|
Post by Tony Madge - HJG on Dec 23, 2019 17:07:19 GMT
Hope you all have a good festive break and a wonderful 2020. On a sadder note it is the end of Windows 7 January 2020 as MS stop updates. Now I have Windows 10 on my main PC that I don't use much and I was forced into Windows 10 on my laptop when the old one broke. My view is its restrictive, the layout looks cheap and nasty, it hangs a lot it just is not user friendly at all and I will mourn the loss of Windows 7, sadly new hardware and programs are coded to use Windows 10 so there seems no way back. I wonder how dangerous it is to use Windows 7 after January as to be honest I only use it for FS mainly no banking no credit transactions... Plus I rarely update it these days as I often think MS designers like Apple are lazy and do not check the functionality of updates and update when there seems little need, lets face it if they got it right first time round updates would be a lot less frequent.... Ok last rant of 2019 there.... I will keep running 7 as it is pretty good in my view and safe? well maybe someone can put me right
|
|
|
Post by Falcon on Dec 23, 2019 18:20:18 GMT
Tony, I was forced into Windows 10 a year ago after my Vista OS became so outdated I couldn't browse with it. lol
I actually I have been very happy with it, once I got over the shock. Loading FSX on here was very simple once I let the computer do what it wanted. It actually told me to run compatibility tests to see what the older programs should run as. XP2 was actually a choice. I haven't had a bit of problems with it, as it is my main computer. I was very skeptical at first. Since this new machine has 16gb ram, 8 core processor and stand alone AMD Radon GPU, I get amazing FPS that I don't even get obsessed with anymore. So good luck my friend from over the pond. Hang in there. I haven't tried to install FS2004. My FSX is so large 300GB I don't want to slow it down. Merry Christmas Denny H. aka Falcon
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2019 19:14:28 GMT
I wonder how dangerous it is to use Windows 7 after January I will keep running 7 as it is pretty good in my view and safe? well maybe someone can put me right It is safe as long as you keep definitions of your anti virus software updated daily and your web browser is at latest version. And you do not tell anyone your IP address. Also if Microsoft still offers security and regular updates for Windows 7, take advantage of that unless you do not want Windows update for Windows 7 BUT be sure to keep updating anti virus definitions for your anti virus software and keep updating your web browser. Thank you for whole year of WONDERFUl repaints. Happy Chanukah to you and Merry Christmas to you. Regards, Aharon
|
|
|
Post by hornit - HJG on Dec 23, 2019 22:22:45 GMT
Haha! I just finished building a new computer a few months back with a Cloned HD with 7 on it. Working like a CHAMP!!!! No problems whatsoever. Practice safe surfing and keep your anti virus etc up to date.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Monce - HJG on Dec 23, 2019 22:32:11 GMT
I'm still using W7 even after its attempts to destroy FS9 few years back on my computer. Just make sure all updates by MS are turned off which is what I've done. I've had no issues with any security problems on the OS. What problems I've had have come through the browser (firefox) and we're quickly fixed by Norton.
I'll keep plugging along until next year when I will purchase a new computer to run MSFS 2020
Mike
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Dec 24, 2019 1:30:50 GMT
We have 3 PC's here .... each with different OS's. One's WIN 10 .... another's WIN 7 .... and the other's "so old" I'm not even going to say We run a variety of FS installations on our OS's .... ranging from MSFS 2004, FSX, and other stand-alone programs too .... and which are composed of both freeware and payware. We haven't experienced any problems with anything using either OS. We keep our principal FS PC "right away from the internet". Personally .... I've found WIN 10 to be a stable platform .... and very user friendly too .... and one of my FS colleagues is even currently using FS2004 on it and with HJG aircraft, panels, sounds, and effects installed too .... and with no adverse issues (that I'm aware of at least) being experienced .... based on what I've "seen" and know to date I also personally think that as applies to anything new whenever migrating from one thing/OS (one may have been using for quite some duration previouly) to something else/another more recent OS .... then .... there's an obvious "learning curve involved" and until one's better/fully adapted to the new OS .... even R/W aeroplanes tend to be like this too and as a very vague comparison I've find myselself siding with both Jim and Mike here. Their comments are good .... and relevant .... right down to the importance keeping up with anti-virus updates .... SO .... be careful, and be thorough/meticulous, and on the basis of their/this advice also keep your minds, and eyes, out of the gutter by being careful in regard to what you do, where you go, and indeed what you're watching/looking at as well Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by christrott on Dec 24, 2019 2:22:57 GMT
TBH, Windows 10 has followed with typical Microsoft pattern of the last couple decades (although much of it wasn't of their own doing - just how things shook out). Every other version released is the "good" one, starting with Windows 1. Windows 1 was okay, Windows 2 had major problems (which led to 2.X) 3 was really good, 3.1 was okay but was made much better by 3.11, 95 was a cluster, 98 was GREAT, and ME was an OEM forced pile of stuff. Parallel to 95, M$ introduced NT 4.0 which was actually a good platform, so good that they then released Windows 2000 (which was decent, but had issues), but that led to XP (aka Windows NT 5.1) which was at the time so good, that Microsoft broke their development cycle and it was 5 years before a new version of Windows was released, and that was Vista (aka Longhorn). Vista ended up as it was for several reasons, but the biggest was that Longhorn failed and they tried to release anyway without re-writing the rest of the OS to deal with not having Longhorn's new file structure. Out of the ashes of Vista came Windows 7, the real successor to XP as it was built around everything that worked in XP and not trying to completely re-write HDD file structures. Then we got the dumpster fire that was Windows 8, and now we have Windows 10, that once again was a properly developed OS that didn't suffer when "key" technologies didn't work and the OS got shipped without making sure the rest of the OS worked okay without it.
