# Is this legit?



## Ruby (May 10, 2002)

I just had an icon pop up on the bottom bar by the date and time that say I can reserve a free upgrade to windows 10 when it comes out later this year. Has anyone else had this. It is for windows 7 and 8. I want to make sure it's liget before I click on it to reserve windows 10.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Ruby said:


> I just had an icon pop up on the bottom bar by the date and time that say I can reserve a free upgrade to windows 10 when it comes out later this year. Has anyone else had this. It is for windows 7 and 8. I want to make sure it's liget before I click on it to reserve windows 10.


It is.
http://www.engadget.com/2015/06/01/windows-10-july-29/


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

Got it today and dismissed!


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

painterswife said:


> It is.
> http://www.engadget.com/2015/06/01/windows-10-july-29/


A lot of people will be doing this when 10 comes out 10 is much much better.

10 IS what 8 Should have been~!


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

I decided to pass on the Windows 10 upgrade and deleted the upgrade link since Windows 8.1 works fine for me with no conflicts with the sites that I visit and will be supported for security updates through the next 8 years.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Shrek said:


> I decided to pass on the Windows 10 upgrade


You have a year to decide. It will be a free upgrade to everyone, even people running pirated versions of Windows, for a year. Microsoft thinks they can convince everyone to want to be fully-licensed Windows users. We'll see...

I got the Windows 10 promotional banner in my Windows Update also. I don't see why anyone would need to "reserve" it though. It's going to be an online upgrade. When you can just download it I don't understand why anyone needs a reservation.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

I will only upgrade when the Sys admin where I retired from advises to as she has recently tweaked my 8.1 o/s for me and isn't totally comfortable with some of the background processes of the 10 beta she has been checking out.

That aside, I have to wonder why if 10 is supposed to have the features that should have been a part of 8/8.1 and the upgrade is no charge , why don't they simply tweak the 8/8.1 with normal updates instead of the digital version of an in your face hard sell of 10 as if they were a used car salesman pushing a junker with a new $50 paint job.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Shrek said:


> I will only upgrade when the Sys admin where I retired from advises to as she has recently tweaked my 8.1 o/s for me and isn't totally comfortable with some of the background processes of the 10 beta she has been checking out.
> 
> That aside, I have to wonder why if 10 is supposed to have the features that should have been a part of 8/8.1 and the upgrade is no charge , why don't they simply tweak the 8/8.1 with normal updates instead of the digital version of an in your face hard sell of 10 as if they were a used car salesman pushing a junker with a new $50 paint job.


Because 10 has a new Browser and is the start of the End for IE, that is why.

A brand new browser will be in the very near future and IE will go Bye Bye. And because IE is a interlaced so much into the OS you can't just Tweak 8/8.1 to have the end results be getting rid of IE .


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

arabian knight said:


> Because 10 has a new Browser and is the start of the End for IE, that is why.
> 
> A brand new browser will be in the very near future and IE will go Bye Bye. And because IE is a interlaced so much into the OS you can't just Tweak 8/8.1 to have the end results be getting rid of IE .


 Or the new o/s will be a flop as ME and 2000 was . As soon as the device toy sector finishes the extended beta the network admins will better understand the feasibility of it and if they want to use it in their primary networks over the next few years.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

I've been running it for a few months on my home computer. Even as a beta test, I personally think it's superior to Windows 8/8.1. I'll upgrade soon as I can.

(Then again, as an IT pro, I kinda HAVE to know about the OS so I can fix issues when others have them. LOL)


----------



## WhyNot (Jun 21, 2011)

I've been running Windows 10 since last November. It was pretty cool then and got cooler as time went on, device drivers are the big one. It wasn't until recently until some of my newer accessories such as headsets and mice were functioning properly in it but legacy devices worked immediately. Which would have been great if I had old equipment. I had to dig up an old wired optical mouse and an old headset and use those for a few months. I think in April I was able to use the newer equipment finally.

It's getting there.

I'm not sure how I feel about Spartan, now renamed Edge....the new browser. It works fine when I'm browsing the internet but on the company internal network going to internal sites that have IRM, DLP and other security it doesn't work as well. This may just be a browser security setting I haven't bothered to tweak yet but we have been piloting "out of box" scenarios and giving the developers a lot of feedback.

Microsoft has built in really easy ways to give feedback for all of their software now, so I encourage any early adopters to go ahead and tell them about all issues and pains you run into with either Win10, Edge, Office...whatever. They really are paying attention to that.


----------



## WhyNot (Jun 21, 2011)

Nevada said:


> I don't see why anyone would need to "reserve" it though. It's going to be an online upgrade. When you can just download it I don't understand why anyone needs a reservation.


