Resilient File System (ReFS) “Create” ability being pulled from Win10 Pro

Topic

New Reply

@abbodi86 just noted a change in the list of features deprecated (removed) from Win10 Fall Creators Update, version 1709, expected this October or so.
[See the full post at: Resilient File System (ReFS) “Create” ability being pulled from Win10 Pro]

2 users thanked author for this post.

AlexEiffel, wdburt1

Reply | Quote

Replies

One more thing removed from Pro, making it more like Home edition.

What’s next, ability to join domains in Pro limited to Azure only, not local?

Removing local GPO?

This company, man….SMH.

1 user thanked author for this post.

BobbyB

Reply | Quote

Thanks, after all these months of reading, for giving those of us among the unwashed a definition of “deprecated.”

It’s been a long wait.

 

 

1 user thanked author for this post.

radosuaf

Reply | Quote

Kirsty wrote:

anonymous wrote:

Removing System Image Backup? really??

NO! (not yet…)

As the topic said:

System Image Backup [is] being deprecated … not in active development and might be removed in future releases (“Deprecated”)

Referencing: Fall Creators Update will remove some Windows features (from July 24th)
🙂

2 users thanked author for this post.

ch100, Elly

Reply | Quote

Well I suppose they have to give the new version a bit of exclusivity, because I aint seeing much in it that would sell it to Business never mind the Home user. Whats left for the average Professional user that sets it appart from Home Ver, well not really much except at best some control over updates, and haphazard functionality in GPOL settings. Certainly not worth the $100 or so extra I would have thought for the difference between Home and Pro 🙁

Reply | Quote

Amended seems like Paul Thurott has a similar theory.
https://www.petri.com/microsofts-removing-refs-creations-functionality-windows-10-pro?

Reply | Quote

There is nothing to sell. Serious businesses would have to update because they have to update and this is what all normal users do. Like with iOS, Chrome or anything else related.
The only decision which is to be made is to either use Windows 10 or not.

Reply | Quote

For the 02 Aug 2016 Win 10 Anniversary Update/Version 1607, M$ purposely deprecated Win 10 Pro’s Group Policy Editor, in order to push the SMBs onto Win 10 Ent subscriptions. When that move failed, M$ recently introduced the more expensive Win 10 Pro for Workstations in Aug 2017. This time, to again push the SMBs onto Win 10 Pro W or Win 10 Ent subscriptions, M$ purposely further deprecated Win 10 Pro’s ReFS.
M$ seems very pushy. Imagine how much more goodwill M$ would have “profited” if they weren’t so pushy and greedy.

Win 10 Pro Retail license costs US$199, which can buy you a new Intel Atom Win 10 Home 2-in-1 touchscreen tablet. How preposterous! A fair price would have been about US$50 for a Win 10 Pro Retail license, since a comparable Linux distro like Ubuntu and Linux Mint, can be gotten for free.
Is it worth buying Win 10 Pro now? Are M$ super-greedy or profit gouging? What is the profit margin for the Windows Licensing Division?

Reply | Quote

What about the Group Policy Editor has been “deprecated”? It’s still there in Windows 10 Pro, right through the Fall Creators Update, and still has basically the same functionality as ever before. So what does “deprecated” mean in this context?

-- rc primak

Reply | Quote

Maybe Microsoft removed a few assumed to useless previously available settings for Windows 10 Professional customers?

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

A lot of posts here are “fluff” from people ready to socialise but not so interested in technology. Don’t take everything literally, it is a forum after all. Windows 10 Pro is well and alive and can be used in businesses of any size, but mostly intended for those in business who do not qualify for Enterprise licence or for the more technically minded home users. Windows 10 Pro should be the main version in use for most readers here. I will make a big controversial call here, but to me it is clear that Windows 7 and 8.x are dying fast and the only legacy operating system still considered reference is Windows Server 2012 R2 which indirectly provides a lifeline for Windows 8.1.
As far as I know, there are few policies removed from Windows 10 Pro with little impact for those in the know but huge emotional impact for many others.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

@rc-primak,
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/29/windows_10_pro_anniversary_update_tweaked_to_stop_users_disabling_cloud_ads/

Reply | Quote

Yeah, I saw that and similar articles. They were talking about some settings which had been useful in protecting privacy. Shameful that these were “deprecated”, but the GPE infrastructure and many of its settings are still alive and well.