|
|
|
Post by Peter Liddell - HJG Admin on Dec 24, 2019 19:53:31 GMT
TBH, Windows 10 has followed with typical Microsoft pattern of the last couple decades (although much of it wasn't of their own doing - just how things shook out). Every other version released is the "good" one, starting with Windows 1. Windows 1 was okay, Windows 2 had major problems (which led to 2.X) 3 was really good, 3.1 was okay but was made much better by 3.11, 95 was a cluster, 98 was GREAT, and ME was an OEM forced pile of stuff. Parallel to 95, M$ introduced NT 4.0 which was actually a good platform, so good that they then released Windows 2000 (which was decent, but had issues), but that led to XP (aka Windows NT 5.1) which was at the time so good, that Microsoft broke their development cycle and it was 5 years before a new version of Windows was released, and that was Vista (aka Longhorn). Vista ended up as it was for several reasons, but the biggest was that Longhorn failed and they tried to release anyway without re-writing the rest of the OS to deal with not having Longhorn's new file structure. Out of the ashes of Vista came Windows 7, the real successor to XP as it was built around everything that worked in XP and not trying to completely re-write HDD file structures. Then we got the dumpster fire that was Windows 8, and now we have Windows 10, that once again was a properly developed OS that didn't suffer when "key" technologies didn't work and the OS got shipped without making sure the rest of the OS worked okay without it. Yes pretty much... W2K Pros biggest problem is the dev cycle was interupted by the XP launch. 2000 Pro was always supposed to be a workstation OS, with ME being the home OS... but when ME became such a royal clusterf*** more people (and OEMs) took to 2000 Pro than expected which led MS to switch to the NT kernel for the home use OS as well and develop XP to replace both 2000 Pro and ME. 2000 Pro was actually better than XP for many uses until XP SP2, but driver support was a big issue as it was never intended to be for end user systems many low cost hardware OEMs didn't keep drivers updated for 2000 as much as 95/98/ME. When XP came along the driver model was originally supposed to be the same for XP and 2000 Pro, but the backwards compatibility was dropped as some point and so... 2000 was the ended too soon. I ran a 2K Pro workstation for years for VM Ware, web page building and project testing with out any issues, but I built it with hardware with good 2K support. I only stopped using it when the CPU died...
|
|
|
Post by christrott on Dec 26, 2019 0:32:02 GMT
ME was an OEM forced deal. Windows 2000 was supposed to be the only version of Windows released on the NT kernel with 98 being the last DOS-based OS. However, the OEMs wanted a "special" version for the Millennium to ship with their new hardware and mollify owners about Y2K.
It all started with problems in Win2K's production led to the release of 98SE as an interim while Microsoft worked on Win2K and the successor projects - Odyssey and Neptune. Both of the successor projects ran into problems and wouldn't be ready until late 2001 or early 2002, which led to the OEMs wanting "whatever was ready" to be shipped. Microsoft had already announced the end of the 9x line (and the DOS kernel) with the release of 98SE, so this put them in a bind because Neptune (the consumer OS) wasn't going to be ready in time for a "New Millennium" release. The OEMs wouldn't wait for Microsoft to finish their work on Neptune and so they pumped out ME as a combination of the new features from 2000 on the old DOS kernel and shipped it. While it did a modest marketing campaign around ME, in the background they were telling the OEMs and anyone who would listen that ME wasn't their idea, they weren't going to support it beyond what they had to because they had stopped development on Neptune (now XP) so they could make the OEMs happy and they weren't doing that again. They knew XP was where they wanted to go and they were going to get it out as fast as possible - which they did, less than a year after ME became available for purchase.
|
|