In reply to a post by broadband66:

Why pay for something newer that doesn't give anything extra for lots of users?

But that is wrong, actually, it does give a lot extra for the small price to pay, in many cases, but if users never upgrade, then they are never going to realize those benefits. If you apply that attitude people would still be running MS-DOS etc.

touche

Edited by deleted (Mon 02-Mar-15 18:28:53)

So I assume that you are still watching TV in 405 line black & white or SD. Don't you like enjoying the benefits of improvents in technology? Why pay for FTTC when you can still use dial up or ADSL? After all does the same thing just a bit slower and more flakey. Anyway car technology doesn't improve at the same rate, so not really a good example is it? I'm with Pipexer on this one.

I'm going to weigh in on the other side (sort of).

For many people they don't notice the difference between XP and Win 7/8. If they aren't upgrading their apps then they will continue working on XP. XP is faster on old hardware than Win 7/8 will be.

So, upgrading may involve replacing a perfectly working PC.

The benefits of upgrading are the support of newer hardware/software, arguably better stability (although XP was pretty solid) and continued patching support from Microsoft.

But, of course the user also has to get used to the new OS. For Win 7 that is pretty easy. For Win 8.1 it is not so easy and will take a little while to work things out (like how do I close a metro app, how do I reboot it, etc). These things are not intuitive in Win 8.1 and therefore take some learning.

The problem is XP was just too darn good. There is little justification for many people to upgrading and if it involves a hardware replacement then it is even more difficult to justify.

The Metro interface defeats the object of Windows anyway.

Plus few ordinary people will discover how to set Win 8x to boot straight to the Desktop, and even if they do that is not as simple to operate as Win 7 and earlier.

I can sort of understand people's reluctance to change the way they work and you and RobertoS are perfectly correct regarding usability and the horrible Metro interface. I loath it and use a free program called Start Menu 8, which provides the exact same interface as previous Windows including a fully functional Start button. There is no way that you can design an interface that works for all variations of Windows (PC, touch screen tablet etc). Microsoft's problem is that it is too arrogant. Their attitude is "this is what you are going to get, like it or lump it". Instead of listening to users opinions.

Yes I still watch in SD. HD is too unnatural in its colour depth. Vinyl is better than CD and far superior to MP3. Not everything that is newer is better.

And I'm still on ADSL as I only use 10 - 15GB / month and 14mbps is more that we need. The odd upload is a bit slow but I have a life and can set an upload going and go and do something more interesting instead ( as the old childrens tv programme used to say).

Some people extole the virtues of W8 when many ( and I probably should say the majority) wouldn't give a flying "£$% what OS they used as long as they can watch catch-up tv, view some strange dog balancing a ball on his nose via UTube and read their emails.

Does a newer OS really make the world a better place?

"Not everything that is newer is better." No of course, not but 95% is.
There is no way I would watch TV in "fuzzy vision "SD.
Even my 87 year old Aunt has just got HD and she thinks it's brilliant.

Try using ADSL when you've got 25 devices that are Internet connected, including 3 TV's streaming media and 2 sons playing online games. And who on earth wants to watch catchup TV on a computer. Why not in comfort watching a large screen TV from the sofa. Anyway FFTC is hardly any dearer than ADSL, £5 a month in my case.

"Some people extole the virtues of W8 when many (and I probably should say the majority) wouldn't give a flying "£$%? what OS they use. That's just personal opinion, hardly a fact.

"Does a newer OS really make the world a better place?" No, but a combination of all modern technology does. If you developed a serious illness I'm sure you would rather be treated with the tech and drugs available now rather than those from as short a time as 15/20 years ago.

You are only on this earth once, it's not a rehearsal. I want the best I can get. The only reason not to is financial restraints.

Edited by deleted (Tue 03-Mar-15 19:03:17)

From what I remember from reading a few days (weeks?) ago Win 10 will give us back a proper desktop interface. I'm 98% happy anyway since I discovered the Boot to Desktop option in W8 rather than the annoying boot to Metro and having to click the Desktop button.

Just the sheer frustration of seeing the Metro screen at bootup and despair over the idiots that OK'ed it was the problem. Not the single click required.

Just discovered Chrome for getting catchup onto a non-smart TV. Great. My preferred control is from my iPad, rather than the laptop or phone.

Edited by RobertoS (Wed 04-Mar-15 02:06:31)

I can confirm on the latest build of Win 10 it is indeed boot to desktop with a start menu, although there is a button to make the start menu full screen in a pseudo metro screen for those that have complained their digits are too big for a normal start menu,