Windows 10 Technical Preview

Behold, the next version of Windows, 10, due out late next year. sun.gif1JQbU8P.png
wJ2RaUF.png
pNYjL3H.png
WnWUNGZ.png

Thoughts, observations, etc:

- The start menu is back and looks great. YES!

- No signs of the start screen. YES!

- Metro apps (including system ones) that previously ran in that stupid separate metro-mode, now run like regular applications on the desktop. I haven't seen any signs of the stupid separate metro-mode period. YES!

- You can finally copy/paste from/to the command prompt using Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V.

- "Multiple desktops" are now supported (that's my term, but I think the more accurate term would probably be "multiple workspaces" as there's still only one desktop).

- It still really wants you to sign up for and log in through your Microsoft account, which I'm sure is nice for most "normal" users, but you can easily disable this and make your account local-only, which I like.

- There still doesn't appear to be a direct way of changing the font family for the various UI elements as you could in most versions of Windows until Win8 came around, but I did a quick search online and I think it can be done in an indirect way.

I've only used it for a few minutes but already it's clear that Windows 10 is WAY better than Windows 8; the UI looks prettier and more refined too. If it stays this way and the price is good (there is the possibility it could be free) I will most probably upgrade from Windows 7.

BTW, if you want to try it out yourself, you can download the ISO here: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/preview

sun.gif
IwDDeCo.jpg
«1

Comments

  • And if I do decide to upgrade to Win10 when it comes out, I'll probably just upgrade my whole system while I'm at it (and include an SSD in that upgrade of course). I'm starting to get that itch already. In late 2015 I'll have been using my current system for about 5.5 years, which is just a little less than the time between when I built my first system (P4) and upgraded it in 2010.

    smile.gif

    I have thought about overclocking; apparently getting my i3-530 from 2.93GHz to 4GHz is easy, but I'm not sure I'm in the mood for a variety of reasons (stability, longevity, increased power consumption...) We'll see, maybe I'll give it a shot and see if the performance increase is noticeable enough to be worth it.
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • edited 10/16/2014 @ 12:54:36 PM
    Actually, the Start Screen is still there and will not be going away, thankfully. I found that I much prefer the Start Screen over the Start Menu for the way in which I use my computers. I like being able to see everything I care about at a quick glance. The Start Menu tends to bury things in a way that I do not find very helpful.

    That said, I have no issue with using a Start Menu but, since Windows 8, I have become very proficient with using the search to open a program. I now tend to use that more often in Windows 7 and Windows Vista that I did before.

    Edit: As far as overclocking that i3, it is not unlocked so you can only go so far with it. Personally, I would get a i5-2500k or 2600k as an upgrade instead if you can find one somewhat cheaply.
    "For God so loved the world..."
  • edited 10/17/2014 @ 12:21:15 PM
    ManofGod said:

    Actually, the Start Screen is still there and will not be going away, thankfully. I found that I much prefer the Start Screen over the Start Menu for the way in which I use my computers. I like being able to see everything I care about at a quick glance. The Start Menu tends to bury things in a way that I do not find very helpful.

    Interesting, I didn't see it myself but I'm guessing that's because it's disabled by default. Oh well, as long as it's optional, I'm cool it with. lookdown.gif
    ManofGod said:

    That said, I have no issue with using a Start Menu but, since Windows 8, I have become very proficient with using the search to open a program. I now tend to use that more often in Windows 7 and Windows Vista that I did before.

    You mean the search feature of the Win7 start menu, right? Yeah, aside from the handful of programs that always show up in the start menu (the ones that are put there in order of how often they're launched) and the few program shortcuts I have on my desktop, I've always typed the name of the program in the start menu to launch it rather than walking through the menus. That was definitely a great improvement over XP.

    However I noticed that in Win7 it doesn't always work perfectly; sometimes I'll type something and nothing will appear so I'll have to type it again. Or I'll type something and by default it opens the help file for the program I wanted to run, or the uninstaller, rather than the program itself. giggle.gif For the most part it works good though.

