I'm not sure you can compare client and server versions. I expect there to be a bit more work on server OSes (or people won't use them.)
One of my rigs is indeed based on the cpu Microsoft decided to no longer support. I dunno, if Microsoft treats Windows 8.1 as a new OS (seems it does 6.2 vs 6.3) then, I see the logic behind that. Most people see it (and Microsoft itself, see the picture below) however, as a service pack to the original Windows 8 and that's where the problem lies. Microsoft makes you update your computer, since, well this is a free "update". Well, some people simply can't. So they are left, with no other choice but to remain on the OS that only receives security updates, go back to Win7 x64 (which I need to buy obviously) or update to Win8.1 x32, which is of course, not a sound option, if you have to use = > 4gb of RAM.I don't get why people are complaining about the free 8.1 update. Yes, you have to go through the Windows Store or find an ISO. No, you do not need a Microsoft account to install it. If your hardware can run 8, it can run 8.1. There is zero reason not to update. Unless you're running one of the (ancient) CPUs affected by the CMPXCHG16B debacle. In which case you're likely better of sticking with 7...
My 2c.
I don't get why people are complaining about the free 8.1 update. Yes, you have to go through the Windows Store or find an ISO. No, you do not need a Microsoft account to install it. If your hardware can run 8, it can run 8.1. There is zero reason not to update. Unless you're running one of the (ancient) CPUs affected by the CMPXCHG16B debacle. In which case you're likely better of sticking with 7...
My 2c.
NT4 Workstation
Windows 2000 Professional
Had I known of these possible issues 2 years ago, I would have certainly bought another copy of Windows 7 x64 Ultimate. Add insult to injury, that free update in the form of Windows 10 will make me no good, as it seems to sport similar system requirements for the 64-bit edition.
perhaps its time to start investing in or saving towards new hardware? the cost of an additional copy of Win7x64 Ultimate would go a long way towards a new CPU/mobo/ram, where even the most basic/budget oriented parts would leave those original Athlon dual core CPUs well behind
the old CPUs might be fast enough for basic tasks but instruction sets and other features keep improving and ultimately it is advantageous to reposition that minimum baseline so that we're not stuck with software being written to cater to hardware that is over 10 years old
For reference, when Windows stopped supporting 16bit hardware was there a lot of outcry? It doesn't strike me as out of the ordinary to update minimum requirements with new versions of Windows. I don't think anyone should be forced to support 10 year old software OR 10 year old hardware.
That article is actually supposed to be a parody, somehow. It's not actually funny enough for that to be obvious (or rather, it isn't funny at all), and it isn't pointed out anywhere, but it's not a real article.No wonder, even Bill Gates struggled with updating his computer to 8.1. The article doesn't mention what kind of pain he had to go through, though. Well, I am not surprised, it's Steve Ballmer who seemed to mess up the once prosperous Microsoft legacy. He tried at "innovation", but failed. You know the rest. Windows XP is only followed by Windows 7 in terms of success and worldwide recognition, both were made under the leadership of Mr. Gates.
That article is actually supposed to be a parody, somehow. It's not actually funny enough for that to be obvious (or rather, it isn't funny at all), and it isn't pointed out anywhere, but it's not a real article.
To a serious person, none of those are even remotely good reasons not to upgrade.You just listed several.
...
Windows 8, at some point, notifies the user that 8.1 is available through a popup. More importantly, is this a principled objection, an inconvenience, or a reason that one simply wouldn't know the update is available?- Have to go to windows store
If you're the type of DIY type of person who would rather not use the provided installers, which takes care of the tracking down ISOs, making bootable discs, and obtaining a key, sure. Microsoft provides the installer through the Store to make things easy.- Have to find ISO
...
- Heres one you didnt list... it needs a key.
All programs and data are retained. The downside, largely, is that it takes a short while longer to do the re-install.- Have to reinstall for what in the past would just have been a simple service pack
Not for an upgrade. If you've decided to do an install of Windows 8.1 then it's likely you've either installed and configured a new user account on Windows 8 RTM and you'd know how to get around that. Either way, it's already installed at this point anyway making it moot.- Yeah you don't need an MS account but it tries to trick you into thinking you do:
...
You have to click that to get to the button that says "sign in without a microsoft account".
And ongoing support.What does all that hassle get you? A start button without the menu to go with it (lol) and the windows store icon is now on the taskbar. You also get the warm fuzzy feeling of having the latest OS which you can brag to all your friends about.
Yes, there was. People don't like change, and they like buying a new computer even less. There is a lot more work to it than "installing a new OS" for the average person.
Again I will lean towards, this forum is a poor segment of the populous. We lean to the technical side. Even that said, I work in IT, and am absolutely over tweaking, fixing and reinstalling my own stuff. I just want it to work at the end of the day. Not making large changes prevents things breaking. When stuff breaks on my own equipment, I get upset, not happy I get to fiddle with it. And I like and have an in depth knowledge of technology. Unless that shiny new OS comes with the latest buzzword on FB for Fox news, the average joe could care less about upgrades.
This is most peoples mentality.
I thought this was a spelling mistake until I googled it. Out-lee-ur... heh. Still not sure what you're saying after reading the Wikipedia definition of it though.Or perhaps XP was the outlier?