-- rc primak

Reply | Quote

Anyone have any idea what ONE seat of Windows 10 Pro Workstation is going to cost? Another $100 above the Windows 10 Pro Amateur Edition perhaps?

I always bought Ultimate in the past. I’d be willing to pay for a supported, serious system.

Microsoft, in case you’re reading here looking for ideas to further differentiate Windows 10 Workstation from Windows 10 Amateur, some suggestions:

• The ability to run as a pure desktop system – no Cortana, no Apps.
• If not “no Apps”, then a way to make them stay out of the way. It’s about work.
• Full privacy; “off” as the default configuration for telemetry.
• Provide configuration options to MINIMIZE your junkware and thus maximize the system for our work. That’s right, not everyone wants your application software.
• Bring back control, such as control of desktop theming; some of us LIKE rounded corners, buttons with style, Aero Glass, sounds for important events.
• Programmable DNS site and URL blacklisting with wildcard capability.
• Visual Studio bundled in.
• Continue to support IE, with full security configurability as a business browser.
• A tool for vocalizing arbitrary things, e.g., for helping with proofreading.
• Optimizations for deep multitasking – for example having 30 or 40 applications running at once, and integrating them together smoothly.

In other words, the best of what Windows desktop systems WERE, and what I’ve tried to tweak Win 10 “Creator’s Update” into BEING in pursuit of a nice desktop system – and all well-supported by Microsoft!

If you want to SELL Windows 10 Workstation, you will need to make the professional features REAL again, not just pay them lip service.

Windows 10 for real WORK has been neglected for too long.

-Noel

14 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, Bill C., NetDef, DAVe3283, David F, flackcatcher, lurks about, Jan K., Cybertooth, Elly, MrJimPhelps, AlexEiffel, satrow, Rock

Reply | Quote

The most important item on the list:

It must be an LTS version. That is what would make me buy it. If not, we are just talking about the same Windows amateur version that has been going on.

I bought Vista Ultimate and never used any of what it offered. Apart from bitlocker and MUI language packs which I thought I would use but I didn’t, it only offered some games and decoration like wallpapers. Not such a great value proposition.

I am very disappointed about the move of ReFS to W version. Now we keep toys for Pro version and move basic OS features like modern filesystems to special versions? Reliability is not important for home users and small businesses that don’t use their PC as a graphics/CAD workstation?

 

7 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, Bill C., NetDef, johnf, Noel Carboni, flackcatcher, Elly

Reply | Quote

I am not so sure that ReFS is such a core feature. It is certainly a “nice to have” feature, but core feature? I would dare to ask regular registered users here to post how many of them have ever used ReFS and how many actually know what ReFS is or heard about ReFS.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

I understand your point and I share your opinion about its usage among users here. However, I think it certainly belongs to the Pro version of Windows, just like group policy, system image and other arguably basic tools to ensure control, stability and security in the OS. Those are core OS features for me, not performance features. Yes, ReFS is a nice to have more than an essential tool, but it is a filesystem, not a toy like 3DBuilder, Paint3D and others. The way Microsoft is going, there is less and less Pro in the Pro version of Windows.

Maybe a lot of people don’t use ReFS because they don’t know about it, they think it is more difficult than it is to use it or mostly they likely don’t have the hardware anyway (not everyone has 2 spare data hard disks to use as mirror). Many might not see the usefulness compared to an external backup, but among those, how many do a regular backup every day? ReFS is not a replacement for a proper backup strategy, but it is certainly a good way to protect yourself from hard disk failure if you are going to be lazy and not do enough backups.

Plus, it is a way to protect against bit rot, which few other technologies can do. The problem with bit rot is that it is like cancer. You might not see it at all and when you do, unless you keep very old backups, maybe you won’t be able to recover from it. However, I don’t think it is that big of an issue by itself in general or we would hear a lot more people with photos suddenly looking very bad. Still, I like the idea of a mirrored backup protected against bit rot and I do believe Microsoft should not suddenly restrict its new filesystems to special editions for creative professionals and engineers just because they don’t have enough goodies to put in those editions. ReFS as boot disk only on W? I’m ok with that, but no ReFS for other editions for data disks when you offered it before? Cheap shot. Just my opinion. Not a big deal, but another disappointment to add to the list.

