.NETLover3790 wrote:I find it reasonable that you refer only to official requirements, but you often can run them on less than that, and even the official requirements do not imply reasonable performance as you said. I disagree with them being considered meaningless however.
I apologize for the confusion. I did not mean that the official requirements are meaningless; rather, the individual (subjective) requirements—those "you often can run them [operating systems] on less than that"—are meaningless to me. Regarding reasonable (or rather unreasonable) performance I again referred to subjective requirements and not the official ones.
.NETLover3790 wrote:In addition to criticizing the speed of Windows 10, the author gave the opinion of it being god awful
What does this even mean
It is most certainly not bloated; no more than, say, Windows Vista. Further it is more componentized than previous versions, and additional features are configurable or removable.
.NETLover3790 wrote:unfinished after four years of availability
Such a position is interesting to me. How would one define completion? Was Windows Vista incomplete before Service Pack 2? Was Windows 7 incomplete before Service Pack 1?
.NETLover3790 wrote:and a piece of spyware, which I agree with.
I cannot imagine why.
.NETLover3790 wrote:If you want legitimate examples of Windows 10 encroaching on the privacy of users, I can give them. For example, when I logged into my Microsoft account and checked one of their Windows 10 pages, it showed me a list of my PCs, and it had the names and Windows 10 editions of two PCs I had run Windows 10 on in the past. Now I had not configured either of these computers using my Microsoft account, I had used a local account, yet it still had their name and said "Windows 10 Enterprise" (as that's what I ran) below it. I believe it found this out by finding that they are attributed to the same router and IP address. Very shady. I don't see why they needed to have this and track computers I ran Windows 10 on.
This is not a legitimate example as it does not happen. Nevertheless, I will ask: Do you have any proof
.NETLover3790 wrote:Didn't help my (already bad) user experience.
It reads as though your experience(s) is based on your preconceived notions of what you already think it should be.
.NETLover3790 wrote:Additionally, while not encroaching on privacy, the whole forced updates thing is BS. If I want to block them, let me. If it's not convenient when MS wants me to update, I will put it off. The old Windows Update from Vista was great because it didn't push updates on you that you didn't need. It showed "Important" and "Optional" updates and let you choose depending on if it updated a component you cared about, or if it was just a useless feature update, or if it caused a BSOD, what have you. It's my computer, give me the control.
I do not disagree with your commentary regarding the forced updates. Microsoft certainly should provide additional functionality (e.g., the ability to disable driver updates from within the interface); however, it has finally brought the ability to pause updates to both Home and Pro, which is laudable and gives me hope for the future.