Upgraded to Win 10

[was_butnotnow]

Well I bit the bullet and upgraded my Win 7 desktop to Win 10
I did our laptop win 8 and all went well so next was to see if I wanted to do the desktop. I have a couple of old programs and was worried if they would work under the new OS. I have an old Netscape Composer 4.79 which I love and use it to build my web sites. It wouldn't run on the laptop under Win 10 but I also have Netscape 7.2 that does. Also I now use Mozilla Thunderbird for email so knew it would be OK in Win 10. But I used to use Eudora email and wanted to make sure I could access the old email files.
Win 10 said these old programs would not run but after upgrading ALL my old 32bit programs run just fine.
I am very impressed how all old program settings transferred over.
And both my old Composer 4.79 and Eudora also run great. The thing is these old programs run ok since they were already installed on the old OS. But if I would want to do a new install of them then they wont run.
Another reason I wanted to upgrade to Win 10..., I had so many Win 7 system updates on my old OS some updated and some didn't. Now all that is gone and a fresh start with a new OS. Microsoft got this one right. Oh and when traveling with limited bandwidth there is a option to tell it you are on a metered ISP so updates don't blow your usage.
Go to settings...Network and Internet...Advanced settings...Metered connection... set as metered connection. Also go to settings... updates and security...advanced options... Choose how updates are installed...pick Notify to schedule restart... You'll be asked to schedule a restart to finish installing updates. Updates won't download over a metered connection (where charges may apply).

[mikestock]

Tried to install W10 last night. Failed. Had to run diagnostics and updates. Tried to upgrade again today. Failed again.:?

[mlts22]

There is one camp that says that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Another camp says, upgrade every time, or else be left in the dust.

In 25 years of IT work, the truth is between the two extremes. Other than Internet capabilities, a Mac Plus from 1986 running Word 4.0 would work just fine for 95% of the users out there. However, what happens on the Internet can fundamentally change things quickly, so one has to keep abreast of changes somewhat, so as not to get stung by ransomware or other threats.

For example, my old, custom desktop from 2002 which sits on a shelf. It isn't even worth powering up because everything it can do, can be done in a virtual machine on my MacBook Pro, for a fraction of the power/cooling needed. Well, not everything... should I have a need to use a 5.25" floppy, I might fire it up. However, I have not come across a 3.5" floppy, much less its bigger cousin at my place in decades. On the other hand, my MacBook from 2008 is still useful, even though it is considered a "vintage Mac" by Apple. It runs the latest OS, browse the web, and do the basics, and has 8 GB of RAM, and a decent SSD.

It really depends on the person. A machine that is usable for me may be just endless frustration for someone else.

[monkey44]

QUOTE:: "Software "upgrades" are indeed a racket just to get your money.....in most cases. Have you also noticed that Microsoft has gone BACK to the leasing method of acquiring their application software ??

That means that if you "buy" Office, it will only work for XX months unless you cough up additional money at that time.
It is just a matter of time until they try to pull that with their so-called operating system too. Will you so happily jump on the upgrade bandwagon if and when it costs you $100 a year just to continue to RUN your computer ????" Unquote::

Yes, for example, I NEED / MUST HAVE Photoshop for my work. When my PC dies I buy a new PC, and my Photoshop won't work. Adobe tells me I have to buy a new program. Why should I? My program works fine, but it won't activate without a fee to Adobe. And, now, Adobe is transitioning to an active account system, where you have to pay a monthly fee just to use Photoshop, and it never quits ... just keeps charging and charging you, like a rental.

Similar with my other programs - MSWord 2007 works fine for my work, does exactly what I need, and I don't need the "Upgrades", which often foul up my previous detailing on photos or word projects - so it means a ton of extra work for me each time this happens -

Yes, if I need a new PC, I should buy it and pay for it ... but the auxiliary costs to upgrade all my software should not become a requirement of that purchase.

[stetwood]

bwanshoom wrote:

Sam Spade wrote:

bwanshoom wrote:
Why do you still need to use that?

I assume:
He paid for it.
It works for him to do what he wants or needs.

Why should he be FORCED to change ????
Hint: He shouldn't be.

I didn't say he needed to change it. I was asking an honest question, not condemning him. Sheesh.

Then why ask the question? I have had to update computers and software not because they didn't work, but because the financial companies would not support them or because the internet became bloated with ads, pictures and other garbage. I still use a Dos program.

[joebedford]

was_butnotnow wrote:
Most time it's better to just hold off and buy a new computer with the latest OS already installed and not try to upgrade.

Nah!

