Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Mike Lewis on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Upgrade or Not
- Thread starter Macola10
- Start date
BionicJohn
Technical User
I found my domestic upgrade process from Win 7 Prof very stressful, time consuming and in my case, expensive, costing just under UK£100.Macola10 said:
The Win7 "Guest" account did not carry over correctly with seemingly video issues. This can be avoided by saving any files in the Guest account remotely and disabling the account before upgrading. Then recreate the account. There are threads on hear about the finer points.
I also suffered (apparently uniquely) a corrupt UEFI during restarts of the big Win10 update 1511. To cut a long story short, I ended up replacing the motherboard, after which the primary C: drive continued with the update, and all was well after some 20 minutes of reboots and information screens. Maybe I should be generous and congratulate the Win10 update 1511 for recovering from its own mess.
Win10 does seem pretty smooth now it's up and running, though I would agree with Dilettante that Cortana should be ripped out, WinRT as well and the fake Start Menu replaced with a real Start Menu like "Classic Start Menu" from
For some reason I had to phone Microsoft to re-authenticate my Office 2013 suite after the update whereas Adobe CS5.5 continued without a murmur.
I have Win7 Sony VAIO laptop on which I now have stopped the nags, but after my above experience I am reluctant to upgrade.
My advice would be, that before you start, you have a complete backup and image as insurance and a lot of spare time available. Hopefully all will be well, and the process over in under an hour.
Iechyd da! John
Glannau Mersi, Lloegr.
goombawaho
MIS
This would be the OBVIOUS recommendation to anyone/everyone with a computer regardless of what you're doing and unrelated to upgrading!!!! But............ what percentage of people have either one or the other? In my experience, 10% of non-technical people.
"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.
BionicJohn
Technical User
I feel it's worth stating, as John Cleese would put, the bleedin' obvious.
Iechyd da! John
Glannau Mersi, Lloegr.
Iechyd da! John
Glannau Mersi, Lloegr.
Also Microsoft has a link on their web site to check if your windows 7/8 machine can be safely updated. If there are going to be any problems it lets you know before hand. See the link below.
Bill
Lead Application Developer
New York State, USA
Bill
Lead Application Developer
New York State, USA
dilettante
MIS
Of course that site will turn its nose up at you if you are running Vista. You have to isntall Windows 7 first before it will even offer to perform any such evaluation, something totally absurd.
The one system I went through this with was the only one that completed the "upgrade" smoothly too. Microsoft seems very intent on cutting off its nose to spite its face.
The one system I went through this with was the only one that completed the "upgrade" smoothly too. Microsoft seems very intent on cutting off its nose to spite its face.
goombawaho
MIS
Everything and everyone will turn its nose up at you upon the mention of Vista!!!
"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.
"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.
goombawaho
MIS
We probably should not get started down that road.............makes us look like cranky, curmudgeonly old people.
"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.
"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.
hairlessupportmonkey
IS-IT--Management
start10 (windows 10 brother to start8) - worth every penny.
ACSS - SME
General Geek
ACSS - SME
General Geek
goombawaho
MIS
Sort of like "that good looking guy with hair is just me 20 years ago". Not really the same.
"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.
"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.
goombawaho
MIS
Not sure I agree > Vista SP2, which was actually pretty good.
Well, it's in the past now so we should probably leave it.
"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.
Well, it's in the past now so we should probably leave it.
"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.
dilettante
MIS
You'll never sway those who bought into the campaign that Apple ran to discredit Vista.
Apple FUD
A "pack of dogs" mentality develops where barking and winking at each other far down in the ranks feels safe... even when the Alpha they follow is a plant with the goal of leading them over a cliff. They have no idea that others can easily see how mangy, weak, and low in the pecking order they are.
Apple FUD
A "pack of dogs" mentality develops where barking and winking at each other far down in the ranks feels safe... even when the Alpha they follow is a plant with the goal of leading them over a cliff. They have no idea that others can easily see how mangy, weak, and low in the pecking order they are.
Apples campaign was successful because Vista was a load of garbage. When you either have to turn off security totally or have to click an OK button many times to do anything is not a useful system. Windows 7 repaired many of the problems with Vista and I have used both.
Bill
Lead Application Developer
New York State, USA
Bill
Lead Application Developer
New York State, USA
>either have to turn off security totally or have to click an OK button many times to do anything is not a useful system
Which just goes to show that the Apple campaign worked. UAC was pretty much fixed and works no differently from W7 by the time we had Vista SP2
Which just goes to show that the Apple campaign worked. UAC was pretty much fixed and works no differently from W7 by the time we had Vista SP2
Exactly. When I used Vista, I was not on any of the service packs. It was so difficult to use I reinstalled XP and never used Vista again. The issue is not that they finally patched Vista. The issue is that they released such a POS in the first place.
Bill
Lead Application Developer
New York State, USA
Bill
Lead Application Developer
New York State, USA
dilettante
MIS
Windows 7 is unsafe by default. It tweaked UAC to unsafe levels to help the "I am still using Windows 9x which has no security" mob under pressure from hardware OEMs. This is the main reason so many were happy to swallow what Apple spooned out. Vista forced them to be responsible and they rejected that.
