The 2017 Operating System Thread

[benni]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

I selected Apple OSX just because I tend to use that more frequently for day to day stuff. My other computer is running on Windows 7.

[Ascaris]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

I don't understand the hate of the "forced" updates. M$ had to do it, after some especially knowledgable people just never patched their system ever and switched off any update functionality.

No, Microsoft did not "have" to do it.

I own my computer. It's for me to decide what runs on it. That's part of the deal with ownership. If MS would like to own my machine, they can certainly make me an offer to purchase it, and I will be happy to consider the offer and to approve or deny it... but short of that, it's mine, and I alone decide what gets installed on it.

Microsoft has already shown us they are willing to use the Windows Update system to distribute malware to their customers. This alone is reason enough to not allow forced updates-- defending oneself against malware is certainly not so strange and unusual, and when the update system is a known conduit of malware, we have to be careful with what we install, just like we have to be careful about attachments sent to us in email.

How many people, I wonder, have never considered turning off Windows updates until Microsoft became the world's largest source of malware via that very same update system? How many of those who DID upgrade to 10 and might have used the "Notify me when updates are available, but don't download or install them until I say so" option, were it available, have found some way to creatively break Windows so that updates don't work at all?

Are more people really getting updates now than before MS tried to force them? I'd hazard a guess that less of them are. Most people don't change the Windows Update settings at all; for them, nothing will change. The people who turned them off before will still find a way to do it (there are plenty of guides on the net about how to do just that). Little to no discernible change there either.

Then there are the people who have lost enough trust in MS to make them throw up their hands and just say NO to all updates (whether they are running 10 or not) even though they never had a problem allowing them before. That group does exist, and it appears to be pretty sizable, considering the comments one sees across the web.

I can tell you with certainty that unless Windows 10 makes a LOT of changes, there's no way I am going to ever accept it. If that means using older versions well past their expiration date, then so be it-- it's not on my head. It's on Microsoft's. They know damn well that they're pushing a substandard, defective-by-design product that is significantly worse than its predecessors in several critical areas, and they're doing it because they think they can use their monopoly power to cram it down our throats whether we like it or not. Well, they can't... not with all of us.

We've seen it written many times that MS wants to avoid another XP debacle, where a lot of people simply refuse to upgrade. Still, they can't bring themselves to offer a replacement for 7 that is even remotely as appealing; they're trying an all-stick, no-carrot approach. They know exactly what we Win 7 holdouts want... they simply have no interest in giving it to us.

As such, this is not going to be another Windows XP... it's going to be much worse. There was another version of Windows widely regarded as being good when XP was supposed to sunset; that would (of course) be Windows 7. Now, though, it's just Windows 10 looming on the horizon, and it's already more hated than Vista ever was back in its day. How many people who were willing to make the jump from XP to 7 (like me) will refuse to make the jump from 7 to 10 (like me)?

Lots, you can bet. MS had to extend the updates for XP for two more years than they had originally intended, and even after that AND nearly three more years of no updates, Windows XP is still hanging on with more market share than Windows 8/8.1.

If I'm able to pass a law, I'd make YOU responsible for keeping the system up to date. If you don't -> Jail or at least 90 Tagessätze (per diem rate in english??) to pay for your stupidity. And a 'Computer Security course'...

Not big on freedom, huh? That's a shame. Having a government tyrannical enough to do that is a lot bigger problem than having a few botnets around.
I can at least defend myself against script kiddies trying to send me phishing emails, or who try to hide trojans in dodgy software, or who would never even think to use a script-blocker in their browser or a HIPS on the PC itself.

I'd bet I'd be less likely to pick up malware using my XP box on the net than the average person using Windows 10, fully updated, but who has no idea about malware vectors, phishing, exploitation of zero-days, or using the least privileged user account possible, with Flash allowed to run on command, or even Java, if it's an older system.

It's not so simple to say that "unpatched = you have malware for sure" or "patched = don't ever think about what you do, Windows 10 is the most secure EVAR, so don't even worry!" User behavior is by far the biggest factor in spreading of malware, and while keeping the security holes plugged is important, it's not the most important.

Oh and what's the alternative? MacOS?! Android??

Linux Mint, and perhaps for the things I can't do in Linux, Windows 8.1 (which I am told can be modified to be a pretty usable OS... it took something as bad as Windows 10 to make me start to consider 8). Or maybe I will stick with 7 for only those things for which I need Windows specifically and restrict it via firewall to only connect to trusted hosts, with Linux for everything else.

Android's not an option (not a PC OS, and Google), and neither is MacOS (not available on non-Apple hardware without hacks, and it can't run the Windows stuff either).

[srhofmann]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

Because Windows 10 has DX12 support and is the best Windows so far.