    I think the idea of the start screen is good, and I can see why you would like it. To me it's just very poorly executed to an extremely frustrating degree. I can't stand the whole "wanna do this? okay, but in order to do that you've gotta totally hide everything you're doing and go to this completely separate screen and do it there, but when you're there you have to interact with me in a totally different (less straightforward) manner than you have for the past 20+ years" thing. lookdown.gifgiggle.gif

    Obviously different strokes for different folks. It looks like Microsoft is getting it right in Win10 though: if you like the start screen, you can still use it; if you don't, thank goodness you don't have to and can use the returning start menu. And with the menu, most people kinda get the best of both worlds what with them improving the start menu further over Win7 and adding some of the features of the screen to the menu while making it so it still works in a way that is non-jarring and is as straightforward and intuitive as Windows has typically been.
    ManofGod said:

    Edit: As far as overclocking that i3, it is not unlocked so you can only go so far with it. Personally, I would get a i5-2500k or 2600k as an upgrade instead if you can find one somewhat cheaply.

    If I were to upgrade right now, I'd probably strongly consider the i5-4690K just because it's the latest and greatest of that tier and a quick search reveals it to be about the same price. Which, by the way, is a bit high for my liking especially compared to my i3-530, which only cost me like $90 new, but... either way, I still want to hold off a little bit before upgrading. By that time there will likely be something faster available for the same price if not less. sun.gif
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • Oh, I see, you have the older i7 920 compatible board. Still, a quad core in that family of processors would run really well as an upgrade. Of course, you would need to find one cheaply to make it worth while.
    "For God so loved the world..."
  • edited 10/21/2014 @ 2:37:40 PM
    Actually no, mine uses socket 1156, which did support most i7 CPUs of that era except for the really high end ones like the i7-920 which used socket 1366. You might have been thinking of the i7-860. smile.gif

    The i7-920 is only $100 on Amazon. gasp.gif Too bad I would need a new board. But, according to Anandtech the single threaded performance of the 920 is basically the same as that of my i3-530, so it wouldn't be a big enough upgrade for my liking anyway. Contrast that with the i7-920 vs. the new i5-4690K, which in the single threaded benchmark was 2x faster: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/47?vs=1261

    (I love AnandTech's benchmark page by the way, I think I've mentioned it in the past but it's worth mentioning again. It makes it so stinkin' easy to compare the performance difference between two different CPUs. sun.gif)
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • The more things change, the more they stay the same
  • genoski said:

    The more things change, the more they stay the same

    (While [typically] improving.)

    lookdown.gif

    (IMO)

    At least when it comes to products.
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • Well, I am going to install it in dual boot mode on my home computer sometime this week. I would like to see how it works straight up.
    "For God so loved the world..."
  • I dual booted Vista and Windows 8 on my lappy.. to check out Windows 8, need to get up to speed on it because a non tech savvy friend got a laptop for Christmas last year with 8 on it and He's one of the guys who calls me every few weeks because he screwed up his computer.

    I never use the 8

    Hell, I never use the lappy
  • ManofGod said:

    Well, I am going to install it in dual boot mode on my home computer sometime this week. I would like to see how it works straight up.

    Let us know what you think. smile.gif I know you like 8 and the Start Screen and other stuff so I'm interested in seeing if you think 10's "interpretation" of it is better, worse, just as good, etc.
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • genoski said:

    I dual booted Vista and Windows 8 on my lappy.. to check out Windows 8, need to get up to speed on it because a non tech savvy friend got a laptop for Christmas last year with 8 on it and He's one of the guys who calls me every few weeks because he screwed up his computer.

    I never use the 8

    Hell, I never use the lappy

    I've never been big on laptops. I'm sure I'd get used to them but like smartphones, I find them frustrating to actually use (although the portability is of course really nice). Mostly due to the wildly different keyboard (key and board size, spacing, angle, height) and lack of a mouse, so I feel they really hold me back.
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • Well, at work it will not boot correctly unless I make Windows 8.1 the default boot device. (UEFI Firmware problem I believe.) Since it is pre beta, it does have a lot of bugs but seems ok. The one weakness of the Start Menu is still there in that a program can steal focus from it and close it even though I did not want it to. (Start Screen does not have that problem.)

    Essentially, I setup the icons on the taskbar and placed my used Modern Apps on the side on the start menu and that is it. I rarely used the start menu and never really have. (Always created a button bar, even with Windows 3.1 and the Amiga.) At home, it is ok but I doubt I would get much use out of it in it's current form. Things like Virtual Super Resolution do not work in it but do work in Windows 8.1. Well, it is a pre beta OS to report bugs on and I do enjoy trying things out. :D
    "For God so loved the world..."
  • I do not mind doing bug testing and it will help make the final product better. However, at least at home, it was to unstable to be of any real use. AMD VSR did not work, the facebook app would freeze, Internet Explorer would constantly crash and the start button does not always work. Also, I need the start screen for home so I can see what is going on with weather, email and facebook at a glance.

