6 Features To Expect in the Next Windows 10 Update

[JMAC]

https://www.techconnect.com/article/...hconnect_daily

" Microsoft has signaled that the next Windows 10 update, codenamed 'Redstone 4,' may look a lot like the Insider Build 17083 the company just released.
Hints of what's to come include new font settings, adjustments to Timeline and Quiet Hours, plus privacy enhancements."

[GaryProtein]

It's too bad the next Windows 10 update won't have a Windows 7 interface.

Windows 10 sucks.

[Karl Maga]

Originally Posted by GaryProtein

It's too bad the next Windows 10 update won't have a Windows 7 interface.

Windows 10 sucks.

The Windows 7 interface worked better for me Gary. However, I don’t find that I’m hindered by the Win 10 interface, so I’m not bothered by it. I do find Win 10 and the apps I run on it to be very, very stable. That counts for a lot with me.

[Jerome W]

This "upgrade" thing is a game of fools made to sell more computers, software, printers and so on.
HP and Apple have been condemned for their planned obsolescence politics. I wonder how long it will take to see also Microsoft blamed for the same reason.
Environmentally, this is a disaster.
For individuals, it is a stupid source of stress and anxiety.
"If it is not broken don't fix it" : where the plain grandpa logic has gone ?

[IM3CPO]

I worked at Microsoft for 10 years and have a computer science degree (obviously) as well as an MBA. While I do understand the points being made here, there is an actual rationale as to why Microsoft does what it does (and its not for planned obsolescence).

I could give a super detailed/in depth answer here but the essence of the answer to the question of why Microsoft does what it does is simple: Competition and staying relevant.

8+ years back, the strategy was that people will have "3 screens and a cloud". The three screens were the phone, tablet/computer, and living room (XBOX). Another important caveat here is that people will see a screen and assume they can interact with it like they do a smart phone. The "cloud" is what would be used to tie all these "screens" together into a seamless experience to the end user.

This inevitably meant that the "screens" or "devices used to access the cloud" would need to converge into a single user experience. I will admit that some aspects of this convergence (ex: Windows 8) happened too quickly and at a rate people werent ready for. The big market disruptors responsible for this was the iPad and Smart Phones (specifically Google's Droid).

Microsoft didnt randomly change things for the sake of changing. Again, they were pushed to do it by competitors and in an attempt to stay relevant in the market. Heck, you can thank Google for the way Windows does its feature rollouts (like the Creators Updates) as they were the ones who started that methodology with Chrome. Microsoft is just following the market leaders on much of this.

[1KW]

These companies exist to make money. If they don’t then they go out of business. Planned obsolescence is part of staying in business. With audio fortunately a newer speaker design doesn’t make my current speakers sound worse. With computers, phones not the case as software and network

[eljr]

Originally Posted by IM3CPO

I worked at Microsoft for 10 years and have a computer science degree (obviously) as well as an MBA. While I do understand the points being made here, there is an actual rationale as to why Microsoft does what it does (and its not for planned obsolescence).

I could give a super detailed/in depth answer here but the essence of the answer to the question of why Microsoft does what it does is simple: Competition and staying relevant.

8+ years back, the strategy was that people will have "3 screens and a cloud". The three screens were the phone, tablet/computer, and living room (XBOX). Another important caveat here is that people will see a screen and assume they can interact with it like they do a smart phone. The "cloud" is what would be used to tie all these "screens" together into a seamless experience to the end user.

This inevitably meant that the "screens" or "devices used to access the cloud" would need to converge into a single user experience. I will admit that some aspects of this convergence (ex: Windows 8) happened too quickly and at a rate people werent ready for. The big market disruptors responsible for this was the iPad and Smart Phones (specifically Google's Droid).

Microsoft didnt randomly change things for the sake of changing. Again, they were pushed to do it by competitors and in an attempt to stay relevant in the market. Heck, you can thank Google for the way Windows does its feature rollouts (like the Creators Updates) as they were the ones who started that methodology with Chrome. Microsoft is just following the market leaders on much of this.

speaking of clouds...

Windows 10 changed it's cloud a year or two ago.

They had a super approach, everything was in the could and your PC only had place cards. (excuses my explanation, I am not a computer guy)

Now if you want that same interface you have to place the files on both your PC and Cloud!

They reverted to the same system as Drop Box or Google....

From what I read, too many folks did not realize that their files were not on their hard drive so they dumbed down their product to be the same as everyone else.

I was real ticked because I had bought a new PC with no memory, relying on the cloud. Now it;s a whole process like it is with any other cloud.

[Weirdcuba]

This is one of the reasons I prefer analogue to Digital - for some reason, fiddling with a turntable isn’t nearly as infuriating to me as waiting on forced software upgrades, etc. (Yes, that issue can be injected into nearly any thread - apologies for diverting the thread).

[eljr]

Originally Posted by 1KW

These companies exist to make money. If they don’t then they go out of business. Planned obsolescence is part of staying in business. With audio fortunately a newer speaker design doesn’t make my current speakers sound worse. With computers, phones not the case as software and network

Maybe it's just perspective.

I know in my industry technology is ever evolving and as it does new product is brought forth.

I think of planned obsolescence as building a machine to break down after a planned life span.

but then i think of simply introducing new colors of an established product, just to make the existing colors seem dated.

I guess it depends on the definition of planned obsolescence.

i think we need a definition alright.

[Formerly YB-2]

One feature you can always rely with a Windows upgrade is that it will be more of a memory hog than its predecessor.