Today Microsoft Starts the Most Aggressive Windows 10 Upgrade Campaign

dencal said:

Its all about efficient housekeeping, being cost effective, I suppose you could blame the bean counters for trying to run a controlled fiscal policy to the detriment of W7/8.1 users, ie- cutting down on operating costs.
As a comparison car manufacturing changes every year, and spares and support are only available for a limited time, all being done to keep costs under control.
I do believe that people should have their preferred O/S choice, which they do, but also understand the reason for the annoying M$ nag.

It's also about making it a lot easier on the developers/programmers now only having to work on one core piece of code rather than many. Code/Test one time is a lot easier than having to test changes over many parts of code.. I know from personal experience.

SonicMojo said:

Exactly. If the general public were so hot to get Windows 10 on their computers - Microsoft would actually be "selling" this OS for actual cash rather than foisting some free crap on the masses.

I don't see Apple forcing a free iPhone on me when a new one comes out.

Sonic

Why are you comparing an OS update to a Hardware upgrade?

lx07 said:

You could right click and delete it [Windows.old} but you'd have to take ownership and grant yourself authority first.

If you do nothing it will disappear after 30 days or so anyway.

Now the last line I never knew. That's good to know. Is that Windows 10 specific?

SonicMojo said:

I was merely comparing tech "product" to tech "product". Or "I gotta have it - because it's so good". Could be anything out there.

Bottom line - any company should be "selling" any so called hot, desirable products that they offer. Clearly this one is not.

As soon as you dumb something down to "free" - the value of said item is perceived to be almost nothing.

Sonic

So where does the comparison to Apple come in?

OSX & IOS are both free, same as Windows

BunnyJ said:

It's more based on the desire of MS to move people over to 10 so they can cut back on the current support for 7/8 so they can save money. With 10 they are saving money in development by having it the base platform for all of the products they support.

But, it's a tad aggressive.

I can imagine more layoffs down the road (for phone-in support staff and development). I wonder if they are successful in getting more users to Windows 10 sooner than they expected, if they would pare down the terms of extended phase support for Windows 7 and 8.1. Could they shorten the lifecycle? I mean EULAs and other agreements are always "subject to change, aren't they?

markweatherill said:

The remaining users of XP wonder what all the fuss is about...

markweatherill said:

The remaining users of XP wonder what all the fuss is about...

They might for now. But the clock is really ticking for XP. Right now, it's still workable. We have a machine at run using Firefox v44 and it works with all of our web apps. That's pretty good for two years post-support. But Google Chrome pulls the plug in April, and Firefox will eventually be compiled with a newer version of Visual Studio that won't include support flags for XP.

That's already the case for 64-bit compilers. You need Windows 7 at least, so even x64 builds of Firefox are a no go for XP and Vista. And Pale Moon (which had an x64 build for XP) has removed support for Windows XP x64 Edition. So for me, it's a done deal. After all, if I had ever wanted to go back to Windows XP, it would ONLY be the x64 Edition. It was remarkably stable if you had supported hardware.