The "reservation" is mostly to project use. MSFT loves information and digesting statistics.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

I upgraded to 10 on my everyday use laptop about 2 weeks ago.

Frankly, I think Windows 10 is what SHOULD have been released instead of Windows 8/8.1. It's faster, a bit more simple to use, that *stupid* full-screen 'Metro' style start menu is no longer, etc.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

I personally dont see point to using more resource hungry operating system UNLESS one needs it for a specific purpose. Most household pc's are far more powerful than what most people use them for. But we are pushed and prodded to upgrade cause nobody makes software for the older systems. And frankly one needs a modern browser. And modern browsers, even if they will install on older systems, require more memory than older hardware provides. Its not just the operating system, its the software you have to run on the operating system that also has memory requirements. Sad day when Opera browser abandoned its independent memory thrifty ways that allowed it to run on very old low memory machines and became a Chrome clone. Now there is just Firefox and Chrome as only full service independent browsers.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

HermitJohn said:


> I personally dont see point to using more resource hungry operating system UNLESS one needs it for a specific purpose.


I think we can all look forward to Windows being with us for the foreseeable future. Businesses are heavily invested in Microsoft Office, so that means they'll use either Windows or Mac. I don't see them going to Mac, and I don't see them going to MS Office-compatible alternatives. Their people use MS Office on Windows, and businesses are concerned that productivity will take a hit of they go to anything else.

They aren't going to Linux desktops either. Aside from MS Office not being available for Linux, there are too many Linux desktops to work on for any one product to become competitive with Windows or OS X. Say what you will about Linux desktops, but none are mature products. Besides, Linux was developed by geeks for geeks. The concept of user-friendliness has never been much of a consideration.

Face it, we're stuck with Windows.


----------



## Sumatra (Dec 5, 2013)

After seeing 8, I have absolutely no faith in their ability to make good future versions. Gonna be sticking with 7 for a while.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Nevada said:


> I think we can all look forward to Windows being with us for the foreseeable future. Businesses are heavily invested in Microsoft Office, so that means they'll use either Windows or Mac. I don't see them going to Mac, and I don't see them going to MS Office-compatible alternatives. Their people use MS Office on Windows, and businesses are concerned that productivity will take a hit of they go to anything else.
> 
> They aren't going to Linux desktops either. Aside from MS Office not being available for Linux, there are too many Linux desktops to work on for any one product to become competitive with Windows or OS X. Say what you will about Linux desktops, but none are mature products. Besides, Linux was developed by geeks for geeks. The concept of user-friendliness has never been much of a consideration.
> 
> Face it, we're stuck with Windows.


Interestingly I didnt mention linux or mac. Heck even DOS or win3.1 would be perfectly usable IF there was a modern browser for them.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

HermitJohn said:


> Interestingly I didnt mention linux or mac. Heck even DOS or win3.1 would be perfectly usable IF there was a modern browser for them.


You would have a hard time finding compatible software and hardware for DOS or Win 3.1. There would also be the problem of unpatched vulnerabilities throughout the system, so using it online wouldn't be a good idea.

Realistically our choices are Windows (Vista or newer), OS X, and Linux.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Nevada said:


> You would have a hard time finding compatible software and hardware for DOS or Win 3.1. There would also be the problem of unpatched vulnerabilities throughout the system, so using it online wouldn't be a good idea.
> 
> Realistically our choices are Windows (Vista or newer), OS X, and Linux.


First DOS doesnt have a gui interface or need for any hardware drivers just to run, so it will run on any x86 PC. Lot of diagnostic tools are still DOS based. Like that memory test program I ran recently to diagnose memory ram sticks on my desktop computer. 

Second I am not suggesting people move back to DOS or any other operating system.

My point, which you keep wanting to twist to something completely different, is that older systems ON OLDER HARDWARE THAT THEY WERE DESIGNED FOR are needlessly replaced, especially for home use, simply because nobody updates the software for those systems. Planned obsolescence to make money selling new stuff. Frankly except for browser not up to the job on modern web, the older systems ON THE OLDER HARDWARE would meet needs of majority of home users. 

Its amazing for example how efficient some of the old software was. It had to be, simply cause of great limitation of the hardware. Still occasionally see some buisiness using ancient hardware for a singular purpose, just cause it ran a particular piece proprietary software that worked great and still works great, except it wont run on modern systems. They dont need a computer a hundred times faster to do that job, yet are forced to use such cause nobody supports either the old hardware or the old software.