 

 

Reply | Quote

Maybe off-topic, but… Noel, looking at your screenshot, over on the right in the system Protection window I see you mention an “Aero 7 Theme”. And it looks like it’s working. I thought that Microsoft had made it impossible to install third-party themes in Windows 10? How did you do that?

Keep Running Windows 7 Safely for Years to Come  
Make Windows 10 look and work like Windows 7

Reply | Quote

There’s a developer out there who’s resurrected Aero Glass, and as part of his package he patches the system at run time to re-allow the loading of 3rd party themes. He’s not the only one who’s accomplished that latter… There are a surprising number of alternate Windows 10 themes, e.g., on DeviantArt.

See also:

http://www.glass8.eu/
http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/180-aero-glass-for-windows-8/

-Noel

1 user thanked author for this post.

Cybertooth

Reply | Quote

You saved me quite a bit of typing there! 😀 but you forgot two things…

No ads!

No updates released until found bug-free!

Forget all about the stupid idea of releasing after a date schedule a’la “Patch Tuesday”!

If you find an error, work on the fix and release the thing once properly tested.

You may send me an email, if you’ve developed a fantastic new feature and offer me it via a link to your fantastic webshop. Don’t force-feed me anything…

…

Price is really secondary and I’m prepared to pay whatever, but if they don’t deliver as requested above, I’m finally out. Let’s see in a year or so…

7 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, NetDef, David F, Noel Carboni, flackcatcher, lurks about, Cybertooth

Reply | Quote

…once properly tested…

Nice idea, but probably impossible to hope for. Microsoft dissolved its testing organization. That’s not coming back soon.

The engineers are expected to test their own software now, and while that’s certainly a wonderful idea, it doesn’t – CAN’T – substitute completely for a professional test organization designed from the ground up to think of ways to break the system, not want to see it work.

Microsoft is running on inertia presently, building on the good and tested works of the past. But I predict that’s not going to keep; as they change out more and more of the infrastructure of Windows, they’re going to find they can no longer build on things that aren’t rock solid, and the software engineering industry has proven time and again that they CAN’T be rock solid without internal competition to make them so.

Even millions of users can’t possibly test things as thoroughly as an organization with a plan.

Dissolving their internal testing is one of those things that, as they say, “isn’t going to end well”. That’s my professional opinion.

-Noel

5 users thanked author for this post.

flackcatcher, AlexEiffel, Elly, Rock, lurks about

Reply | Quote

Noel Carboni wrote:

Even millions of users can’t possibly test things as thoroughly as an organization with a plan.

Honestly? Looking at various forums what is “tested” by Insiders is real basics – like “Live tiles not working”, “Start Menu stuck”, “game crashing” etc. – so while you have a possibility to check if the system works AT ALL at basically unlimited number of configurations, more sophisticated functionalities won’t be tested – since “professionals” mostly don’t bother with installing Insider builds, and “enthusiats” will give you feedback like “give us dark theme”, “new emojis” and “change status bar colour”.

ASUS PRIME Z270-K * Intel Core i7-6700 * 2 x 8 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 2133 MHz * Aorus Radeon RX 570 4GB * Samsung 840 EVO 250GB SSD * SanDisk Ultra 3D 1TB SSD * DVD RW Lite-ON iHAS 124 * Creative X-Fi XtremeGamer PCI * Windows 10 Pro 21H2 64-bit

1 user thanked author for this post.

Noel Carboni

Reply | Quote

Well, if they can’t properly test updates before release, then I wonder, what way they understand the meaning of “pro” and “work”…

I did read the wonderful 56-page article by the Microsoft engineer, and frankly… it’s impossible to base a working company with critical software on that solution.

“In WaaS you do “Proactive Testing” and you configure everything without making any mistakes and running through quality gates. (sure you do)

But – due to the fact of not having unlimited time like in Windows 7 – there will come a point in time, where you just suggest that everything will work.

What is the impact for the chosen users who will run into problems?
They will call either Support desk or their Application Holder and then roll back –> 30 minutes to 60 minutes”

Unless your company makes a living of installing/testing Windows, then that try’n’error attitude will cost you time = money and in worst case scenario customers/clients…

It may work in large companies with 1000s of users, but for us small ones with one to 20-30 (?) users, that is simply not a safe and stable foundation to build on.

