Stability will not be the only factor that will be assessed when deciding which releases to push out to the public.cwathen wrote:Whether or not I believe AJ works for Microsoft when he was working in a Vodafone uniform 6 months ago is neither here nor there - I couldn't care less if it's true any more than he could care less about whether or not I believe it. Of course there are newer builds than the public build and of course it makes sense that a Microsoft employee would be on a later build.bilky asko wrote:Going by cwathen's novella on the hierarchy of Windows 10 build releases, it makes perfect sense (as far as I can tell) that AJ is on a later build than the public one, rather flying in the face of the hierarchy.WillPS wrote:LOL.
The issue I took was claiming that 'the internal builds are more stable than the public' (note: 'builds' as in there has been more than one that's more stable than 10130) - essentially saying that they're keeping the good stuff to themselves. Since the release schedules changed, builds are supposed to be pushed out to the fast ring once validated by the Microsofties. We've been stuck on 10130 for almost a month and 10130 has now been pushed to the slow ring without anything new coming onto the fast ring, which is the longest we've been left on the same build since the change in release schedule.
If there have indeed been a number of superior and more stable builds since, then surely we shouldn't have been left on 10130 for this long? That is what I meant.
Windows 9 is now Windows 10
I'm no Sherlock but one of links in AJ's profile leads to a link to his blog, which, unless he has a thing for fabricating things over a long period of time, would suggest that he certainly was in a Vodafone uniform six months ago, but that he now certainly does work for Microsoft...cwathen wrote:Whether or not I believe AJ works for Microsoft when he was working in a Vodafone uniform 6 months ago is neither here nor therebilky asko wrote:Going by cwathen's novella on the hierarchy of Windows 10 build releases, it makes perfect sense (as far as I can tell) that AJ is on a later build than the public one, rather flying in the face of the hierarchy.WillPS wrote:LOL.
Why would he lie? Pretty hilarious display of arrogance going on here.
-
scottishtv
- Posts: 743
- Joined: Thu 01 Apr, 2004 15.36
- Location: Edinburgh
I didn't read all the thread back to the start, but there's been a lot of confusion reported on tech sites about who will get copies of final Windows 10 for free. Obviously anyone running Windows 7 or 8.1 will get it, but the confusion arose over this 'loophole' which suggested that if you were on the Windows Insider program the final copy would remain activated after Win 10 launched. Now it would appear that you only get a final version to keep if you're already a Windows 7 or 8.1 owner (like everyone else).
So if you upgraded from anything else for the purposes of the Insider program, for your evaluation copy to remain activated, you'll have to continue to participate in the Windows Insider program through into beta versions else it will expire and you'll have to restore your PC using your own old copy of an OS or a restore disc.
My question therefore is, I take it there is there no end date for the Insider program - it just runs and runs?
Like many others, I'm obviously motivated by self-interest here. I have a very old Vista laptop (that meets the min spec for Win 10) and would happily participate and install a few preview builds if it eventually meant being able to keep a final copy of Win 10, but I'm guessing it won't work like that? I also suspect people like me would really annoy the hard core testers who've been dedicated to providing feedback for months.
So if you upgraded from anything else for the purposes of the Insider program, for your evaluation copy to remain activated, you'll have to continue to participate in the Windows Insider program through into beta versions else it will expire and you'll have to restore your PC using your own old copy of an OS or a restore disc.
My question therefore is, I take it there is there no end date for the Insider program - it just runs and runs?
Like many others, I'm obviously motivated by self-interest here. I have a very old Vista laptop (that meets the min spec for Win 10) and would happily participate and install a few preview builds if it eventually meant being able to keep a final copy of Win 10, but I'm guessing it won't work like that? I also suspect people like me would really annoy the hard core testers who've been dedicated to providing feedback for months.
-
scottishtv
- Posts: 743
- Joined: Thu 01 Apr, 2004 15.36
- Location: Edinburgh
Actually, it seems pretty clear now - based on this post. I'll just put the old Vista laptop back the cupboard and take it out twice yearly to run a slideshow, as I do now. The 'loophole' did seem too good to be true. Was a bit surprised the Insiders will get nothing then, other than being able to play with the new versions early.
Many people big themselves up in internet forums and claim to know things/work for companies/have done things that aren't true. Did I categorically acuse him of lying? No. Did I suspect he might be? Yes. Was I wrong to suspect that? Probably. I couldn't really care less either way, let's move on.WillPS wrote: Why would he lie? Pretty hilarious display of arrogance going on here.
