No win98??? WTH are they thinking!

How about they pay me each and every version of Windows I used, to go on Windows 9. That's better than giving a free upgrade because now they're bribing me to use their "latest rendition" of their OS.

EDIT: The only way I'm ever going to go with a new Windows is if they bring back the old GDI\GDI+ looking interface, e.g. Windows Classic Themes, and work on making backwards compatibility with legacy software better for all. Otherwise, screw them.

You only have to look at the chart to see that Windows 7 has the biggest market share followed by Windows XP. That is actually kind of sad when you think about it. Vista, 8, and 8.1 COMBINED don't even add up to XP's market share. XP and 7 collectively add up to 75% of the OS market. Microsoft needs to come up with something really compelling to get those users to switch or 9 will fail.

Chart here:

http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2014/08/01/wi … are-first-time/

DracoNihil wrote:

and work on making backwards compatibility with legacy software better for all.

That would probably defeat the purpose of giving it away for free.

Aside from the interface issues that everyone complains about, is compatibility in Windows 8 really that much worse than Windows 7? I know they at least fixed the kill-Explorer-to-fix-garbled palettes thing.

They could of fixed that problem without force feeding everybody a lame as hell mobile device UI towards desktop computer users.

Hell they could of fixed that problem with a hotfix for Windows 7, but they chose not to.

We don't know that. It's quite possible that any such fix would have required drastically taking apart the UI and required tons of testing in order to make sure that the "hotfix" didn't break a bunch of other things in the process.

Also, for $deity's sake man,

Didn't stop Microsoft from making a hotfix for audiodg having a memory leak when people have reported that dozens of times. If Windows 9 is going to be a "huge" change from Windows 8 there better be alot of improvements worth the trouble of everyone still using Windows XP and Windows 7. Like sliderider points out, the market share says it all really... There's also that case of the IRS trying to bribe Microsoft into continuing to offer support for XP.

Also I'd appreciate if my grammar isn't attacked with memeitc images because I couldn't give much of a damn about my own grammar, I only care about my grammar if I'm speaking formally to someone, one on one. If my grammar bothers you, keep it to yourself. I don't care about grammar on a public forum.

DracoNihil wrote:

Didn't stop Microsoft from making a hotfix for audiodg having a memory leak when people have reported that dozens of times.

A memory leak by nature would be an entirely different problem.

Also I'd appreciate if my grammar isn't attacked with memeitc images because I couldn't give much of a damn about my own grammar, I only care about my grammar if I'm speaking formally to someone, one on one. If my grammar bothers you, keep it to yourself. I don't care about grammar on a public forum.

So, you think so little of us that you don't think you need to bother communicating effectively? Why should we give a damn about what you appreciate, then?

Jorpho wrote:

A memory leak by nature would be an entirely different problem.

A hotfix is still a hotfix. It doesn't matter what the problem is, Microsoft should be listening to their customer base at all times when there's problems with whatever aspect of the OS, from benign to serious. Only Microsoft can fix whatever problems there are with Windows because Windows is a proprietary closed source product, and coming up with hacks to fix things Windows is doing wrong is potentially illegal if it messes with closed-source code. Everybody buys their OS, it's only right we're given proper support for it in return.

Jorpho wrote:

So, you think so little of us that you don't think you need to bother communicating effectively? Why should we give a damn about what you appreciate, then?

Are you really going to start flaming me because you can't understand what I meant by my response to that dumb image? I don't "think little" of anyone, don't put words into peoples mouths. I just don't care about being strict about my own grammar. If you can understand me, great, if you have to bring out a huge flame against me because my grammar irritates you, then how is it my fault? It's not like I'm the few people that don't have English as their primary language and thus massive language barriers, or people who mispell words constantly or type in alternating caps trying to sound "kewl"

Can we please stay on topic? I'm really interested in seeing this marketing tactic develop. I don't want to contribute or unwittingly start a flamewar.