    The desktop does not have the features and functions that the Start Screen does. The desktop is just a blank slate with no feedback.
    "For God so loved the world..."
  • Cngevpxhaqrefpber said:

    And if I do decide to upgrade to Win10 when it comes out, I'll probably just upgrade my whole system while I'm at it (and include an SSD in that upgrade of course). I'm starting to get that itch already. In late 2015 I'll have been using my current system for about 5.5 years, which is just a little less than the time between when I built my first system (P4) and upgraded it in 2010.

    Same here, my current PC running Windows 7 is more than 5 years old just like yours! Previously I built a new desktop PC every 1.5 to 2 years on average. In the last 3 years I prefer building helicopters and quads instead of PCs.

    I think I will be building a PC this year and use Windows 10 in it. I need to do lots of research regarding what motherboard, video card, etc. I will be putting into this PC. I have been out of the hardware loop for so long. OTH my current PC is still able to do what I need to do including video editing with Adobe Premiere and After Effects CS5.
  • ManofGod said:

    Since it is pre beta, it does have a lot of bugs but seems ok.

    FYI a new build was released today: http://blogs.windows.com/bloggingwindows/2015/01/23/january-build-now-available-to-the-windows-insider-program/
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • Turns out I am going to have to build a PC soon for my son as he needs a more powerful PC to run AutoCAD and Revit which are the software that he will be using on the PC (aside from playing games LOL). Did my research and aside from faster processors, bigger hard drives and maybe more efficient video cards, things haven't changed that much since I last built a PC more than 5 years ago... RAM is still DDR3 which is what I have on my five plus year old PC. Interfaces to HDDs are still SATA and USB3. The interface to video cards is more or less the same. Things move slowly on the PC / Laptop world compared to phones and devices. I guess this is the reason sales of PCs (and laptops) have stagnated.

    I will still be installing Windows 7 on this new PC... Windows 10 is not ready until October 2015 according to an article I stumbled upon.
  • ManofGod said:

    (Always created a button bar, even with Windows 3.1 and the Amiga.)

    We're the exact opposite: I've always HATED buttons being in the taskbar. giggle.gif If there are buttons down there besides the Start Button when I install Windows, deleting them is one of the first things I do if not thee first thing. And if I accidentally add one there or an app adds one? I immediately delete it. It just bothers me big time. giggle.gif
    ManofGod said:

    Also, I need the start screen for home so I can see what is going on with weather, email and facebook at a glance.

    The desktop does not have the features and functions that the Start Screen does. The desktop is just a blank slate with no feedback.

    Hmm. I wonder if they totally removed the start screen or if there's an option to allow you to boot into it or at least switch to it?
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • edited 01/25/2015 @ 3:46:46 AM
    cyclo said:

    OTH my current PC is still able to do what I need to do including video editing with Adobe Premiere and After Effects CS5.

    Yeah, my PC actually still gets the job done for me too, and whereas before (back when I created this thread) I was really in the mood to upgrade when Win10 came out, right now I'm thinking I'll probably wait a couple more years. The only time my PC is a PITA:

    - Startup: when I first installed Win7 it booted super fast, now it takes a long time and I won't even bother trying to load apps (like Thunderbird and Firefox, which are the first two apps I launch 99.9% of the time) until my hard drive stops making noise. One of these days I'll try to figure out the major cause(s) of the slowdown and try to fix it if I get around to it. I'm wondering if part of the problem is, back when I first installed Win7 I made a lot of tweaks and disabled a lot of stuff I thought I didn't need and might bog down my system. This might have helped things slow down overtime though, but I dunno. (This is, after all, typical Windows behavior - but I have heard people say 7 is better about not slowing down over time so who knows.)

    And, to a lesser degree:

    - When installing software / launching applications / doing something that uses the hard drive a lot.

    Of course, the easiest (and cheapest, hardware upgrade wise) solution to all those problems is to just buy an SSD. lookdown.gif
    cyclo said:

    Did my research and aside from faster processors, bigger hard drives and maybe more efficient video cards, things haven't changed that much since I last built a PC more than 5 years ago...