There has been (yet more) clarification today about what will happen. From piecing together several different stories, it would seem that the development of Windows is about to become a different animal. Previously, reaching RTM essentially meant 'we're done - this is basically it' as far as a version of Windows was concerned, and development would then be around issuing service packs/updates/patches along with some minor feature updates. Development on what would become the next version of Windows might well use the existing version as a base, but it would very much be a different project. The implication is that with Windows 10, RTM will simply be the build deemed ready for general release, and there will continue to be additional development and further new builds issued through the insider programme.scottishtv wrote: I didn't read all the thread back to the start, but there's been a lot of confusion reported on tech sites about who will get copies of final Windows 10 for free. Obviously anyone running Windows 7 or 8.1 will get it, but the confusion arose over this 'loophole' which suggested that if you were on the Windows Insider program the final copy would remain activated after Win 10 launched. Now it would appear that you only get a final version to keep if you're already a Windows 7 or 8.1 owner (like everyone else).
So if you upgraded from anything else for the purposes of the Insider program, for your evaluation copy to remain activated, you'll have to continue to participate in the Windows Insider program through into beta versions else it will expire and you'll have to restore your PC using your own old copy of an OS or a restore disc.
I would imagine this is the last time Microsoft envisage users to make a conscious decision to change the version of Windows they are using, and in the future you will simply be on Windows without thinking about the version you are using and it will become normal to change the build in use over time.
Coupled to other reports that insiders will get the RTM code but not be considered upgraded, what I would imagine this means is that insiders *will* get the RTM code and so effectively will get a free copy of the finished Windows 10 - with the caveat that it will still be tied to an end date for that build and when that expires they will lose it. In order to keep running Windows for free, continued participation in the insider programme and therefore continued updates to pre-release builds with the risks that come with that will be required, running the RTM build will be a very short term thing.
That is of course unless Microsoft changes everything again.
That's one of the stories I read. I do think Microsoft are really missing a trick buy not allowing XP and Vista users into the free upgrade offer. Granted, Vista users are a small enough group not to both worrying about but XP holdouts still represent a big chunk of the market. Although actual XP-era hardware isn't going to be up to Windows 10, I don't actually see much of that still in use. It's usually newer hardware (or at least Vista-level hardware which will run 10 fine) coupled with the older OS.scottishtv wrote:Actually, it seems pretty clear now - based on this post. I'll just put the old Vista laptop back the cupboard and take it out twice yearly to run a slideshow, as I do now. The 'loophole' did seem too good to be true. Was a bit surprised the Insiders will get nothing then, other than being able to play with the new versions early.
-
scottishtv
- Posts: 743
- Joined: Thu 01 Apr, 2004 15.36
- Location: Edinburgh
I think hardware manufacturers would've also strongly voiced negative views about any XP to Win10 offer. It's only anecdotal, but I've spoken to a couple of people recently who run small business/home office operations and they have recently bought new machines in anticipation of Windows 10. Ironically they've made the few tweaks required to hide most of the Metro interface, and are now enjoying using a much better machine, albeit running Windows 8.1. If that#s anything to go by, then Windows 8's bad name/reputation may have been holding back a lot of sales.
Finally, a new build. 10158 is downloading on my test system right now. From reading other accounts of it this build just seems to have a bit of polish added and no significant new features, which is as you'd expect this late on.
I thought since we have a number of IT types on here that this was as good a time as any to discuss the new update policy for Windows 10. With 10, only Enterprise and equivalent SKUs (such as the 'for education' versions) will retain the traditional windows lifecycle policy (5 years of feature updates, 5 years of security updates only) - and the traditional windows update system giving you the option of refusing to install anything you don't want. This is justified on the grounds that where you've got huge networks of thousands of stations running standard images used to access mission-critical applications you can't just have an update forced on you which will break it.
Great, but what about SME's? They won't have systems of such a scale and as such generally will be running the professional version of Windows that came with their hardware rather than a standard image. But the fact that they might only be running 20 stations does not alter the fact that they still might have a mission-critical process which could be broken by uncontrolled updates. Microsoft will permit pro versions to defer for 4 months (and a further 4 if your updates come from WSUS) but ultimately they will eventually expect you to install any new build, any new feature, any update that they push out or you'll lose support for security updates. For me, this is a terrifying prospect. When at smaller business the 'IT Department' is usually just a function of someone working there (or 1 dedicated IT person if you're really lucky) it is a huge workload to expect that limited resource to be constantly testing updates and seeking resolution for things that don't work against a 16-week clock. When that person might well be tied up with a beefy project (like replacing the fileserver and rolling out a new version of some mission critical peace of software) the last thing you need to worry about is whether an update might break the client machines. There's also no (legitimate) way of getting an Enterprise version of Windows as a single licence for a single machine, so it's not like you can even decided to cough up extra money for the functionality.
