They won't be migrating to it much, certainly not en masse, Philly.  Not unless there's a major overhaul.  Many gamers will go for it because of DX12 but probably not until there are some games which take advantage of it & from what I understand that may take a considerable period of time.  Even then, how big is the PC gaming market (I realize Jafo is an entire market unto himself, but I don't think he'll make or break Win10)?  Currently, there are more XP desktops than 8/8.1 desktops and Win7's share of desktops grew nearly 50% over the course of 2014.

Oh, I can surely break Win10.  MS hasn't made an OS I could not break...

 I wonder what the chances of the forum clock showing the right time on window 10 is, as I sit here my watch tells me it is 02:49 but my un edited reply was posted at

03:43 an hour from now and I never felt a thing as I traveled through time. 

Trolling for Jafo has a 100% success rate. 

I have no incentive to upgrade to Windows 10 right now. I am running Windows 8.1 (with start8), and windows 10 inside VMWare Workstation 11. So far i am not impressed with Windows 10. While it may be "better" under the hood than Windows 8.1. I don't see any significant improvements for the average user (unless the average user is completely illiterate, and just uses "pictures"). The icons are a mix of both old style windows 7, and the god awful "euro street sign looking" icons. The start panel IMO is useless in its current state with no option to switch it to the classic windows 7 start menu. DX 12 would be the only benefit "if" my laptop supports it.

8.1 came with this laptop, and if i had my way i would downgrade it to Windows 7 pro, but i don't want to blow more money on a win7 disk. The old saying.. If it aint broke, dont fix it. With Start8 i have no issues with windows 8, and if i have an old program i cant run on windows 8 there is always vmware, and windows xp, or 98.

"IF" i do upgrade to windows 10. Then YES i will get Start 10. just because i cant stand that metro wannabe start menu.

Here was the problem with dos vs windows,  or real dos mode vs dos being a window. Basically there are more teenagers,  and early 20 year olds than there are older people. It is easier to sell to people who haven't used computers very long.

They are telling us what we want. It is easier to convince someone who wants to be like everyone else than someone who knows technology,  and wants better even if it means older. Stop telling us what we want,  and ask us,  also how about asking thr minority who have been around the block. Instead of asking young people who will like it because it looks good with advertising,  or only cares that they have what everyone else have. Here's an idea how sbout asking people who have been around who know better technology,  and advertise to the ones who will buy anything with advertising. Instead of having backwards priorities. 

The issue if better gaming is not a concern untill games come.out for this. It is still to new.

and the jafo is not the only master of MS shatter in these forums, and some of us can even manage to re-assemble the shattered windows into a able to function window frame, even if there are a few lines across the view.

I have been breaking MS products since 1980, then getting them to work again afterwards.

Harpo, the NON-subscriber

I have the feeling we're going to have to be brave explorers and muck about in the registry directly before this is all said and done, although it would be nice if MS would fix these issues directly.

Am still going to upgrade to Win10 because it's coming to me free of charge, and Win7 is starting to creak for me in some of my more common use cases.

An Irish friend of mine said that he'd read a lot about Win 10's icons and UI being butt ugly to look at.... reckons he especially bought a bottle of 'White-Out' for the bits that he doesn't like.

I tried to tell him about WindowBlinds but he rejected the idea outright cos he'd just bought new curtains and wasn't about to waste money replacing them just yet.

I dunno, you just can't help some people.

starkers, it sounds like your irish 'friend' is either pulling your legs extremely hard(and knows just how to get the largest reaction from you) OR is an illiterate irishman that can not learn.

 my wild guess is the first

harpo, the NON-subscriber

Is there any particular reason why windows 10 should use 100% CPU.. ALL OF THE TIME?! Yes i know its a beta, and i did report the issue. I just want to hear other thoughts than "were looking into it".. Right now i am getting Vista flashbacks.

Here's the situation. I run Windows 10 preview build 10041 on Vmware Workstation 11. I allocate the recommended resources (2 core 3 gig cpu, 2 gigs sys. ram, 1 gig video ram, 60 gig VHD) VmWare wont let me allocate more than 2 CPU cores since my rig has a quad core cpu.

Win 10 PB Installs just fine. I use my Win 8 microsoft account. Then when its finished, and starts up it remains stuck at 99-100% cpu usage for the entire run. No matter what i do. Needless to say the lag, and delays caused by this is a major drag.

I saw the majority of the cpu use is used for the error logging, and phoning home to microsoft (dev mode) which kinda was expected. When i disable that it STILL uses 100% cpu. Search indexer uses a lot of cpu too, but after a while that stops once the indexing is done. I disabled system restore, and other stuff i dont use like bluetooth, printers, etc. to try and free up more cpu. In fact i ran it for a whole 24 hour period, and it never used any less than 70% cpu. I didn't install anything (other than the Vmware drivers, and tools). It was just windows 10 running. I did the windows update, and that made no difference.

