That’s total crap.
There will ALWAYS be issues, in every piece of software and every operating system.
This is true for Linux, Apple and Microsoft.
I can’t even begin to tell you all the problems I have had to get a new Linux variant/release to accept hardware. Or maybe I’m making up the thousands of forums and user communities out there just for this purpose?
Microsoft, like Linux, has the same problem. These operating systems run on other people’s hardware, and just about any vendor’s hardware is different from the other. That’s 10s of thousands of hardware combinations. Some stuff will just never be pre-tested before deployment.
You work in IT and you know this. If deployment was easy (in both Linux and Microsoft realms), then many of us would be out of a job!
Bottom line, Microsoft’s “woes” with these issues in Windows 10 are NOTHING new. It happened in Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 and R2, Windows 8, Windows Server 2008 and R2, Windows 7, Windows Vista, Windows Server 2003, Windows XP, Windows 2000 Server and Professional, Windows Millennium Edition, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 98, Windows 95, Windows NT 3.5/1, and the Windows For Workgroups 3.11, 3.1, 3.0 2.0 and MS-DOS. I’ve been down this road on EVERY one of these operating systems.
Additionally, I’ve been working with Red Hat Linux since it was a baby, using RH 3.0. I’ve been using every version of RH Enterprise since that came out in 2002. On every occasion, I’ve had various issues to contend with, including kernel upgrades that “broke” them. It’s what we do for a living.
And Apple? Well, if you are the sole maker of both the hardware and the software, you can test the heck out of them. Then they “just work”, right?
Still, when Apple release a new version, there are tons of support issues getting that release to deploy properly then, with some folks finding older hardware or software not working, etc., and this is on the approved, made by Apple only hardware.
Bottom line here, Dayglored, is that New Microsoft OSs are always like this, and it is nothing new in Microsoft management like you claim. They’ve always been dollar driven A’Holes!
BTW, the PC came out in 1981. Unless you’re talking about BASIC (written for Altair’s), most folks wouldn’t have worked with Microsoft before IBM came out with the PC.
Well, good morning to you, too! :-)
> There will ALWAYS be issues, in every piece of software and every operating system. This is true for Linux, Apple and Microsoft.
Of course it is. No argument there. But that wasn't my point; you appear to have missed it, so I'll try to explain here, bear with me...
> I can’t even begin to tell you all the problems I have had to get a new Linux variant/release to accept hardware. Or maybe I’m making up the thousands of forums and user communities out there just for this purpose?
There are such forums and communities for all OSes and nearly all applications.
You might be interested to know that I've participated in such communities since 1976, first was the KIM-1 User Group. I helped answer folks' questions, traded hints, and had some of my early software applications published in the Newsletter. That was, ummm, 40 years ago -- you needn't attempt to lecture me on this topic. Instead I suggest you take a look at my FR Profile Page section which contains a brief timeline of my involvement with computers.
> Microsoft, like Linux, has the same problem. These operating systems run on other people’s hardware, and just about any vendor’s hardware is different from the other. That’s 10s of thousands of hardware combinations. Some stuff will just never be pre-tested before deployment. You work in IT and you know this. If deployment was easy (in both Linux and Microsoft realms), then many of us would be out of a job!
That's correct, to a degree. But I wasn't talking about the acknowledged difficulty of testing every single possible combination of S/w and H/W. I was speaking of these problems as being indicative of an attitude, common in upper management, of setting and holding to arbitrary release schedules, regardless of whether proper QA has been done on the product.
> Bottom line, Microsoft’s “woes” with these issues in Windows 10 are NOTHING new. It happened in Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 and R2, Windows 8, Windows Server 2008 and R2, Windows 7, Windows Vista, Windows Server 2003, Windows XP, Windows 2000 Server and Professional, Windows Millennium Edition, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 98, Windows 95, Windows NT 3.5/1, and the Windows For Workgroups 3.11, 3.1, 3.0 2.0 and MS-DOS. I’ve been down this road on EVERY one of these operating systems.
No argument, but since you're familiar with the whole line, I'll ask you to recall that a few times (notably in mid-late 90's) Microsoft has had to lay out and enforce a set of standards for what types of hardware and architectures Windows would run on -- and they were entirely correct to do so, because it had gotten so crazy. That was 20 years ago, vendors are used to the idea that they need to stick within guidelines to have Windows work on their systems.
My point was that those vendors made systems that ran Windows and worked with Windows -- and then Microsoft CHANGED the rules and BROKE things. That was my point. They screwed up on some very visible things, and they didn't catch their own mistakes. It had nothing to do with other vendors' systems being out of compliance.
> Additionally, I’ve been working with Red Hat Linux since it was a baby, using RH 3.0. I’ve been using every version of RH Enterprise since that came out in 2002. On every occasion, I’ve had various issues to contend with, including kernel upgrades that “broke” them. It’s what we do for a living.
Point granted, but RedHat (incidentally, my favorite Linux since about 2001) and Linux in general have taken a much looser approach by definition. They're a different sort of "product", indeed, with a few exceptions Linux wasn't even what I'd call a "product" (in the sense of a carefully defined and delineated offering) until only a few years ago.
In recent years, Canonical notwithstanding, Ubuntu has gone off the rails in this regard. Each new release makes changes for the sake of changes, breaking stuff, and it's driving me crazy because my main shop includes a few hundred Ubuntu "development" and "test/QA" systems, and keeping them from falling over after upgrades is a chore. They get no flowers from me.
> And Apple? Well, if you are the sole maker of both the hardware and the software, you can test the heck out of them. Then they “just work”, right? Still, when Apple release a new version, there are tons of support issues getting that release to deploy properly then, with some folks finding older hardware or software not working, etc., and this is on the approved, made by Apple only hardware.
Apple has NO excuse whatsoever, in my opinion, for such errors. As you say, they control the environment with an iron fist. Yet they still screw up occasionally, miss something in QA, and they have to fix things. I take Apple to task for that just like I do with Microsoft. It just happens that since I run the Windows Ping List here, my comments about MS are much more visible than my occasional comments on the Apple threads.
> Bottom line here, Dayglored, is that New Microsoft OSs are always like this, and it is nothing new in Microsoft management like you claim. They’ve always been dollar driven A’Holes!
Well, I'll agree up to a point... but then, they're supposedly a capitalist business, and their responsibilities include their stockholders. They have to be that way, to some degree.
> BTW, the PC came out in 1981. Unless you’re talking about BASIC (written for Altair’s), most folks wouldn’t have worked with Microsoft before IBM came out with the PC.
That's correct. A buddy of mine got a copy of MS BASIC for the 8080 and I was intrigued, so when I got my KIM-1, I got a copy of MS BASIC for the 6502 and with a bit of assembler for the I/O drivers, got it running in 1977. Again, my FR Profile has the timeline.
Thanks for the comments and chance for a bit of conversation -- I have to run now but I'll be back online tonight. Cheers!