5 users thanked author for this post.

Bill C., Noel Carboni, Elly, Microfix, radosuaf

Reply | Quote

@JanK,

Yes, M$ should be banned from selling Beta-software, ie Win 10. Someone should sue them for doing so.
Imagine a car company selling cars that have not been fully-tested. Only car-crash dummies would buy such cars.

Reply | Quote

anonymous wrote:

Imagine a car company selling cars that have not been fully-tested.

I had a Mercedes once which seemed like it was rushed to market before it was fully tested. There were lots of details which were “wrong” in that car. I wonder if an actual driver ever got behind the wheel and drove it when they were testing it.

I then purchased a Mitsubishi. I continually got the feeling that Mitsubishi did lots of testing with real drivers on that car, because just about every detail was so well thought out.

Group "L" (Linux Mint)
with Windows 8.1 running in a VM

Reply | Quote

The other problem is although I found some bugs and reported them initially as an insider, probably the very low volume of those bugs found when looking a bit deeper than on the surface gets drowned by requests for flashy new things by enthusiastic users, so I don’t have much hope they will be fixed.

If you have a million voices, only the most popular topics will get addressed? If people don’t notice some significant failures of the underlying OS, it won’t be seen easily. You could argue they might not be that significant anyway if nobody notices, but as an example, if the OS leaked your wifi passwords to people who connect on the same network and you didn’t notice it, would you still find that minor? What if there was corruption in the not tested that much ReFS so that occasionnaly, a bit gets flipped on random files?

 

2 users thanked author for this post.

Noel Carboni, flackcatcher

Reply | Quote

Noel Carboni wrote:

Microsoft dissolved its testing organization.

Noel, I’ve been looking for verification of your statement, but I can’t find it anywhere. Is this verifiable information, or is it merely your belief?

I did find the following about a product called Microsoft Test Manager:

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj635157.aspx

I wonder if Microsoft has gone to a more automated testing model (i.e. Microsoft Test Manager), so that they don’t have to pay for a testing department, even going so far as using the “amateur” user base as their unpaid testing department? To assist the unpaid testing department, they provide Microsoft Test Manager. The best I can determine, MTM is free – it comes with Visual Studio.

Group "L" (Linux Mint)
with Windows 8.1 running in a VM

Reply | Quote

http://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-just-laid-off-2100-people-2014-9

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140806183208-12100070-why-did-microsoft-lay-off-programmatic-testers

1 user thanked author for this post.

MrJimPhelps

Reply | Quote

Thanks, I wondered for too long about origin of the (to be nice) odd “Quality update” phrase. Maybe Microsoft itself must be the primary user of Bing to help account for the two point something percent share of users.

The dedicated testers which were fired were not a negative profit draining asset they were creators of bug reports, other insightful data and could examine the source code. The reply left by Mr. Kesler matches the description of how Microsoft used to do testing, which can be corroborated (and/or inferred) in the excellent book Showstopper by G. Pascal Zachary.

Developers doing both jobs could lead to increased employee burn-out at such high release rates; I wonder what the burn-out rate is for the folks that are members Arch Linux distribution project and other similar projects.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Elly

Reply | Quote

From the Business Insider article:

Testing will no longer be done by a totally dedicated team, but will be rolled into the developer team. Nadella believes this will reduce bureaucracy and let Microsoft deliver products faster.

Nadella has no clue about the necessity of rigorous and thorough testing. I guess he figures that the users will do the testing for him. In the short term, his bottom line will improve. But at some point, the users will get fed up with being treated like guinea pigs and will abandon Microsoft in large numbers.

If you don’t test your products thoroughly, of course you can get them to market faster. But at what cost? The public will quickly learn that Microsoft sells junk, and they will look elsewhere for the products that they need.

Hey WordPerfect, this may be your chance to regain the market dominance you lost to Microsoft! Are you listening?

Group "L" (Linux Mint)
with Windows 8.1 running in a VM

3 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Bill C., flackcatcher

Reply | Quote

I remember reading about some DoD systems still using WinXP.

If those systems oversee or control the ability to deliver firepower downrange, I would much prefer a TESTED system that is old than the newest UNTESTED system that might not launch or even worse fire when not asked.

