Don't upgrade to Windows 10 yet.

[codechris 9]

Don't fix what isn't broken isn't a bad thing to stick by. Especially with our creaking flight sims

[Christopher Low 5,332]

That's why I still have P3D v2.4 installed.

 

Interestingly, those vertical double contrails have disappeared recently, which makes me think that it might be an issue with the Quality Wings Avro RJ. I have been using the PMDG 737NGX for a couple of months, and I have recently started testing the A2A Simulations Piper Cherokee 180. Those double contrails seem to have vanished. I guess I will need to test the Avro RJ again to confirm it....

[dho112 17]

I know things like opinions about a UI can be very subjective, and yet their seems to be a heavy leaning toward the negative about Win10. I'm curious about what the initial reactions to Win7 were, and if they were historically similar?

 

For me, wether Win10 and Dx12 is "the future" is a more troubling issue because a FSX install is not anything close to resembling an easy process for me, or the majority of others here who I assume use MANY third party applications with FSX as well; A complex installation instance that I think no one will argue is a very delicate balance that is especially sensitive to even minor changes in the operating system.

 

I don't feel like 0-1 FPS performance increase "maybe" outweighs, "It works perfectly and is stable, now and for the next 5 years" If the performance increase was a confirmed 5-6 FPS, that would be a different story.

 

I realize the change is inevitable, and it will bring certain significant improvements along with the flight sim and gaming communities ideas of "bad", but as is my traditional MO, I won't even look sideways at a new MS operating system until after at least Service Pack 1 Particularly when the change is barely evolutionary, rather than anything resembling revolutionary (despite the marketing hype)

[Guest]

Hi David,

 

UI really shouldn't be "subjective" ... there are common human mistakes made and UI's need to understand those human traits and adjust accordingly. There is a real non-subjective way to produce a high quality and efficient UI:

 

1.  Never place Delete next to New

2.  Never place "Cut" next to "Paste"

3.  Never place a minimize/maximize button next to a close button

4.  Never force the user to search for ways to accomplish a basic task

5.  Don't ask the user questions they can't possibly answer

6.  Error messages need to be refined and useful ... Error code: 0x8007002 doesn't say much to an end user

7.  Don't make very important buttons/hotspots tiny, getting a "drag handle" should be an easy task

 

Some UI errors that seem to persist with Win10 ... no window shadows, the purpose of these shadows was to make it clear what window is "active" and to distinguish "windows".  Win8.x and Win10 have no obvious visual cues to let you know what window is active ... so if I start typing I could be typing into the wrong window/app.

 

Win10 still persists the minimize/maximize boxes NEXT to the close box, placing two radically different functions so close together invariably makes it easy for users to be a few pixels off and hit the wrong button.  This problem has been around since the dawn of time for Windows OS ... a functional grouping that ignores the likelihood of human error.  But because it's "always been that way" it continues to be that way.

 

Color does actually come into play with an OS, it's not entirely subjective.  For whatever reason, humans seem to be more "calm" with blue colors than they do with red colors ... so variants of blue are offend used in OS themes and application themes.

 

Visual cues on how to accomplish tasks should NEVER be hidden ... Win8 and even Win10 is still full of hidden cues.  The pundits for this are often quoted as "you have to get used to it" ... but why should you?  A good UI isn't something one needs to get used to ... it should be intuitive.  Why not take the opportunity to make the UI easier for the user?  One reason for this oversight is because it takes up precious screen real estate ... not a problem for desktop screens but for tiny phone screens it is a problem.  So desktop users are forced to compromise so as to "unify" the UI across multiple devices even though a desktop computer has considerably more desktop space and is operated entirely differently than a phone.  

 

This conceptual flaw around "unification" of OS ... it's equivalent to trying to make all cars, airplanes, trains have the exact same set of "controls/cockpit" even though they are very different physical environments.

