessively fast hardware to create a fluid and pleasant user experience. Nokia did A TON of things wrong, and that put them into the position MS found them in. When MS bought them they tried really hard to fix it all (MS having f***ed up too by sticking for too long with Windows Mobile, for not getting the enterprise portion right with the first iteration of Windows Phone, for limiting the software too much for really no reason apart from keeping things simple (you can't set the volume of ringtones separately from the volume of music playback etc.?!). The problem is that WP7, while pretty good, was too late. And what I fault MS for now is not offering flagship phones (why?!). Otherwise they are doing plenty of things right. Windows Phone 10 is impressive, and it might actually change their fate. The ability to run a rather full fledged Windows on your phone, just plug in a monitor, mouse and keyboard, that is impressive. Now if Windows Phone 10 merges further with Windows 10, and gains x86 support, then we're talking. Atom CPUs have become quite reasonable in the latest generation, AND they are put into phones. Microsoft needs to make x86 based phones for business users, that can run all sorts of regular Windows programs. For employees that need to work from home too, but that don't need a super fast computer, this would give them continuity between home and office, they can have a dock at home and in the office that connects to keyboard, mouse and monitor. The PowerPoint they created? Just connect the phone to a projector and you're good to go. No need for a laptop.

The prospect of having a full fledged computer, running Lightroom or Photoshop, inside my phone, sounds great. USB Type C is of course a requirement then, so that docks can be offered.

Had MS continued on their old path I would have seen doom and gloom for them (Microsoft is DOOMED!), but they found their mojo again, they are experimenting, daring, innovating. Exactly what they need to do. I just hope they don't give up on Windows Phone.

[osv]

i just got a lumia 640 that's scheduled for win10, looking forward to trying it out.

$79 at walmart, free unlock with at&t, as long as you don't need a bunch of apps, win 8.2 on a phone is lean and mean on less hardware than android bloatware could ever survive on.

the popularity of android has made it a prime target for hackers, everything from those chinese flashlight spyware apps to full-on financial malware:

"According to the report, in the mobile networks, “Android devices have now caught up to Windows laptops as the primary workhorse of cybercrime.” The infection rates between Android and Windows devices now split 50/50 in 2014, said the report.

This may be hardly a surprise to those familiar with Android security. There are three issues. First, the volume of Android devices shipped in 2014 is so huge that it makes a juicy target for cyber criminals. Second, Android is based on an open platform. Third, Android allows users to download apps from third-party stores where apps are not consistently verified and controlled.

In contrast, the report said that less than 1% of infections come from iPhone and Blackberry smartphones. The report, however, quickly added that this data doesn’t prove that iPhones are immune to malware." Android to Become 'Workhorse' of Cybercrime | EE Times