I wont get started on the broken stuff like the store beta, and mail, people, and maps, yada, yada, There are "hacks" to fix that, but i really shouldn't have to "hack" a beta to get something to work.

I tried 3 complete clean installs, and its pretty much the same thing. I pretty much gave up, and stopped using it.

If Win 10 runs like this on a virtual machine that is well within the specs (on a rig that has PLENTY of resources). I don't even want to think of what it will run like as my primary OS on the very same rig. I ran Windows 8.1, 7, XP etc. on VmWare, and had far less trouble. They never ran at a consistent 100% cpu. Again i know win 10 is beta, but i find this very odd.

Thoughts?

When running an OS within a VM you really should be suspicious of BOTH the OS AND the VM proggy.  Yes, VMware may be entirely happy with 8, 7, XP, et al ...but that does not mean it must also be happy with 10 [or anything else].

I haven't dl'd a recent build...but the one I do have is under VB, not VM, and appears to be fine.

The one 'true' measure of an OS is for it to be installed and run natively, not virtually...

I want Start10 for sure!

Understood,

I used Virtual Box before, and i had the opposite experience. Everything i loaded ran laggy, and choppy (even windows 98). I have had far better luck with VMware. I guess it depends on the rig, and host OS too. In my case its windows 8.1.

I suppose if i ran it natively it would run better, but i really don't want to risk it. Which is why i am using a virtual machine.

The fourth clean install seemed to be the charm. Plus a little bit of "Black Viper" . Disabling services i don't need nor will ever use. Especially in a virtual environment. Like printers, bluetooth, etc.etc. Helped a great deal. I don't get near the major CPU usage i had before. System runs now at a around 10% CPU which is a far cry from the consistent 100% cpu in the last few rounds.

Problems with store, and pre-installed apps not working still persist, but its a known issue.  Other than that its running pretty smooth.

As my PC is just that,

when i decided to risk Windows 10 it took over the PC and it has been quite good from what I have seen so far

For what I use the PC for which is just home user things , Facebook being  here doing stuff on Paintshoppro, some things dont work but you expect that shame that GForce and WhiteCap are in that list but expect they will work ones 10 is out there and programs catch up.

Stardock stuff is working ok but i expected that as have been around since XP days and it is the first thing on because i like/love it.

Thanks to them for making my computer time better for me.

Major Stress

reply 35

Quoting Jafo,

reply 33

Quoting Major Stress,

reply 32

Thoughts?

When running an OS within a VM you really should be suspicious of BOTH the OS AND the VM proggy.  Yes, VMware may be entirely happy with 8, 7, XP, et al ...but that does not mean it must also be happy with 10 [or anything else].

I haven't dl'd a recent build...but the one I do have is under VB, not VM, and appears to be fine.

The one 'true' measure of an OS is for it to be installed and run natively, not virtually...

Understood,

I used Virtual Box before, and i had the opposite experience. Everything i loaded ran laggy, and choppy (even windows 98). I have had far better luck with VMware. I guess it depends on the rig, and host OS too. In my case its windows 8.1.

I suppose if i ran it natively it would run better, but i really don't want to risk it. Which is why i am using a virtual machine.

The fourth clean install seemed to be the charm. Plus a little bit of "Black Viper" . Disabling services i don't need nor will ever use. Especially in a virtual environment. Like printers, bluetooth, etc.etc. Helped a great deal. I don't get near the major CPU usage i had before. System runs now at a around 10% CPU which is a far cry from the consistent 100% cpu in the last few rounds.

Problems with store, and pre-installed apps not working still persist, but its a known issue.  Other than that its running pretty smooth.

My machine is a 'bit' of a beast...so should be capable of running 'anything'.  32gig of DDR4 and a i7 5960x with '16' cores.  Multiple VMs along with VB doesn't raise a sweat...

I hate you....

I consider myself fortunate to have a 3 gig quad core laptop. With 8 gigs ddr 3 ram :/ (there is much worse out there that cost MORE money)

And if you'd gone with liquid cooling instead of that other monster, you could have 64 gigs of DDR4.  Mind you, I had a similar issue with the Thermaltake cooler in my AMD rig, though I didn't have to resort to hacksaw to make things fit.  No, I was lucky in that installing the RAM first solved the issue.  Had I installed the cooler first I'd never have gotten the 4th RAM stick into its slot.

Anyway, saving for 'my' next beastie is going well and I'm on track for an August build... on which Win 10 will be installed.  Hopefully the recognition issues you had with DDR4 in Win 7 will have been resolved in Win 10.