 

Another flaw is to say "read the manual" ... basic OS functionality shouldn't require a manual, it should be intuitive.  I am pro manual and the reading of documentation, but that should only be required if one is attempting to do more advanced tasks with their OS.  It  should NOT be required for basic operation.

 

Even though Win10 does improve a little from Win8 UI, it's still has a lot of issues and hasn't really brought "anything" to the table I need other than DX12.  IMHO, the Windows OS hasn't evolved much at all from 15 years ago.  

 

With that said, I'll be upgrading to Win10 on my main computers after a few months from RTM release, but only when I know my applications are working correctly and all my other components to my daily work are up to date and support the new OS.

 

There is nothing in Win10 that has made me say "oh that's nice, I could use that feature" ... it's mostly been about "ok how do I do this same task I could do in Win7" ... it's different, but I can't see where it's better?

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Jude Bradley 659]

Damn, well said Rob. 

[rmhoman 20]

There is nothing in Win10 that has made me say "oh that's nice, I could use that feature" ... it's mostly been about "ok how do I do this same task I could do in Win7" ... it's different, but I can't see where it's better?

 

I think it has to do with removing some of the downfalls of 8 and better memory/CPU management. But I agree there are a couple of things that I am like okay that is nice but nothing to make me want to spend money or time upgrading just yet. I like it but if I weren't testing it would I care? probably not. However as someone getting a new computer I think I would go for 10 and not 7, and by all means if I were offered 8/8.1 I would shove the PC.... well you get the idea 

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

 

I think it has to do with removing some of the downfalls of 8 and better memory/CPU management. But I agree there are a couple of things that I am like okay that is nice but nothing to make me want to spend money or time upgrading just yet. I like it but if I weren't testing it would I care? probably not. However as someone getting a new computer I think I would go for 10 and not 7, and by all means if I were offered 8/8.1 I would shove the PC.... well you get the idea 

 

Remember that there's a free upgrade if you're on 7 or 8.1.

[Blackrat100 33]

what happened to 9? :rolleyes:

 

If third party software HAS to have WIN9 to run correctly and checked for 'WIN9' it could possibly be confused by WIN95 or WIN98 if it only checked the first 4 characters.

At least I think that is what was explained to me. I glazed over.

[Guest]

 

 

If third party software HAS to have WIN9 to run correctly and checked for 'WIN9' it could possibly be confused by WIN95 or WIN98 if it only checked the first 4 characters.

 

Urban myth, OS versions are reported the same way other application versions are:

 

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms724834(v=vs.85).aspx

 

Windows 10 actually jumped from version 6.3 (Win 8.1) to 10.0 (Windows 10) ... I've heard the same rumors about why Windows 9 was skipped, but any developer looking for OS version info will be looking for Major Version and Minor Version "numeric" values. 

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Bobsk8 12,543]

Urban myth, OS versions are reported the same way other application versions are:

 

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms724834(v=vs.85).aspx

 

Windows 10 actually jumped from version 6.3 (Win 8.1) to 10.0 (Windows 10) ... I've heard the same rumors about why Windows 9 was skipped, but any developer looking for OS version info will be looking for Major Version and Minor Version "numeric" values. 

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

I think that microsoft wanted to get as much distance between the POS OS called Windows 8 and a newer version, and that is the main reason that marketing decided to jump over 9.   

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

I think that microsoft wanted to get as much distance between the POS OS called Windows 8 and a newer version, and that is the main reason that marketing decided to jump over 9.   

Other than the start screen (which was replaceable by Classic Shell or some other similar program), W8 was exactly the same as W7.

[jjjallen 37]

It's a mute point - EVERYONE will be on WIN 10 (in more ways than 1) by the end of the year.  IMO.

 

Buying a new thermostat?  It could be running WIN 10.

 

Regards

jja

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

It's a mute point - EVERYONE will be on WIN 10 (in more ways than 1) by the end of the year.  IMO.

 

Buying a new thermostat?  It could be running WIN 10.

 

Regards

jja

Probably not businesses. 

