Hmm. My memory is not dependable, of course, but I recall thinking, "Well, good, this will be the last time I have to change everything."
Oh. So possible, but not good business, therefore pphht! goes the perpetual update possibility. Not liars, just capitalist toads?
I mean, they are a business. They need to continue making money and staying above the competition. You can't expect them to be benevolent and just give everything for free. And you can't expect old framework to be updatable perpetually. That developer was a bit of an idiot saying something like that. Just not sustainable for any medium.
Well, yes, I did expect perpetual updates since that is the way 10 was presented to me when I changed over. I surely don't recall Windows issuing a disclaimer at the time re: the developer's misinformation.
Nothing on a computer is perpetual. Never expect anything related to programming to last more than five years, a decade at most. And that time table is shortening as turnarounds on products are much faster now. At my company, the product turnaround time is about three years, then they expect customer updates on equipment. Parts for repair stopped being stocked at around eight years, forcing new equipment purchases for companies to stay relevant. This may seem extremely capitalistic, but from a business perspective having people trained and allocated to support out-of-date systems is extremely expensive and provides very little back to the company that made it. In technology, if you aren't moving forward, you become irrelevant. I currently support three different base models of electron microscopes, which makes for twenty different substructures, and hundreds of attaching equipment, along with five different operating systems and a hundred other programs for analysis and data management/collection. Trying to mainatain old systems while adjusting to the installation and progression of new systems is basically impossible. We are constantly struggling to maintain a dying bridge between the past systems and the cutting edge. Atrophying old equipment and programs provides relief to us working on them. Framework upgrades on Windows allows for greater substructures in programs that the customers use, so they always need to update to get better, and faster, data. But that leaves old stuff behind. We simply can't maintain dealing with old framework because it doesn't advance with the customer needs and the latest toys they get to buy. Long story short, maintaining old systems to perpetuity is a waste of a company's time and it back-pedals them on their ability to move with technological advancement. Never expect any system to last, especially in program framework. They eventually reach a system limitation they can't bypass through update and phase out.
Ah, yes, I know that now. At the time, I was a trusting child of the universe who had used the same desktop computer for over a decade before it died and forced me to find a replacement.
Yes, I remember that was the distinct impression MS was trying to create. But I thought at the time there were enough 'weasel words' involved that I didn't believe them. And as a retired developer/Database administrator, I knew there was no way that Microsoft could guarantee that code they were using would remain viable enough indefinitely that a significant rewrite wouldn't be required at some point. They COULD have called the new OS Win 10, I guess, but the total PITA of switching to it would have remained regardless. We have created a world that simply can NOT allow technology to remain stable. I turn 72 next week, and I expect to live long enough to see Win12 and possibly, Win 13 no matter what MS says or implies.
Those could be sooner or later depending on the relative success of 11. It is an off year however. I'm not holding my breath for it to be spectacular. 12 could be not far behind.
I think he meant that it would be packaged differently - like apple who theoretically at the time they'd been on OSX for ages, but everyone knows that Catalina isn't really the same OS as Cheetah, and anyway Mac themselves abandoned that labeling with Big Sur which is down as OS11 and Monterrey OS12
Well, I don't know about that, but when orange visited San Clemente to see the leopards, which are a different SEX from MICK, they bypassed Carmel and went straight to the OSS at Salinas.
I guess we eventually get used to the stuff. At first I found W10 very irritable. "I'll never install that ###, I'll stay with Windows 7 FOREVAR. Guess what all my computers run I am not going to bend backwards to get some W11, but I assume at some point I will be running it Oh, I loved the old MAC OSX - when Windows Vista was the new thing. What was it? Mountain Lion or something. Compared to the Vista, OSX was like from another planet. Now the new OSX irks me, one attention dancing bear with more and more restrictions.
Alright, here goes nothing. I'm updating to 11. Been an absolutely pain in the dick to even allow my PC to download it. Getting secure boot to work took me a solid two hours. But we're downloading now. I thought I lost everything when I missed a check box in the BIOS and it left me with a previously good SSD being unable to load. However, we're passed that now. We'll see how it goes. I can tell already though by requirements that it's going to be a resource hog and is meant for mid-range to high end PCs, not a little Dell Latitude laptop with an ancient i3.
Fingers crossed man, I hope it doesn't start smoking and shaking like something out of a Spielberg movie.
I can't imagine that would happen. But still. Upgrades can do a lot of interesting things that aren't always upgrades.
So far, not much changed at all. They centered the start bar like a mac and went full on into applications, but honestly it's not bad. Seems to have a lot of telemetry and tracking software attached with it, but I naturally disabled all that nonsense immediately. Activating the version was an absolute chore though. Otherwise, doesn't seem to be the resource hog I thought once I disabled or uninstalled the various bloat and trackers. Troubleshooters built-in are hit or miss as always, but at least they aren't like 2000's always miss. That operating system was straight ass.
My guess is that it's basically the same framework except safer than Windows 10. More like a big service pack than an actual upgrade. Edit* Actually there's a few tools I really like. The chief of those being the multiple desktop layout option. This is sort of invaluable for those of us one monitor people. I could tri-split documents, but it did get a little thin. Now I can split multiple documents across four different desktops for quick comparisons and checks. This I enjoy. Could also be used as a means to hide a particular desktop if the user would need such a thing.