I don't understand the hate of the "forced" updates. M$ had to do it, after some especially knowledgable people just never patched their system ever and switched off any update functionality.

Because if there is an exploit found you want it to be fixed ASAP and not be exploited, do you?!

And that's the problem with Software: Noone really cares about the security of the software. And does some real stupid shit...
And the lawmakers aren't up to it as well...

If I'm able to pass a law, I'd make YOU responsible for keeping the system up to date. If you don't -> Jail or at least 90 Tagessätze (per diem rate in english??) to pay for your stupidity. And a 'Computer Security course'...

Oh and what's the alternative? MacOS?! Android??

It's obvious that you've never administered machines in a corporate environment or dealt with life/safety issues. All you need to do is look at the number of times Microsloth has released patches for their patches because something broke or the patch couldn't be installed, or slammed the CPU to 100% while trying to figure out what patches the machine needed to realize not all patches are NEEDED or WANTED. It really wasn't a critical patch to have Windows 7 machines pop up and advertise for Windows 10, but MS sure thought it was. In a corporate environment literally every single patch needs to be approved by the IT/infrastructure department. Why, because shit might break. MS has no idea what the hardware/software configuration of every machine in the world is. Stuff is going to break, but in a corporate environment it shouldn't break, so the company will test the patches and try to make sure that things still work. One single private person with a problem, who cares, One thousand people with the same problem is a lot of money being spent on unproductive employees and in remediating the problem. In addition, there are some very specialized products that may have been certified/approved under a very specific hardware/os/software environment. If MS goes and updates things what may or may not break? It's unknown because MS doesn't release their source code and if they don't release the source you have no real idea what was changed. What happens if MS removes something that they consider obsolete but other software is dependent on it? It breaks and MS says F*CK Y*U we aren't responsible. Just like when a PC gets infected with a virus, So sorry you had your identity stolen but it's not our fault.

Just a little rant about my hate of Microsloth and forced updates.

[junktv]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

Poll needs multiple choice.

In order of use
7 pro
mint xfce
xp pro

[Ascaris]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

Some of the good people here on this forum have said that Windows 8, properly modified with registry edits, aftermarket mods, etc., can be as good as, if not slightly better than, Windows 7 (modified or not, depending on what you want out of it).

I had to admit I was intrigued. I'd never used 8 or 8.1; I'd read the reviews, though, and certainly the unmodified versions were not something I'd want. I didn't want to depend so heavily on aftermarket programs to make my PC tolerable either... but then I realized I already was, even with Windows 7. I used Classic Explorer to get back the "Up" button and some other stuff, and Classic Start to return to the 2k-style start menu (only better, since the search box is right there when I open the menu, ready to accept typed characters, which never existed in any of the native Classic menus). I was (and am still) also using 7+ Taskbar Tweaker to sand off a few more Win 7 rough edges.

Win 7 is more tolerable than 8 or 10 without aftermarket programs on any of them, but so what? It would be nice to have all the OSes run so well out of the box that I don't need any aftermarket addons to make it ideal, but that hasn't been possible since XP for me. (The same situation exists for Firefox!)

Win 8 and 10, of course, have the ribbon in file explorer, and like many, I loathe it. That means adding Old New Explorer to the mix (or the equivalent). And of course, my custom theme and the patcher required to get Windows to lower itself to being themed by a commoner such as myself.

With those and a bunch of registry and gpedit edits, I'm actually quite happy with Win 8.1, and I'm extremely intolerant of change for change's sake or any regressions in UI usability.

It does seem a bit faster than 7, though it's subtle and I can't really tell if it's real or if it is just the placebo effect. The faster booting is nice, but not really that significant, since I seldom shut down anyway. The big advantage is that it's supported for six more years with security updates, which is three more than 7 gets. Metro, essentially, does not exist; it boots straight to the desktop, and the hot corners for bringing up the annoying charms bar are disabled via Classic Shell. I've uninstalled all the apps, removed access to the Windows Store via group policy, and it's like apps never even existed on this OS. Well, other than the fact that the OS keeps referring to programs as "apps," as in "what app do you want to use to open this file?" Um, none, this is not a phone! I will use something I've installed in PROGRAM files, thanks! Still, not a deal-breaker... just an annoyance.

It turns out that the bizarre, dual-mode nature of 8 (app mode vs desktop/win32 mode) makes it really easy to wall off the app half and make it into a desktop only OS. The same cannot be said for 10, which has integrated apps into the desktop user space... which is a good thing, I guess, if you are going to use apps and win32 on the same PC. I have no intention of using apps, so the tighter integration of apps on 10 just means there is no escaping them, or at least bits of the OS that look like them and share their deficiencies on the desktop.