Home users get it even worse - they will have updates pushed out automatically with not even the option to defer. Putting aside the fact that I'm personally aware of several businesses running Home versions of Windows (if you don't need to participate in a domain and are happy with a simple peer to peer network with local credentials then home versions will do you just fine) there are still plenty of legitimate reasons why a home user might want to retain control over their updates. I personally remember a few years ago when Microsoft pushed out a new driver for my graphics card which had no SDL support. This caused a number of older games I still played to stop working...so I just rolled back to the previous driver and disabled that particular update from installing again. I won't be able to do this on Window 10.
Of course it makes sense for the default behaviour to be to download all updates, but the idea that there is no way of changing it is preposterous. I do hope they backtrack on this pretty soon.
I thought since we have a number of IT types on here that this was as good a time as any to discuss the new update policy for Windows 10. With 10, only Enterprise and equivalent SKUs (such as the 'for education' versions) will retain the traditional windows lifecycle policy (5 years of feature updates, 5 years of security updates only) - and the traditional windows update system giving you the option of refusing to install anything you don't want. This is justified on the grounds that where you've got huge networks of thousands of stations running standard images used to access mission-critical applications you can't just have an update forced on you which will break it.
Great, but what about SME's? They won't have systems of such a scale and as such generally will be running the professional version of Windows that came with their hardware rather than a standard image. But the fact that they might only be running 20 stations does not alter the fact that they still might have a mission-critical process which could be broken by uncontrolled updates. Microsoft will permit pro versions to defer for 4 months (and a further 4 if your updates come from WSUS) but ultimately they will eventually expect you to install any new build, any new feature, any update that they push out or you'll lose support for security updates. For me, this is a terrifying prospect. When at smaller business the 'IT Department' is usually just a function of someone working there (or 1 dedicated IT person if you're really lucky) it is a huge workload to expect that limited resource to be constantly testing updates and seeking resolution for things that don't work against a 16-week clock. When that person might well be tied up with a beefy project (like replacing the fileserver and rolling out a new version of some mission critical peace of software) the last thing you need to worry about is whether an update might break the client machines. There's also no (legitimate) way of getting an Enterprise version of Windows as a single licence for a single machine, so it's not like you can even decided to cough up extra money for the functionality.
Home users get it even worse - they will have updates pushed out automatically with not even the option to defer. Putting aside the fact that I'm personally aware of several businesses running Home versions of Windows (if you don't need to participate in a domain and are happy with a simple peer to peer network with local credentials then home versions will do you just fine) there are still plenty of legitimate reasons why a home user might want to retain control over their updates. I personally remember a few years ago when Microsoft pushed out a new driver for my graphics card which had no SDL support. This caused a number of older games I still played to stop working...so I just rolled back to the previous driver and disabled that particular update from installing again. I won't be able to do this on Window 10.
Of course it makes sense for the default behaviour to be to download all updates, but the idea that there is no way of changing it is preposterous. I do hope they backtrack on this pretty soon.
The current build is now 10166 for fast ring and 10162 for slow ring - but if you've not updated to them yet you won't be getting them (or at least not through any official channel). Microsoft has temporarily suspended Windows Insider updates in preparation for RTM. If you're on an earlier build whatever you're running will show as up to date. The ISO builds of 10162 are also about to be taken down too. And pre-release builds will no longer activate. I guess this means they want to lock down the insider programme to those already in it in order to have a known maximum number of people to push the next update out to in order to see how their servers cope with the load and identify what kind of capacity they will need to deal with the mass upgrading that will likely take place during August and September.
Depending on what you read, the next build will be either an RTM candidate or the RTM build itself and this will be pushed out through Windows Update using the production channels rather than the fast/slow ring channels. ISOs of this build will be delayed as Microsoft wants insiders to do in-place upgrades through Windows Update to test how well that system works rather than do clean installs as an in-place upgrade is how they expect most early migrations to Windows 10 to be done.
Microsoft have already announced an update to RTM to be released in October (ahead of a major update for summer 2016, which would appear to be something that will happen yearly now). Reading between the lines (and judging by all the little niggling things in insider preview that still aren't fixed) I would say that unlike in previous versions where RTM had to be as perfect as possible, RTM will be a version judged good enough to use as a day to day OS but still not quite perfect, and the October update will represent the real baseline standard for Windows 10.
Despite having enthusiastically run every build of insider preview (even giving my testbed an upgrade from an old netbook to an old Core 2 Duo Office PC which can run it much better), I've no intention of upgrading my main system from the outset when there are still many unanswered questions about the upgrade and when it is not clear if Microsoft will back off from their quite frankly terrifying update policy on the home SKUs of Windows 10.
Depending on what you read, the next build will be either an RTM candidate or the RTM build itself and this will be pushed out through Windows Update using the production channels rather than the fast/slow ring channels. ISOs of this build will be delayed as Microsoft wants insiders to do in-place upgrades through Windows Update to test how well that system works rather than do clean installs as an in-place upgrade is how they expect most early migrations to Windows 10 to be done.