Most Windows security flaws mitigated by 'removing admin rights' shows how serious the problem is, though it falls short of pointing a finger at Windows 7 and later which are hazardous out of the box.
The good news is this can be fixed by adjusting the settings back to safe levels, which can also be pushed to machines via Group Policy.
All ancient history now except for the ongoing security hazard of the relaxed default UAC level post-Vista. Thanks so much for all the spam your zombied PCs are blasting out!
Most Windows security flaws mitigated by 'removing admin rights' shows how serious the problem is, though it falls short of pointing a finger at Windows 7 and later which are hazardous out of the box.
The good news is this can be fixed by adjusting the settings back to safe levels, which can also be pushed to machines via Group Policy.
All ancient history now except for the ongoing security hazard of the relaxed default UAC level post-Vista. Thanks so much for all the spam your zombied PCs are blasting out!
goombawaho
MIS
Hmm. Cranky!!
"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.
"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.
First of all, Vista clearly paved the way for Windows 7. It introduced a new graphics and sound model that would help the OS compete better with Apple and properly bring it into the 21st century. The big change was forcing drivers to run in user mode as opposed to administrative mode. The benefit was a more stable system. It became harder, for example, for a graphics glitch to cause a BSOD forcing an unexpected reboot - something that would have certainly caused a fatal crash in XP.
Benefits like that didn't come without a price. Third-party software developers were slow to react to the new Vista environment. Despite the long beta phase, Vista didn't have the widespread support it needed at launch to really be successful. As a result, early adopters found the new OS cumbersome, slow, and often buggy. Vista never recovered, at least not in time. Windows 7 didn't really fix the issues with Vista either. Truth is, by the time Windows 7 launched, 3rd-party support for Vista was already stabilizing, and it immediately carried over into Windows 7. The newer OS appeared to be the savior to Microsoft's Vista debacle, but in reality it had the benefit of not coming first. Vista deserves more credit than most people give it.
As for security, dilettante makes a good point. UAC in Windows 7 and later was relaxed, sacrificing a little security for usability. While Vista undoubtedly had the more secure UAC model, it rendered a system practically useless in an Office environment. Corporate administrators don't like to give standard users admin rights. But with Vista, you had to, otherwise non-admin users would be faced with entering admin credentials on top of clicking "Yes" to the UAC prompt (as you can imagine, this would become a nightmare for the company's IT dept). Some may think the newer UAC model in Windows 7 was a poor decision, but in reality, Microsoft had no choice. Vista's implementation of it wasn't practical for business, and without corporate backing, the OS had no chance of becoming widely accepted.
Good thing UAC is only one piece of the security pie. Advances in other areas, like software and hardware DEP (Data Execution Prevention), new features like "Supervisor Mode Execution Prevention" (SMEP) integrated within modern Intel CPU's, and Windows enhancements like ASLR and ForceASLR which randomize address space allocation, all help to make the environment more secure. Even with a flawed UAC model, these features make it harder for malicious code to gain complete access. So we shouldn't be quick to judge a weaker UAC in later Windows releases as meaning the OS is less secure. The operating systems are advancing in other ways.
-Carl
"The glass is neither half-full nor half-empty: it's twice as big as it needs to be."
[tab][navy]For this site's posting policies, click [/navy]here.
Benefits like that didn't come without a price. Third-party software developers were slow to react to the new Vista environment. Despite the long beta phase, Vista didn't have the widespread support it needed at launch to really be successful. As a result, early adopters found the new OS cumbersome, slow, and often buggy. Vista never recovered, at least not in time. Windows 7 didn't really fix the issues with Vista either. Truth is, by the time Windows 7 launched, 3rd-party support for Vista was already stabilizing, and it immediately carried over into Windows 7. The newer OS appeared to be the savior to Microsoft's Vista debacle, but in reality it had the benefit of not coming first. Vista deserves more credit than most people give it.
As for security, dilettante makes a good point. UAC in Windows 7 and later was relaxed, sacrificing a little security for usability. While Vista undoubtedly had the more secure UAC model, it rendered a system practically useless in an Office environment. Corporate administrators don't like to give standard users admin rights. But with Vista, you had to, otherwise non-admin users would be faced with entering admin credentials on top of clicking "Yes" to the UAC prompt (as you can imagine, this would become a nightmare for the company's IT dept). Some may think the newer UAC model in Windows 7 was a poor decision, but in reality, Microsoft had no choice. Vista's implementation of it wasn't practical for business, and without corporate backing, the OS had no chance of becoming widely accepted.
Good thing UAC is only one piece of the security pie. Advances in other areas, like software and hardware DEP (Data Execution Prevention), new features like "Supervisor Mode Execution Prevention" (SMEP) integrated within modern Intel CPU's, and Windows enhancements like ASLR and ForceASLR which randomize address space allocation, all help to make the environment more secure. Even with a flawed UAC model, these features make it harder for malicious code to gain complete access. So we shouldn't be quick to judge a weaker UAC in later Windows releases as meaning the OS is less secure. The operating systems are advancing in other ways.
-Carl
"The glass is neither half-full nor half-empty: it's twice as big as it needs to be."
[tab][navy]For this site's posting policies, click [/navy]here.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question