Right now I have 8.1 set as a triple boot with Linux Mint 18.1 and Win 7 on my laptop (Core 2 Duo), with my main desktop PC still on 7 and Mint 18.1, though I did buy another copy of 8.1 Pro for my desktop as well. I don't know what the landscape will look like in 2020 when Windows 7 is set to join XP in unsupported-land... perhaps I will be able to make the jump to Linux full-time by then. But if not, I'm ready to keep using Windows, sans Ten, for another three years.

[Topcat]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

Server 2012 R2 carves into a really nice workstation OS. It's bascially the 8.1 interface, so classicshell to get rid of Metro, disable 'ribbons', and the aero glass mod, it looks like normal 'windows', if yuo will....and no cortana, onedrive, and telemetry invasions... I've been tinkering with 10 a lot lately, as a client wants some W10Pro workstations set up.....and wow. It's just plain scary the stuff you have to disable, remove, and hack just to keep your personal data from being spewed all over the web.....

[RJARRRPCGP]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

Server 2012 R2 carves into a really nice workstation OS. It's bascially the 8.1 interface

Yes, the 2013 refresh is one of the best...

For folks that hate 10, I suggest what's based on 8.1, at the latest...

And the 2014 ISO refresh, IIRC, is the best of any Windows, after 7...

[linuxguru]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

Nobody using Fedora? I'm at F25 x86_64 on most of my daily-use Core 2 laptops, with F21 or F24 on a few. Of course, I got rid of the stock UI/WM and replaced it with XFCE or LXDE. Lower-spec and legacy machines (including Centrinos) are still on a heavily customized FC4 install with XFCE4 - and will stay that way until eternity.

I also have a few multi-boot notebooks with Ubuntu 14.x, 15.x and 16.x for experimentation. Not happy with the default UI, but that will be changed as required. Many of the multiboot machines also have FreeDOS 1.0 or 1.2 on them, mainly for BIOS updates.

Desktops are slowly being phased out, but all of them have FreeDOS 1.0 and some flavour of Fedora on them. The majority of them are Athlon II running on some AM2+ mobo, and that will continue until eternity. There's one Socket 771 Xeon with Xeon-modded Socket-775 board, and a few more Socket-775 Core 2s which will be replaced by 8-core Ryzens on AM4 in a few years. I skipped Core i3/i5/i7 almost completely.

My proudest possession is a Dell D830 with Full-HD 1920 x 1200 IPS screen running F25/XFCE. I removed the scratched grey paint on the back of the display casing, wet-sanded the magnesium to bare metal with 400-grit emory, and applied clearcoat synthetic-enamel lacquer on bare metal. That's for another later thread.

I'm planning to do something similar with a Dell Precision M90 that has shown up for sale locally. Yes, I'm a Luddite on the HW side and I'm proud of it. The only exception is that I think that the Dell Venue 11 Pro tablet with quad-core Atom and 1920 x 1080 Full-HD IPS screen is a work of sheer genius by the engineers at Quanta, Wistron or whoever engineered it at Taiwan - my salutations to them. If I eventually get my hands on one of those, I'll try to get F25 on it.

[CapLeaker]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

Ditched last year Win7, Win 8.1 and Win 10 for one Ubuntu 16.04 and the other two are running Linux Mint 18.1. I am done with winchit and they can shove it.

[yudhistira]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

windows 7 on pc and laptop, windows xp on old pc

[kamel84]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

windows10

[TELVM]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

Still on Windows 7, the last usable Windows. I'll never let the abomination infect none of my systems.

[Dan81]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

Windows 7 on my main PC (Asus P5QL Pro) and 2nd PC (Biostar MCP6P-M2)
Windows XP on my 3rd PC (ASRock P4i65G) and 98SE on my 4th PC (ASRock K7VT4A+)

[ratdude747]

Re: The 2017 Operating System Thread

Windows 7 on my workstations and work-supplied laptop (and also my VDI account on work server). Also as a secondary OS (dualboot) on my personal laptops.

Personal laptops have arch linux (GUI: Gnome 3) as the primary OS, one has XP pro for autocad as a third.

Windows 8.1 (modded) on my Asus Transformer (call it a toy, it actually runs quite nicely).

Server runs Debian Headlessly, no GUI.

I've been thinking of moving some things to 8.1 or dare I say 10 for software compatibility reasons. I've already run into two things I (or my dad) use that 7 won't work with and a lot of developers are not supporting 7 any more. Shame. I'm blaming .net for at least some of it (SignalIR protocol for example). Note that I said thinking of, not "will do for sure".

As for what, everything but my old Xeon Gallatin rigs (Supermicro X4DAL-_ based) can theoretically run 10 (Due to the NX bit requirement, which didn't come out with Intel until Prescott/Donthan/Irwindale). All of them could run 8.1. The limiting factors are time, motivation, and cost/hassle of getting liscences.