"A hotfix is still a hotfix" is rather naive when talking about different types of issues. The more changes that are attempted by a "fix", the more likely that something will be broken. And for everything that gets broken, there is the same possibility occurring with fixes at that point, too. Big changes make a lot more sense for new versions of an OS, where they might be improving internals with complete rewrites.

As to backwards compatibility, MS has bent over backwards far more than most OS developers have. How many times has Apple given their old the boot as they introduce their new? Many of the changes you are sneering at are because of improvements to security, performance or abilities. Unfortunately, this means that the backwards compatibility with old programs get broken as there are enough changes or depreciations to existing APIs or newly added ones. In the end, you are probably best off replacing them with new ones that can take advantage of modern APIs and standards. Old games are about the only thing worth going out of your way to get working properly. But even that should not be at the expense of needed functionality unless it is an old clunker used just for old games. In that case, why not just put an antiquated OS on it and be done with it.

Dealing with old development software and modeling programs can be a complete PITA on newer windows systems. ACT mostly alleviates issues but it's not a perfect system.

I've been able, after learning alot about it, get a significant amount of stuff to work under x64 Windows 7, but I've never attempted any under 8.x and I surely wouldn't know what 9 has in store in terms of ACT and the like. A transparent VM is only as good as the implementation of the VM and if your CPU has proper virtualzation and SLAT support.

Windows 9 will have to have alot of major, ACTUAL GOOD IMPROVEMENTS to warrant anybody to upgrade from 7. If they are serious about offering free upgrades then I would surely hope Windows 9 is a massive leap over 8...

I would take a free upgrade as an excuse to buy an SSD and do a clean install.

That's a thought.

A "free" Win9, depending upon what it ends up being, would be a rather smart move on their part. They make very little from end-user sales. The money is in OEM licenses. It's a small hit with a potentially big gain.

Jorpho wrote:

DracoNihil wrote:

and work on making backwards compatibility with legacy software better for all.

That would probably defeat the purpose of giving it away for free.

Aside from the interface issues that everyone complains about, is compatibility in Windows 8 really that much worse than Windows 7? I know they at least fixed the kill-Explorer-to-fix-garbled palettes thing.

Depends on what type of legacy programs you are attempting to run. The main issue is that you can no longer disable desktop composition on a per-program basis (or system wide) and you can no longer use older XP-era display drivers. If you have a pre-Vista program that didn't play well with DWM, you're out of luck.

DracoNihil wrote:

Windows 9 will have to have alot of major, ACTUAL GOOD IMPROVEMENTS to warrant anybody to upgrade from 7. If they are serious about offering free upgrades then I would surely hope Windows 9 is a massive leap over 8...

Unfortunately I wouldn't count on that. Sad but true.

If they really want people to use the new operating system all they have to do is price it reasonably, I upgraded from windows xp to 8 last year(I think?) when I bought it at retail for about $55, I was happy to pay that for a new legitimate OS but over $100 turns people off and that's when they look for the pirated copies etc, $50 though not worth the hassle.

Their wouldn't be much market for people upgrading from 7/8 but people from Vista need a good reason no excuse for the XP users its time to let go.

Yeah the pricing of Windows is what kills it these days, plus why does it cost so much money to upgrade to a new standing release of a OS? Microsoft surely could make enough money licensing to OEM's and to people who have never bought windows than charging it's own customer base for upgrades...

Also not being able to disable DWM needs to be fixed in Windows 9, seriously. That's my #1 major gripe hands down.

Personally I'd have no issues getting Windows 9 as a freebie for my remaining Vista system (just to upgrade it); I don't have any XP builds that can live without it (they're all retro gamers - they use XP for a reason, and none of them are on the open Internet), so no need/desire to upgrade there, but if they'll hand out free licence keys (that I could use on other builds) I won't argue... 🤣

Pardon my ignorance but what is DWM and what makes it a pain with older applications?