My point again is that you dont need a SUPER COMPUTER to do email and surf the web. Or at least you shouldnt need such. Yet we are sold continuous upgrades we dont need, and people like lemmings line up to hand over their life energy, in form of money, to lap it up. If they dont, they are forced to by lack of support for what they already have.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

HermitJohn said:


> My point again is that you dont need a SUPER COMPUTER to do email and surf the web. Or at least you shouldnt need such. Yet we are sold continuous upgrades we dont need, and people like lemmings line up to hand over their life energy, in form of money, to lap it up. If they dont, they are forced to by lack of support for what they already have.


But you don't have to pay a lot for a good contemporary computer, and I never pay anything for Windows.

I renovate laptops on the side. What I've learned is that most people are going to be more than satisfied with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor, which were popular 5 years ago. That means I can find good off-lease laptops for around $50 at eBay. I have to add a hard drive or SSD, a new battery, and an AC adapter. I can usually do it for under $125. I print a manual and load the laptop with useful applications. It's like new again, and I can double my investment easily.

Windows 7 is a good operating system and will be supported for another 5 years. There is no pressure to go to Windows 10, but also no real motivation to use anything older than Windows 7.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

I agree with so many around now you can easily get a newer updated system for todays things and do it on the cheap. And still be able to use it on all websites that don't support old out dated slow browsers that have not been outfitted with good security patches.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> I agree with so many around now you can easily get a newer updated system for todays things and do it on the cheap.


There's actually a market gap right now. Corporations are still leasing laptops at about the same rate they always have, but a lot of the retail laptop market has gone the way of the tablet computer. That means the supply of off-lease laptops is still about the same as it's been but there's less demand for used laptops. That's how I get used business laptops for $50.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

HermitJohn said:


> I personally dont see point to using more resource hungry operating system UNLESS one needs it for a specific purpose.


That's WHY I like Windows 10. It's faster in every way; the same computer that booted in 12 seconds under 8.1 now boots in 8 under Windows 10.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Kung said:


> That's WHY I like Windows 10. It's faster in every way; the same computer that booted in 12 seconds under 8.1 now boots in 8 under Windows 10.


 True this is what Windows 8 should have been.
Even NASCAR is getting on the Windows 10 bandwagon.
Hendrix Motor Sports which is Dale JR's team is going to Windows 10 and all their computers, and MS will be sponsoring Dale Jr. car for a few races even.
And goodness knows THEY sure want and demand Fast computers.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Kung said:


> the same computer that booted in 12 seconds under 8.1 now boots in 8 under Windows 10.


Boot times like that have got to be using a SSD instead of a hard drive. I get about a 20 second boot with Windows 7 using SSD, but it's more like 2 to 3 minutes with a hard drive.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

Nevada said:


> Boot times like that have got to be using a SSD instead of a hard drive. I get about a 20 second boot with Windows 7 using SSD, but it's more like 2 to 3 minutes with a hard drive.


It is; I took the jump and got a Samsung 850 Evo Pro a while back. Good Lord is it fast.  On top of that it is by *FAR* the most reliable SSD. All other SSD's they tested against sustained a maximum amount of writes around the area of 700Tb or so over time.

It took 2.2 *PETABYTES* for the Samsung drive to die. LOL


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Kung said:


> It is; I took the jump and got a Samsung 850 Evo Pro a while back. Good Lord is it fast.  On top of that it is by *FAR* the most reliable SSD. All other SSD's they tested against sustained a maximum amount of writes around the area of 700Tb or so over time.
> 
> It took 2.2 *PETABYTES* for the Samsung drive to die. LOL


Interesting. I got an Intel SSD drive for similar reasons. Intel recently extended their warranty from 3 to 5 years, while the rest are still 3. I don't know for a fact that there are valid technical reasons for the longer warranty. It may be just a sales gimmick.

I don't see a lot of difference until I help someone with a hard drive. Hard drives are slow to the point where they're frustrating compared to SSD.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Kung said:


> I upgraded to 10 on my everyday use laptop about 2 weeks ago.
> 
> Frankly, I think Windows 10 is what SHOULD have been released instead of Windows 8/8.1. It's faster, a bit more simple to use,_* that *stupid* full-screen 'Metro' style start menu is no longer,*_ etc.


That, alone, makes it worth the upgrade. I haven't like that 'Metro' start menu from Day 1.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Txsteader said:


> That, alone, makes it worth the upgrade. I haven't like that 'Metro' start menu from Day 1.


