Anyone with Win7 knows that the update process has been throttled.
MS has now issued a rollup more or less equivalent to an SP2
you can get it here
NOTE: You will need to use Internet Explorer and will probably have to
go to "tools" and toggle the Active-X setting...
I had to turn it off then back on to get it working
Also note: There is a 64 bit and a 32 bit version
I am downloading both of them now
| MS has now issued a rollup more or less equivalent to an SP2
Anyone considering this needs to be aware that
the "rollup" is just a package of updates since
SP1 and almost certainly includes Microsoft's
spyware ("telemetry") and the various trojan
horse updates to force-install Windows 10:
Spyware and trojan horse may seem like strong
language, but that's exactly what they are. It's
not difficult to find reports online of people who
were surprised to find their Windows 7/8 computer
converted to Windows 10. And Microsoft is
increasing the pressure:
Most people -- people who have default settings
for Windows Update -- are in the crosshairs. If you
want Windows 10 then the "rollup" is probably a
good idea. If you don't want Windows 10 this is a
good time to think about disabling the Windows
You go right ahead , I'm going to stay with XP . At least I have a chance
of retaining *some* privacy ... W10 is the most invasive OS there is ,
spyware is built-in , and all your files are open for "them" to inspect .
I'm not even going to get into cloud storage - why on earth would anyone
want all their private information stored on someone else's computer ?
The first thing I did when we got the wife a new laptop running W7 Pro/64
is install anti-W10 software .
I'm not a computer person but heard that the underlying architecture of
Win 10 is better. I downloaded it on former Win 8.1 system and it works
You are advised to turn off all the evasive crap in the settings.
Before I did this, it would take a minute or two to shut down while MS
gathered info. Irritating.
Wife was told by Best Buy geeks that her laptop with Win 7 would not
take it but machine kept bothering her so she actually called MS, let
tech take control of machine and remove the pestering ap.
Win 10 is intrusive but probably no worse than competitors like Apple
and Google. I think they were trying to emulate them. They want to
entice you in to buy more stuff.
Thing that irritated me most was removal of time wasting games like
solitaire and Mine Sweeper but then letting you upload them from their
ap store for free. Games are better but come with somewhat annoying
pop-up ads which you can have removed by paying something like $1/mo.
Having an ad pop-up numerous times asking for donations to Hillary
really pissed me off;)
I would also avoid buying MS Office as it also wants you to save docs to
the cloud as first option. Free Open Office or Libre Office work just
Since the dawn of computing, there has been an oscillation between
"big, centralized computer with dumb(er) terminals" and "smart, decentralized
Originally, computers were expensive and terminals (TTY's, glass tty's, etc.)
were relatively cheap -- tens of kilobucks vs. fractional kilobucks. So,
the thinking tended to be shared and the display, individualized (one
display per user).
But, this approach doesn't scale well; if you double the number of
users, the "central computer" needs to become twice as powerful.
If it is already pushing the state of the art, then that additional
performance comes at a greatly (disproportionately) increased cost!
OTOH, when (personal) computers become affordable, you can decentralize
all that "thinking" and put it in each user's hands. Now, twice as
many users is easy to address -- twice as many computers! it "scales"
But, maintenance then becomes a hassle. You now have all those
scattered computers that have to be kept up to date. So, have to add
tools to each to allow for CENTRALIZED (! :> ) maintenance.
And, ad hoc sharing (i.e., my PC making MY files available to you over the
network) also becomes a headache.
Eventually, someone realizes that what the user REALLY wants/needs is
a good "user interface" (quality display, responsive keyboard, etc.)
and that, most of the time, the user's computer is twiddling its thumbs!
So, "power" (speed/storage) moves back to a centralized device with
GLORIFIED terminals for the users (e.g., this was the X Windows approach
and Sun Ray system). Now, everything can be updated and maintained
in one place -- but with user-specific customizations ("environment")
to tailor the interface to their requirements/expectations!
Then, the network starts to become a bottleneck as folks start wanting to
move more data to their displays (e.g., full motion video). So, you
add capabilities at the "workstation" end, again. This leads to more
pidgeon-holed data and configuration stuff so you again look to
centralize. Esp when you start thinking about sharing across area codes
instead of between cubicles...
Eventually, folks will RE-discover some shortcoming of the central service
(cloud) -- like the fact that it requires The Internet to be operational -- and
will move to the decentralized model, again.