Reply | Quote

Oh! They also have a cloud-based bug hunter for software developers!  http://www.zdnet.com/article/writing-windows-or-linux-apps-microsoft-just-launched-a-cloud-powered-bug-hunter-to-find-flaws-in/

Combine the two with human intelligence and what can possible go wrong!?

Reply | Quote

The ReactOS project needs developers.

Reply | Quote

I thought the original idea was there would be 1 version of W10 but it seems the marketing failures have struck again. It’s getting to the point of being very difficult to keep the versions straight as well as which hardware MS will deprecate on you.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Cybertooth

Reply | Quote

I have customers + myself that want this version.  It appears (crossing fingers) that it returns most of the high end management features we expected, but are losing, in Pro . . . without the stupid monthly/annual recurring subscription costs for ENT.

Just hoping that they don’t change their mind and make this the SMB Office 365 edition of the E OS plans instead – half expecting that though, which would ruin the idea.

~ Group "Weekend" ~

2 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, flackcatcher

Reply | Quote

I’ve been expecting something like this for while. We thought MS would run this past CCB last year. There are ‘whispers’ that despite the purge of the last 6 months there is  a fierce inside struggle that has surprised both Microsoft’s board and it’s CEO. At this moment  win 10 pro w may have more meanings than we understand.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, NetDef

Reply | Quote

flackcatcher wrote:

There are ‘whispers’ that despite the purge of the last 6 months there is a fierce inside struggle that has surprised both Microsoft’s board and it’s CEO. At this moment win 10 pro w may have more meanings than we understand.

My personal opinion only:

I’ve been hearing about that struggle too. Nothing I can source, quote or substantiate . . . but stating this in a very oversimplified matter — the battle appears to be happening between a small MSFT veteran group that may want to continue to provide long term permanent seats for premium products, and the newer crowd (and upper leadership) that may be pushing Nadella’s vision of recurring revenue and deep integration with cloud services.  My personal opinion/guess is that the newer method might win.

If we hear about some sudden retirements or major product group re-orgs from the Windows team by EOY that will be pretty much a sign of the end of that battle.

 

~ Group "Weekend" ~

3 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, flackcatcher, ch100

Reply | Quote

NetDef wrote:

… long term permanent seats for premium products…

This was perhaps the key foundation of why so many people chose Microsoft over other companies. It provided stability.

The new model undercuts that stability. In other words, Microsoft is eliminating the key reason why everyone was loyal to them, in hopes of getting success elsewhere. When you are king of the hill, it is foolish to abandon what got you into that position in the first place, and what has kept you there for so long.

In the past, Microsoft was able to throw their competitors off of their game, and thereby topple these companies. It appears that Microsoft has gotten off of its game. And if they don’t get back on message soon, they will find that they are no longer king of the hill, and that the market has changed. In other words, they will reach a point where it will be too late for them to right the ship and continue to dominate. They may have already passed the point of no return.

Group "L" (Linux Mint)
with Windows 8.1 running in a VM

3 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, flackcatcher, NetDef

Reply | Quote

I’ve been hearing much of the same. Some of this I’m sure is just the usual griping one hears, when a new team is installed. BUT, there is something going on. Microsoft’s second wave of lay offs took out some long time heavy hitters, men and women with deep ties to Gates and his long time board members. And the failure of win 10/cloud computing is a massive black mark for the current CEO, and the board members that back him. Yes, the current CEO should win, the majority of the board has backed him so far. And yet, we have win 10 pro workstation and now the backtracking in Germany. Something is going on, I’m sure of it. I don’t know what it means.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Elly

Reply | Quote

flackcatcher wrote:

And the failure of win 10/cloud computing is a massive black mark for the current CEO

I don’t understand what makes you believe that the Microsoft Cloud implementation is a failure. It is quite the opposite.
It is a huge paradigm shift which is an expression made famous by Stephen Covey rather that Thomas Kuhn 🙂
The old Microsoft is no more, Bill Gates “left the building”, while the new Microsoft has a new direction.