When I first saw windows 8.0 I couldn't understand what Microsoft was thinking. Evidently there are people at Microsoft who believe that Metro tiles are a better way to organize & provide access to an operating system than a start menu. Maybe so, but they've been conditioning the entire Windows community to use a start menu for 30 years now. You can't really blame us for resisting an abrupt change like that.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I was happy with XP, I would still be using XP if my old pc didn't develop an issue. If 10 is closer to what XP was I will upgrade, maybe. I have the option of going with Linux but have been procrastinating about it.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Nevada said:


> When I first saw windows 8.0 I couldn't understand what Microsoft was thinking. Evidently there are people at Microsoft who believe that Metro tiles are a better way to organize & provide access to an operating system than a start menu. Maybe so, but they've been conditioning the entire Windows community to use a start menu for 30 years now. You can't really blame us for resisting an abrupt change like that.


True. It (tiles style) may be fine for smartphones but leave my PC the way it was. 

Perhaps it's just my prejudice but the tiles seem way less efficient to me.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Txsteader said:


> True. It (tiles style) may be fine for smartphones but leave my PC the way it was.
> 
> Perhaps it's just my prejudice but the tiles seem way less efficient to me.


 Both companies Microsoft and Apple and in the process of mergering their PC side to look and feel and act more like the tablets and phones and iPads. As more and more people swap out PC's for smart phones and tablets and such, and use iPhones and other Smart devices to get their internet access. Can you really blame the companies doing this as more and more smart devices are sold and fewer PC's each and every year are going down and down in sales. Can you blame them? The PC's are getting less and less depended on for the great majority now.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

arabian knight said:


> Both companies Microsoft and Apple and in the process of mergering their PC side to look and feel and act more like the tablets and phones and iPads. As more and more people swap out PC's for smart phones and tablets and such, and use iPhones and other Smart devices to get their internet access. Can you really blame the companies doing this as more and more smart devices are sold and fewer PC's each and every year are going down and down in sales. Can you blame them? The PC's are getting less and less depended on for the great majority now.


Well, although there has been a marked decline in PC sales, they aren't dead quite yet. They each (PCs vs. tablets/smartphones) have their advantages based on use. There are still some things that those portable devices can't do as well as/better than a PC.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Well let me put it this way then. More and more Lap Tops with Touch Screens are being used more so now then Desktop CPU's.
And with the touch screens they the PC makers want the same look and feel that the smart devices have because those are also touch screens on them. Now does that make more sense?
I have a iMac. I now have a special mouse pad that I do most of the same things on my iMac then I can on my iPad. With there use of fingers etc. Magnify, shrink. change pages all with the use of fingers just like people do on their tablets and iPads.
And that is why the merging of PC's (Laptops) and desktops with touch screens and also with smart devices etc.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

No the PC is not dead. Some of the most powerful PC.s which are being used to make movies etc. is the Mac Pro.
Fully loaded and I mean as much as you can stuff into a desktop the price is over 10K dollars.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Txsteader said:


> Well, although there has been a marked decline in PC sales, they aren't dead quite yet. They each (PCs vs. tablets/smartphones) have their advantages based on use. There are still some things that those portable devices can't do as well as/better than a PC.


They shouldn't abandon any market, but there's no reason why they have to develop a one-size-fits-all operating system. They could develop a version for traditional desktop & laptop computers, then have optimized versions for tablets and smart phones.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

arabian knight said:


> Well let me put it this way then. More and more Lap Tops with Touch Screens are being used more so now then Desktop CPU's.
> And with the touch screens they *the PC makers want the same look and feel that the smart devices have *because those are also touch screens on them. Now does that make more sense?


Agreed, but what the public wants is gonna ultimately rule how they make 'em. If I understand correctly, the reason they're going back to the original start screen in Windows 10 is because of user complaints.

Like Nevada said, there's really no reason to completely abandon the PC users just yet.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

If I still had a PC I would not want the start menu to go away. 
I have had a HP with Windows 95 all the way to a Dell with XP. 
But I was lucky I went with a Mac 6 years ago. And Macs have not had a so called Start Menu. But then again I learned on Macs back in the 90's when I worked in AZ. So it was No big deal to go to a iMac and not have That Start Menu. LOL


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> And Macs have not had a so called Start Menu.


Mac OS X has drop-down menus that do similar functions to the Windows start menu. Now, imagine they took your drop-down menus away from you.


----------



## Declan (Jan 18, 2015)

Nevada said:


> You have a year to decide. It will be a free upgrade to everyone, even people running pirated versions of Windows, for a year. Microsoft thinks they can convince everyone to want to be fully-licensed Windows users. We'll see...
> 
> I got the Windows 10 promotional banner in my Windows Update also. I don't see why anyone would need to "reserve" it though. It's going to be an online upgrade. When you can just download it I don't understand why anyone needs a reservation.


I think it has to do with so the windows updater knows whether or not to queue it


----------