And, the cycle repeats. Over and over.
Since the dawn of computing, there has been an oscillation between
"big, centralized computer with dumb(er) terminals" and "smart,
I'm not sure how relevant your history of computing
is to the current situation. Mainframes worked for
companies. Affordable PCs meant companies could
be more flexible. But there's still a lot of centralization.
But there are differences in who's using the
computers now. Security in corporate vs SOHo scenarios
is almost reversed. In one the network is trusted but
the user is not. In the other, the user is generally
trusted but the network is not. In the latter there's
rarely a role for centralization, other than software
servers in small companies.
There are also big differences in what computers are
used for. The corporate and SOHo user might be doing
similar tasks, or not. There are varying options in
balancing mobility with functionality. In the days of
mainframes, computers were only for work, at work.
And there are big differences in terms of ownership
and rights. Corporate computers, whether terminals
or PCs, are controlled by the company. They have
the right to watch you work and limit how you use
the computer. You're being paid for using it, after all.
SOHo users are in an entirely different world. They
expect privacy. They own the files on their computer.
Whatever they do is for themselves.
Probably the biggest factor now is a combination
1) Many people are happy having "consumer" services
on a phone. That's their computer.
2) Many people are using tablets, again for
consumption rather than creation activities.
The old computer was mainly a creation device.
One did work on it. The new tablet is mainly a
consumption device. One reads, shops, gets
3) Computers and software have matured. Neither is
now a high-profit market in the way it once was.
In many ways things haven't changed. There
are still millions of people sitting at computers to
do work. But increasingly that's not where the
big money is. Microsoft cleaned up when the market
was expensive software for business. (And they
still clean up at that.) But the rise of Apple has
been exclusively tied to consumer services. That's
the emerging market. They make over $1 billion/year
on sales at iTunes alone. That's stunning, considering
they're selling limited rights to mediocre quality
music at prices similar to what it costs to actually
buy CDs. It's all about convenient entertainment.
Microsoft wants in on that market.
The big problem with the Windows 10 software-
as-a-service approach is that it's trying to conflate
the different uses. You'll own your computer but
Microsoft will have a right to change the software
and watch what you do on your computer. You
may be able to install software, but that ability will
become increasingly limited as software goes to
a rental model. In short, Microsoft is trying to put sand
in your gas tank and sign you up for a taxi service.
It would be fine if they just added a taxi service to
their business, but that's not what they're doing.
They figure they can just shoehorn their billions of
Microsoft car owners into their taxi service and start
shoveling bucks like Apple is doing.
People need to be aware of these changes. It
really has nothing to do with trends toward or
away from centralization. It has to do with market
trends and the wide availability of high speed access,
which are making it very attractive for big
tech companies to own your life activities and
charge you money for them. It's not always a
direct payment, but if Microsoft shows an ad on
Windows 10 they make money and they also
fundamentally redefine whose computer it is. Just
as Google has redefined privacy by spying on
gmail users and Facebook has created a whole
generation of people who've allowed Facebook to
own their social life and are now dependent on
Facebook to maintain their social life.
Accepting Windows 10 is not just going along
with the ebb and flow of computer trends. It's
going along with rental software, loss of privacy,
and ubiquitous spyware watching what you do
in order to show you ads. It's going along with
turning the tool into interactive pay TV.
| > Accepting Windows 10 is not just going along
| > with the ebb and flow of computer trends. It's
| > going along with rental software, loss of privacy,
| > and ubiquitous spyware watching what you do
| > in order to show you ads. It's going along with
| > turning the tool into interactive pay TV.
| Well said...BUT...what's the alternative?
I guess that's hard to say. Personally I'm using XP
on newish computers that I build myself. If/when I
have to move to Win7 I hope I'll be able to do that.
It's possible I'd eventually move to Linux, though I
don't find that prospect attractive. I'm too used
to Windows and have put a great deal of time into
programming on Windows. I can write many of the
software and utilities that I want, and I have fun
doing it. I loathe the thought of eventually losing
It's hard to know how things will develop. It may
be very difficult to have a real computer in a few
years. On the other hand, I'm using an OS that's
15 years old. It still supports most software and
hardware. And I have no need to rent any software
in order to do what I want. (For that matter, I also
get about 45 stations with a pair of rabbit ears
and haven't had cable TV since the 90s. :)
Maybe with any luck Microsoft will fail miserably
at their Win10 scam and come crawling back with
a respectable product. But I'm not holding my
breath. It seems to be closing in from all sides.