Microsoft have already announced an update to RTM to be released in October (ahead of a major update for summer 2016, which would appear to be something that will happen yearly now). Reading between the lines (and judging by all the little niggling things in insider preview that still aren't fixed) I would say that unlike in previous versions where RTM had to be as perfect as possible, RTM will be a version judged good enough to use as a day to day OS but still not quite perfect, and the October update will represent the real baseline standard for Windows 10.
Despite having enthusiastically run every build of insider preview (even giving my testbed an upgrade from an old netbook to an old Core 2 Duo Office PC which can run it much better), I've no intention of upgrading my main system from the outset when there are still many unanswered questions about the upgrade and when it is not clear if Microsoft will back off from their quite frankly terrifying update policy on the home SKUs of Windows 10.
A few days ago, build 10240 was released. Depending on what you read, this version is 1 of 3 things:
1. It is the RTM build which will be released on July 29th.
2. It is an RTM preview, but actual RTM will still be a different build
3. It is the RTM build in the sense that RTM will be 10240, but there will still be required updates pushed out to get it to RTM standard and so this + the updates will be what Microsoft considers RTM.
I think scenario 1 is extremely unlikely and would personally prefer 2 but 3 is a definite possibility. Although this doesn't present itself as a test build in the way earlier builds did (no watermark on the screen and no expiry date shown - which curiously means what I'm currently running just reports as an activated version of Windows with no caveats to this shown on screen), there is still a lot of test stuff in it - the insider previews option in settings is still there, IE still sports the sad face button, and a couple of small bugs/lack of polish still isn't resolved (like the white title bars for applications where the developer hasn't specified a colour - surely they should pick up the accent colour where no colour is set just like Windows 7/8?).
I'd also like to see a little bit more in terms of configuration options - eg you can't make the window borders more than 1 pixel wide and the start menu needs an option to show groups separately on the list rather than plonk them all in together with the ungrouped apps. This of course might never happen.
Compatibility with older apps seems pretty solid, I've not found anything that would work in 7 but won't work in 10 yet (including 16 bit apps in the 32 bit build).
Edge is now working as a pretty competent browser, I've not felt the need to use IE once yet other than to check it still works, but I do feel it's going to suffer from a total lack of market recognition which may see it suffer when both of it's main competitors are now very well established. Whilst a new browser may have been the way forward in terms of development, from a marketing perspective I'm still not sure why they felt the need to ditch the IE brand when it is the market leader (particularly to then give Edge an icon which immediately harks back to IE). I also wonder how many corporate images are going to be set to use IE anyway which isn't going to do much for the corporate experience when IE11 is almost 2 years old already and will end up getting hopelessly outdated yet still in frontline use with huge market share - it could end up like the IE6 problem all over again.
1. It is the RTM build which will be released on July 29th.
2. It is an RTM preview, but actual RTM will still be a different build
3. It is the RTM build in the sense that RTM will be 10240, but there will still be required updates pushed out to get it to RTM standard and so this + the updates will be what Microsoft considers RTM.
I think scenario 1 is extremely unlikely and would personally prefer 2 but 3 is a definite possibility. Although this doesn't present itself as a test build in the way earlier builds did (no watermark on the screen and no expiry date shown - which curiously means what I'm currently running just reports as an activated version of Windows with no caveats to this shown on screen), there is still a lot of test stuff in it - the insider previews option in settings is still there, IE still sports the sad face button, and a couple of small bugs/lack of polish still isn't resolved (like the white title bars for applications where the developer hasn't specified a colour - surely they should pick up the accent colour where no colour is set just like Windows 7/8?).
I'd also like to see a little bit more in terms of configuration options - eg you can't make the window borders more than 1 pixel wide and the start menu needs an option to show groups separately on the list rather than plonk them all in together with the ungrouped apps. This of course might never happen.
Compatibility with older apps seems pretty solid, I've not found anything that would work in 7 but won't work in 10 yet (including 16 bit apps in the 32 bit build).
Edge is now working as a pretty competent browser, I've not felt the need to use IE once yet other than to check it still works, but I do feel it's going to suffer from a total lack of market recognition which may see it suffer when both of it's main competitors are now very well established. Whilst a new browser may have been the way forward in terms of development, from a marketing perspective I'm still not sure why they felt the need to ditch the IE brand when it is the market leader (particularly to then give Edge an icon which immediately harks back to IE). I also wonder how many corporate images are going to be set to use IE anyway which isn't going to do much for the corporate experience when IE11 is almost 2 years old already and will end up getting hopelessly outdated yet still in frontline use with huge market share - it could end up like the IE6 problem all over again.