    Don't forget SSDs... still a lot more expensive than HDDs but they're wayyy more affordable today than they were 5 years ago.
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • So this Windows 10 is free if your upgrading from 7 or 8.1
  • I'm prolly due for a new build myself, but my computer is so freakin sweet there's really no reason too
  • edited 01/25/2015 @ 9:15:21 PM
    It is only a free upgrade for the first year after release. After that, you would have to buy it. Been using the most recent build a bit more and at first, I had issues and a slightly negative reaction. However, after I figured out a few things, I am liking it more and more. Oh, and I am upgrading my work computer from 16GB to 32GB of ram. :D
    "For God so loved the world..."
  • edited 01/26/2015 @ 4:11:30 AM
    genoski said:

    So this Windows 10 is free if your upgrading from 7 or 8.1

    Wow, 7 AND 8? Sweet! I heard murmurings a few months ago that it might be free for 8 users but not 7 users.
    ManofGod said:

    It is only a free upgrade for the first year after release. After that, you would have to buy it.

    Awww. sad.gif
    ManofGod said:

    Oh, and I am upgrading my work computer from 16GB to 32GB of ram. :D

    Dang! gasp.gifgiggle.gif I'm still on 4GB (which is plenty for me 90% of the time - I could probably use 8GB the other 10% though). What do you run that utilizes all that RAM if you don't mind me asking? VMs?
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • Between all the browsers, multiple things happening at the same time and 5 virtualbox machines running, I use 12GB of my 16GB available. I figure, since I got the ram so cheap, I can increase each Virtualbox machine to 3GB or so and still have plenty of ram for other stuff.
    "For God so loved the world..."
  • edited 01/26/2015 @ 10:35:21 PM
    Cngevpxhaqrefpber said:

    It is only a free upgrade for the first year after release. After that, you would have to buy it.

    Awww. sad.gif
  • Cngevpxhaqrefpber said:

    I could probably use 8GB

    I have 8.. 3.3 used, 4.7 free

  • edited 01/27/2015 @ 4:22:40 AM
    genoski said:

    Pat, you're reading that wrong, and ManO is misunderstanding it. It'll be a free upgrade for a year after it's released. That means you have only a year to upgrade for free. Wait 13 months and you'll have to pay to upgrade.

    Ohhh, good! That's awesome. sun.gif I'm going to make the bold prediction that Windows 10 will have the biggest market share in the shortest period of time for any new Windows version ever.
    genoski said:

    It does not mean upgrade for free then 12 months later they're going to send you a bill for it, or your Windows 10 will stop working unless you pay for it.

    Yeah, I was kinda wondering how that was going to work out if the user decided they didn't want to pay for it. lookdown.gif
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • edited 01/30/2015 @ 4:38:18 AM
    genoski said:

    I'm prolly due for a new build myself, but my computer is so freakin sweet there's really no reason too

    Still on that i7? 860 I think you said you had?
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • edited 01/30/2015 @ 4:41:58 AM
    Were you able to test that new browser at all MoG, or did they not include it yet?
    ManofGod said:

    Between all the browsers, multiple things happening at the same time and 5 virtualbox machines running, I use 12GB of my 16GB available. I figure, since I got the ram so cheap, I can increase each Virtualbox machine to 3GB or so and still have plenty of ram for other stuff.

    Yeah, if you run VMs regularly you definitely need a good amount of RAM. I run them rarely (really only to test the new Windows versions out a bit, or fool around in the old versions for whatever reason) but whenever I do it's always a PITA because it swaps and thrashes like crazy, especially when switching back and forth between the host and the VM.
    IwDDeCo.jpg
  • Cngevpxhaqrefpber said:

    Still on that i7? 860 I think you said you had?

    Yes I am, quad with hyperthreading = 8 cores of loving to watch the CPU usage app with all the different color lines popping back and forth. For some reason core 4 and 7 get the most use

  • edited 02/08/2015 @ 6:13:45 PM
    I gotta say I'm a little surprised that Microsoft is offering the free upgrade to 7 users too. 8 users I can understand as it's probably sort of a "we're sorry" gesture as well as a way to hopefully get people to forget about 8 ASAP. But 7... I would imagine they'll be losing out on quite a few million dollars from lost Windows licenses.

    On the other hand:

    - Lots of people will likely be upgrading their PCs to ones with Windows 10 on them already at some point anyway

    - Most users don't have the skillset necessary (or more importantly, think they don't) to upgrade their OS themselves

    - I would imagine it would be the goal of most OS makers to have everyone on the latest version of their OS (for various reasons) - I think Apple has already made OS X upgrades free now

    - From what I saw starting in 8, the push definitely seemed to be to get people to use Microsoft's cloud/online services (for example when you first install 8, it wants you to sign up for a Microsoft account, not just a local computer account like how it was in <= 7), which they make money on; plus there's the app store which they also make money on.
    IwDDeCo.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.