I am finally back up and working again. Took longer than ever before. I typically do a format/fresh install about 1x a year. I have never experienced problems like I did yesterday. In the end, I did a fresh format, Win7 64 SP1 Ultimate install and then ONLY installed my NIC driver. Then I started messing with Windows Update: first I updated Windows Update itself through a separate installer. Then downloaded each and every .NET 3.5.1 standalone update and installed them. And in the end I installed pretty much all critical updates one-by-one. Why did I do all this? I kept getting BSODs (at the same time, every time) while running Windows Update and/or the Windows Update would hang. I even let it sit there during a reboot for over 8 hours (Installing Update 34 of 65...Please not turn off or reboot!)! I could just NOT get Windows Update to install all critical updates smoothly in one sitting. So after formatting and trying again like 4 times, I finally did what I described above on the 5th try with the one-by-one approach with standalone updates. What a PITA!
Win 2K was replaced with Server 2003.
You just listed several.
- Have to go to windows store
- Have to find ISO
- Have to reinstall for what in the past would just have been a simple service pack
- Heres one you didnt list... it needs a key. The installer needs a key, oh but your windows 8 key wont work no no thats too easy, this is a different key. But its not the main windows key its just for the installer.... Any key you find on google will work. Pointless exercise.
- Yeah you don't need an MS account but it tries to trick you into thinking you do:
You have to click that to get to the button that says "sign in without a microsoft account".
What does all that hassle get you? A start button without the menu to go with it (lol) and the windows store icon is now on the taskbar. You also get the warm fuzzy feeling of having the latest OS which you can brag to all your friends about.
In short you get trolled by a multi billion dollar company, that's what windows 8.1 gets you
To a serious person, none of those are even remotely good reasons not to upgrade.
Windows 8, at some point, notifies the user that 8.1 is available through a popup. More importantly, is this a principled objection, an inconvenience, or a reason that one simply wouldn't know the update is available?
If you're the type of DIY type of person who would rather not use the provided installers, which takes care of the tracking down ISOs, making bootable discs, and obtaining a key, sure. Microsoft provides the installer through the Store to make things easy.
All programs and data are retained. The downside, largely, is that it takes a short while longer to do the re-install.
Not for an upgrade. If you've decided to do an install of Windows 8.1 then it's likely you've either installed and configured a new user account on Windows 8 RTM and you'd know how to get around that. Either way, it's already installed at this point anyway making it moot.
And ongoing support.
One of my rigs is indeed based on the cpu Microsoft decided to no longer support. I dunno, if Microsoft treats Windows 8.1 as a new OS (seems it does 6.2 vs 6.3) then, I see the logic behind that. Most people see it (and Microsoft itself, see the picture below) however, as a service pack to the original Windows 8 and that's where the problem lies. Microsoft makes you update your computer, since, well this is a free "update". Well, some people simply can't. So they are left, with no other choice but to remain on the OS that only receives security updates, go back to Win7 x64 (which I need to buy obviously) or update to Win8.1 x32, which is of course, not a sound option, if you have to use = > 4gb of RAM.
Look at it this way, two years ago I bought a piece of software with the intent of using it on that rig. At the time of purchase, it was fully supported and compatible, so I went ahead. But today, I can't update, because this "Service Pack" makes my computer "incompatible". Obviously, the company made new system requirements of the 64-bit edition somewhere "mid-flight", making a lot of people scratching their fingers in one place. Very "forward-thinking" Microsoft, indeed.
No wonder, even Bill Gates struggled with updating his computer to 8.1. The article doesn't mention what kind of pain he had to go through, though. Well, I am not surprised, it's Steve Ballmer who seemed to mess up the once prosperous Microsoft legacy. He tried at "innovation", but failed. You know the rest. Windows XP is only followed by Windows 7 in terms of success and worldwide recognition, both were made under the leadership of Mr. Gates.
Had I known of these possible issues 2 years ago, I would have certainly bought another copy of Windows 7 x64 Ultimate. Add insult to injury, that free update in the form of Windows 10 will make me no good, as it seems to sport similar system requirements for the 64-bit edition.
Oh, yeah. The absolutely easiest way to deal with the whole "Microsoft account required" annoyance, is simply to make sure the computer isn't connected to the internet. Windows will make a local account as standard then. Works on 10 too...
OP check your memory sticks. WU has been using lots of RAM lately, so it might been exposing a real problem.
Watch out guys... Microsoft defense squad is here!
Brand new ASUS Z97-A mobo, brand new Corsair 2x 8GB DDR3, one-year-old Haswell CPU. One-year-old SAMSUNG PRO SSD.
The BSOD occurred exactly the same time twice. Fresh install, installed ALL drivers and then ran WU, clicked UPDATE/INSTALL ALL and then it started and a few updates in would BSOD.
I then changed it up, installed only the NIC driver and then .NET 3.5.1 standalone updates. It went smoother after that.
Yes, there was. People don't like change, and they like buying a new computer even less. There is a lot more work to it than "installing a new OS" for the average person.
Again I will lean towards, this forum is a poor segment of the populous. We lean to the technical side. Even that said, I work in IT, and am absolutely over tweaking, fixing and reinstalling my own stuff. I just want it to work at the end of the day. Not making large changes prevents things breaking. When stuff breaks on my own equipment, I get upset, not happy I get to fiddle with it. And I like and have an in depth knowledge of technology. Unless that shiny new OS comes with the latest buzzword on FB for Fox news, the average joe could care less about upgrades.
This is most peoples mentality.