[was_butnotnow]

OP here with update. A couple of things Eudora was working on my old win 7 now works fine under win 10. I don't use it but it is there is I need to look at old email. I use Mozilla Thunderbird which I like. Next... I use fences and it would not let me move any icons anywhere until I uninstalled it (not an easy feat) and got their latest version. Next... After a win 10 update I got a black screen with curser because win 10 removed my video driver. A common problem on Google search. Had to reinstall Win 10 and hope it doesn't reoccur when I do the next update. Avast Internet Security wouldn't run the firewall until I rebooted. Had to Google to see what to change as Win 10 restart would just say restarting forever.
I seem to have Win 10 working right now but it seems it is not still ready for prime time. If you are not computer savvy (or a computer luddite) you might want to hold off doing an upgrade. Most time it's better to just hold off and buy a new computer with the latest OS already installed and not try to upgrade.

[mr__ed]

I upgraded from W8.1 to W10 a few months ago and just applied the latest update for W10 today and all is working flawlessly.

[Sam_Spade]

Fizz wrote:

Everything computer related is evolving faster and faster. The operating system must keep up or everything bogs down.

That is a reasonable point to argue, I just don't agree with it.

EVERYTHING I want or need to do today still can be serviced quite nicely by XP. Everything.

How about supporting your point by listing just a couple of "innovations" in 10 that everybody just can't live without ??

It seems to me that you refute your own position when you say "There is nothing new in 10."

[Fizz]

mileshuff wrote:

Fizz wrote:
If you like wearing your old shoes, do so.
Don't come here telling everybody upgrading is a racket to get your money.
If you prefer to be left behind do so quietly.

You seem to miss the point. Just because something is considered 'new' technology does not make it better. Reliability, compatibility and stability are essential in a business. If we are to invest heavily in developing custom in house software to run on Windows we cannot go in knowing that effort will be obsolete and 'left behind' in 10 years or maybe less and require a complete rewrite.

There in nothing new with Win 10. It's simply keeping up with the times. A few years ago there was no digital photography, no videos. Now everybody is into it, same with streaming music, movies etc.
Everything computer related is evolving faster and faster. The operating system must keep up or everything bogs down. Nobody really knows where we will be in five years but you can be sure XP, Vista or Win7 will not be up to the task.
Like it or not it's not about you it's the other 99% that will eventually benefit. This has been argued over and over again since DOS. That's just how it is.

[mileshuff]

Fizz wrote:
If you like wearing your old shoes, do so.
Don't come here telling everybody upgrading is a racket to get your money.
If you prefer to be left behind do so quietly.

You seem to miss the point. Just because something is considered 'new' technology does not make it better. Reliability, compatibility and stability are essential in a business. If we are to invest heavily in developing custom in house software to run on Windows we cannot go in knowing that effort will be obsolete and 'left behind' in 10 years or maybe less and require a complete rewrite.

[mileshuff]

Chris Bryant wrote:
I miss Eudora- best POP Email program, bar none. If it was still around, it would *almost* make it worth it to use Windows again.

I liked the old Eudora as well. The latest version made (Eurdora OSE) was based on the open source Mozilla Thunderbird with much the same look and functionality.

[Sam_Spade]

bwanshoom wrote:
So I asked the question - to him, not you.

Sorry. Maybe your question should have been framed a bit differently. If there had been just a few words of detail, I would not have commented at all.

I hope he will respond. I suspect you are putting too much importance on the "need" choice of words.

Now I would like to know the answer too.

[Sam_Spade]

Fizz wrote:

Don't come here telling everybody upgrading is a racket to get your money.
If you prefer to be left behind do so quietly.

And what else should I just lay down and "take quietly" ??

I don't agree with your attitude. When the lemmings march off the cliff, I will be happily left behind.

Software "upgrades" are indeed a racket just to get your money.....in most cases. Have you also noticed that Microsoft has gone BACK to the leasing method of acquiring their application software ??

That means that if you "buy" Office, it will only work for XX months unless you cough up additional money at that time.
It is just a matter of time until they try to pull that with their so-called operating system too. Will you so happily jump on the upgrade bandwagon if and when it costs you $100 a year just to continue to RUN your computer ????

[bwanshoom]

Sam Spade wrote:

bwanshoom wrote:
I was asking an honest question, not condemning him. Sheesh.

And I was saying that the answer should be obvious.

It's like an old shoe; it serves the purpose and is comfortable.

Marketing is trying to convince us that changing just for the sake of change is good. It is a LIE.

The answer is not obvious or I wouldn't have asked the question. Visual Studio is a development IDE and there have been a tremendous amount of improvements made to IDEs since 1998. A more robust and capable IDE can be had for free from Microsoft. At this point using that program is not at all like an old shoe - it's problematic and ill-suited for today's technology.

Since he specifically said "need" and I specifically quoted "need" it sounds like there might be another reason other than the ones you listed like he develops programs targeted for older hardware or architectures or he's using 3rd party libraries or SDKs that are no longer updated, etc. So I asked the question - to him, not you.