Phones, tablets, computers... they're all becoming
more locked down, less controlled by the owner,
and less customizable in terms of privacy, installed
For people who are not so techie.... It might be
time to start thinking about Linux. Though there
are also problems there. Ubuntu, for instance, is
very controlling and I think they actually show ads
on the Desktop. Linux is not necessarily the wild
prairie it was a few years ago. And the wild prairie
versions have their own problems. I've always thought
of Windows being like a generic car, while Macs are
like a sports car with the hood welded shut and Linux
is like a car kit. The beauty of Windows is that MS
has traditionally provided tools for any level of
expertise. Macs won't let you change the oil, or
even swap out the radio. And you can't drive them
anywhere except on approved Mac roads. Sports
cars are fun but not utilitarian. With Windows one can
add gizmos to the dashboard and access most of
the engine/drivetrain/body. It's fun and very usable.
With Linux one has to become a greasemonkey, or
just accept what's provided to civilian users. There's
not much in between.
From what I see,
I don't think most people care very much. Many are
happy to buy a Mac and let Apple run their life. A
number of people I know are using WinXP still, and
I help them keep their systems running. I guess they'll
be stuck with Win10 when it comes time to move on.
They probably won't want to pay to have a custom
Win7 box built.
I would think
there would be a market for someone to just provide
a good, solid system for people to get work done,
but there may not be a big enough market for it. A lot
of pro photographers are accepting Photoshop as rental
software. A lot of companies are accepting Office 365
as rental software. Almost everyone I know uses gmail
and doesn't care about the spying. They can't be
bothered to set up their ISP email, much less get their
own domain. People are already accepting passivity.
Remember how different it was during the PC craze?
I learned HTML because my ISP gave me
5 MB free space for a website. I was thrilled to have
my own front door on the Internet. But most people
now don't see it that way. As has happened with so
many cities across the US, a private shopping mall is
replacing the public square and nobody's noticing.
Wed, 18 May 2016 23:12:30 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:
You can adapt. You can still write code under linux, it's just a little
different if you want it to be native for linux. Otherwise, vm, wine,
dosbox (depending on what you're programming) are all available to you
to continue just like you were doing under windows/dos.
Linux is worth the time to learn...imho.
MID: <nb7u27$crn$ email@example.com>
Hmmm. I most certainly don't understand how I can access a copy of a
Yeah, that's the mantra.
Linux, whatever that is today, can easily do 90% of
what I spend my computer time doing right out of the box.
It's the other 10% that's the deal breaker.
Having the option to do whatever you want with the open-source
system is small comfort to joe average who has neither the skill
nor desire to delve below the surface.
Once you get beyond the browser, the linux-based desktop computing
platform is a minefield for joe average.
The developers designed it that way and are PROUD of it.
Unless the mindset of the developers changes materially, linux
will never be a viable alternative to windows on the desktop of the
average user. Ninety-nine and a half just won't do.
Exactly. E.g., I could replace MOST of this machine with a
FOSS OS and cherry-picked applications. Of course, tagging
my MP3's would require finding a suitable FOSS MP3 tagger;
viewing my PDF's (with embedded animations) would be a challenge.
And, chase down yet another tool to manipulate ISO's.
Then, hope they play well together!
Yes, but that's also true of most Windows users. There are lots of
little (and BIG!) tweaks you can do to a Windows system to change
(improve?) the user experience or overall performance. But, most folks
live with things out-of-the-box ... never even concerned that things could
(Let them change their wallpaper and they're thrilled!)
I think there has been some effort in some of the distros to provide a
genuine "desktop" (so you're not dealing with a text console *or*
a generic X Windows environment with xterms). And, some effort to get
Open/Libre Office in shape to at least write up a simple memorandum.
Hooking up printers? Modifying ACL's? Sharing filesystems? things
get murky pretty quickly.
The developers are obsessed with gadgetry and "performance". As if
the user can really notice that the disk I/O subsystem is 2% (or 20%!)
faster than it was in last WEEK's release!
This is somewhat understandable; they aren't "marketers" but, rather,
developers/engineers. If it does what THEY want/need, they are happy!
And, its always more fun to tinker with some new idea than it is
to nail down every last bug in the old BORING software before putting
it behind you.