[gpbarth 12]

The ONLY reason I'm moving to Win 10 is for DX12 ... and that's exactly why Microsoft will not provide DX12 for Win7.

 

There is so much that can be done with a new Windows OS that is NOT being done, changing around a UI that has no real benefit to my productivity isn't something I want?  Why do I want a flat 2D desktop ... I don't ... I want a desktop that can leverage my GPU.  Why can't I navigate my Visual Studio code in 3D world where I visually zoom down and thru and up and back my call stack?  I've long since had the GPU and hardware that could easily do this.

 

Why can't the OS notice that I regularly work with a given set of applications in a specific desktop arrangement and then ask me if I'd like to save this arrangement and automatically make me a desktop icon that I can click the next time and it'll load all my apps and projects and arrange the windows just like I had them?  This is BASIC stuff that should have been introduced over a decade ago.

 

I don't want a desktop that looks like my phone nor acts like my phone ... it's sorta insulting my intelligence assuming I can't handle one device being different than the other.  From a coding perspective it's actually more difficult to code a "one UI for all" because you're constantly compromising two very different environments.

 

There is very little innovation from Microsoft -- how long did it take for them to finally do a DX12?  Why encourage PC gaming/simulations when you are trying to sell XBOX content?  That's why we didn't see a DX12 sooner.  

 

Sorry, but Microsoft are so far OFF THE MARK in providing useful tools.  I'm glad Win 10 will be free at least ... and I'm sure that's because it's hard to sell "nothing" ... although Seinfeld was able to run for 9 years on a show about nothing

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

Rob, I am seeing the future here, and you've got it right. MS (and damned near everyone else) is programming the next OS and probably many more for the "portable crowd." You mentioned XBox. And now that tablets, like MS' own Surface, the Samsung, Dell and others are being pushed as a perfect replacement not only for laptops but also desktop units, and even the cellphone market is jumping into the fray, why even waste time with those of us who still run big metal boxes with huge memories, multiple video cards and giant monitors and 1000 watt power supplies?

 

You want gaming? The XBox and other dedicated systems will take care of that. Only the high-end costly and massive flight sims, starting with P3D and working up, will ever need the computing power that our present day desktops provide. I know that there are many AvSim members up here who use loaded laptops to fly with. The desktop, with the associated OSs are going the way of the dodo, and MS is leading the way.

 

I will be forced to upgrade to Win10 when MS stops supporting Win7, and I will do so. Same thing happened when I had to change to Win 7 from XP. There is no other choice. Apple Mac? Nope.  How about Linux? Ever wonder why no one is developing for Linux? It runs everyone else's OS, but where is a dedicated flight sim for Linux? As Chris said,

 

"Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit works just fine here. I have no intention of "upgrading" to Windows 10." Nice thought, but there is no choice, just a time limit.

 

EDIT: Gary I corrected your post as you had your response in the Quotation. - Rob

[Guest]

Gaming and Simulations are one in the same when it comes to their need for processing power ... FS going back to the earliest version was and still is the benchmark of how far (on the performance front) our CPU/GPUS/chipsets/RAM etc. have come.

 

Any attempts to portray a sense of "reality" or even "fantasy" is doing it with 3D graphics currently on 2D space (your monitor).  Even 3D movies are really still 2D and rely on ways to trick they eye (and they have seemed to decline in popularity).  

 

Mobile device have never paved the way on the computational front, they have some key failures:

 

1.  Most operate at 5-30Watts max

2.  Tiny screens

3.  Provide considerably less computational (be it GPU or CPU) capability

4.  Can't dissipate heat well

 

Mobile devices are temporary solutions and are worky and clunky at best case.  

 

This is more likely what the future will hold ... very very early days.  But clunky devices like Oculus rift and/or other similar headsets have to many fundamental flaws when it comes to everyday human interaction.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=13&v=AoWi10YVmfE

 

What OS will be around to control/implement a holo deck ... not sure, but I'd put my money on Google.

 

Cheers, Rob.