Yeah MS should've made their products incentivizing purchases before releasing a version of Windows saying "HEY GUYS REMEMBER ALL THOSE MICROSOFT DEVICES YOU DON'T HAVE? NOW THEY CAN DO MORE WITH WINDOWS 10"!
That said, I am enjoying the W10 TP . And MS does have an audience, gamers. They've always been forced to upgrade before everyone else since new DX versions are tied to Windows releases.
MS better be careful that Vulkan doesn't overtake them, though. Source 2 will be using it, and it's multiplatform unlike DX12. Will work on stuff besides 10.
Reading some of the posts I'm under impression that good OS means pretty pictures and stuff like that. Like I should sit whole day and look at desktop with bunch of thingies churning numbers or text. I gave up on gadgets in W7 because I have seen desktop only couple of times a day for about 3 seconds.
I also wouldn't give a rats tail for popular thinking if this or that device is good for me or not or how popular or not they are. Nokia used to make some of the best mobile phones and now they are "lost cause" ? Why, because of windows on them ? Android is as clunky system as they come and iPhone is overvalued piece of garbage.
My ideal OS would be just bare essentials with ability to ad to it what I want or need. Like this I spend more time cleaning, uninstalling and deleting stuff than adding programs and Apps after OS installation.
For me, I subjectively perceive the Windows 7 system design to be vastly superior in comparison with subsequent releases of Windows; however, I am acutely aware that my perception cannot be regarded as "univeral truth". We can utilise statistical a priori methods to quantify what a user may perceive to be the more useful and/or aesthetically pleasing operating system; however, I believe this to be meaningless since voluminosity is not the measure of importance.