In Linux's defense (and by that, I mean in the defense of the various
Linux-based distributions), they are moving more in that direction than
many of the other FOSS OS's. (I think FreeBSD is now headed in that
direction as well).
A big part of the problem is that efforts are fractured; too many
groups thinking THEY have *the* "solution" -- so none of them have
a COMPLETE solution.
Yep, you pick a distro based on which has the least missing stuff for your
Then you go on a scavenger hunt to try to find the missing pieces.
Then you just give up on the rest...like printer features, mouse
capabilities beyond point and click, camera specialties, basically
all the reasons you selected that hardware in the first place.
Installation statistics suggest that
most of us just give up in frustration, turn on a windows machine
and just get on with life. I've got a dozen or more disks with
desktop linux installed just waiting for the day that I can
wipe them and install a distro that just works...AKA windows
There's plenty of wasted manpower to produce a distro that contains
the BEST of all the distros in ONE place and polish the edges with
more/better GUI configuration. ONE baseline distro. ONE COMPLETE
repository with EVERYTHING compatible with everything else. Standards,
consistency, managed evolution with no loss of freedom for anyone.
You want a new distro, just write an install script against that repository
and you're done. If you screwed it up, just patch the script.
All the bugfixers are working on the same bugs in the same place
for the benefit of all.
Build it. Give vendors a STABLE target with some possibility of
PROFIT...give desktop linux a legal entity with the ability to enter into
binding contracts...create a BRAND...and the for-profit hardware and
software vendors will come.
Linux has had many opportunities to take the desktop from MS.
ME, Vista, 8 and now windows 10 just to name a few. They just don't
want it. Taking responsibility is not nearly as much fun as futzing
with your hobby on your own terms.
| Installation statistics suggest that
| most of us just give up in frustration, turn on a windows machine
| and just get on with life. I've got a dozen or more disks with
| desktop linux installed just waiting for the day that I can
| wipe them and install a distro that just works...AKA windows
I've done something similar. I started
with Red Hat 4, in 1999 I think. After spending weeks
learning how to set up and use the system, I finally got
reasonably comfortable with it. I felt like a bit of a
wizard of esoterica. Then I was faced with one glaring
problem: Functionality. There was no software
and I still hadn't managed to get online with it.
Over the years I tried Mandrake, then Mandriva, then
Suse. I actually have Suse 12 installed now. I've never
really used it. And each version is only supported for
12 months. I've also repeatedly tried GIMP. That, too,
is never quite fully baked after 20+ years in development.
Over the years Linux has also developed problems in
the other direction. On the one hand, one needs to dig
around in /etc config files, which are typically
undocumented, in order to set up many things. On
the other hand, the half-hearted attempt to accomodate
normal users has resulted in excessive security. It took
me a long time to figure out that root was no longer
root and that I needed to perform special incantations
to get control of the OS. (Apparently they stole that
irritating design idea from Microsoft.)
The last time I thought seriously about Linux was a
few years back when the WINE people came into
Windows programming newsgroups looking for volunteers
to cooperate over porting Windows software. I thought
that sounded interesting. But the WINErs didn't want to
cooperate. They were resistant to even providing guidance
about how to best optimize and choose API calls in order
to make WINE work. They just wanted me to be an
official bug tracker for my software, while they tried to
make it work. The whole thing had a strange, paramilitary
feel to it. I was intended to be a private in some sort
of Linux Boy Scouts and take orders from my commanding
officer. When I tried to figure it out for myself I
discovered that the WINE API was a mish mash of
correlate functions implemented in non-correlating libraries.
(One function from shell32 might be in one lib, while
another was in a different lib, 3 others were nowhere to
be found, and several were *somewhere*, but not stable
enough to use.)
So it was nearly impossible to figure out which API
functions could be used dependably. Even the little bit
I was able to figure out was a chore. The documentation
came with instructions for "compiling" it to make it
readable! Over 20+ years of WINE development, the
WINErs have made no effort at all to provide tools or
docs for Windows programmers.Too many of the Linux
people are the type who can't use a coffee press but like
to customize the functionality of their TV remote while
they're eating their breakfast, of Starbucks kiddie coffee
and a candy bar.
The little problems with Linux are an endless list.
That's why, when people recommend Linux, it's almost
never a serious recommendation with tips and advice.
It's a one-word wisecrack: "Linux".
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.