Reply | Quote

Well, we will agree to disagree. The tell is when MS did their first round of lay-offs. Wiping out their Q and A  and Hardware support teams destroyed their back end protection. They renamed the current update system ‘cloud’ while firing the very people who were overseeing it. A ‘cloud system’ by its very nature is a secure system.  The backend, is overstaffed to handle the mass demands of it client and customer base. Hey, this is basic command and control in communications 101. MS bootstrapped their ‘new cloud’ on their current update system and blew it apart. If the current CEO had an once of integrity, he would have announce a massive hiring campaign to build a separate and secure system for his ‘new cloud’.  Yes, Apple does it right. Because Jobs accepted the increase hardware and personal costs for closed systems right of the bat.  I run secure systems and it’s not cheap.  The extra personal and hardware is needed just to handle unexpected problems that come from your client and customer base every day. Every. Single. Day. This is Billion Dollar Corporation we are posting about. So why is the CEO acting like he is the boss of a cheap web startup and short changing his customer base.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Elly

Reply | Quote

I don’t know Covey, but I said coined, didn’t I, not made famous? 😉

Behind great ideas, I found there is often a philosopher further up the chronology of their development and expansion.

“A paradigm shift, a concept identified by the American physicist and philosopher Thomas Kuhn (1922–1996), is a fundamental change in the basic concepts and experimental practices of a scientific discipline. Kuhn contrasted these shifts, which characterize a scientific revolution, to the activity of normal science, which he described as scientific work done within a prevailing framework (or paradigm). In this context, the word “paradigm” is used in its original Greek meaning, as example”.”

“Kuhn presented his notion of a paradigm shift in his influential book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962).”

“Since the 1960s, the concept of a paradigm shift has also been used in numerous non-scientific contexts to describe a profound change in a fundamental model or perception of events, even though Kuhn himself restricted the use of the term to the physical sciences.”

“In a 2015 retrospective on Kuhn,[2] the philosopher Martin Cohen describes the notion of the ‘Paradigm Shift’ as a kind of intellectual virus – spreading from hard science to social science and on to the arts and even everyday political rhetoric today. Cohen claims that Thomas Kuhn himself had only a very hazy idea of what it might mean and, in line with the American philosopher of science, Paul Feyerabend, accuses Kuhn of retreating from the more radical implications of his theory, which are that scientific facts are never really more than opinions, whose popularity is transitory and far from conclusive.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm_shift

Reply | Quote

There is no doubt that the cloud group will win. It is just common sense and anything else is only wishful thinking from people who cannot keep up with change and keep dreaming to past (possible better) times.

2 users thanked author for this post.

flackcatcher, NetDef

Reply | Quote

All of this makes me think of Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolution. He’s the philosopher guy who coined the “paradigm change” idea in science. Very interesting read.

For him, paradigm shifts occurs when old people die. People don’t change their mind easily, even in science, even with facts discounting the old paradigm. If you believed in alchemy, there’s a very good chance that however smart you are, you won’t change your mind when modern chemistry will arrive.

So, maybe lots of us are just crazy old smart folks who don’t get the new world.

I spoke to a relative this weekend and I asked him a question already knowing the answer. He’s a young, smart, programmer. I asked what he thought of Win 10. He doesn’t care. I said you don’t find it disturbing to see the ads, the useless toys apps everywhere, not really understanding what is constantly changing? He said no, I don’t see it, I just do what I have to do on the computer and ignore the rest. He has grown in this new culture, used to ignoring ads all over the place and not having control on many things. He doesn’t care about his privacy, he thinks his data is already collected everywhere and doesn’t seem to care much because he doesn’t see the impacts or he don’t care being served targeted ads.

To me, that is awful, but to him, it’s no big deal. Paradigm shift?

I’m afraid the future don’t belong to the old school computer users as our voice will be smaller and smaller as time goes by. I don’t think it is the right way to go, but I’m not sure it can be stopped, unless lots of big businesses voices gets too loud for Microsoft to ignore, if they struggle too much with the new way of doing things. Unfortunately, probably the big businesses with dedicated resources will be less affected than smaller ones because the latter can’t afford a full-time employee to test constant changes in Windows.

 

5 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, flackcatcher, ch100, NetDef, MrBrian

Reply | Quote

Oh, but I forgot a comment the young programmer made in my story and I remembered it after seeing the recent post from Noel about Visual Studio.

After my relative said he doesn’t care about Windows 10, he said that however, he was sick of the latest Visual Studio being so bad and broken. I didn’t even bother telling him that maybe fast release cycles and different testing methodologies might have played a role in his experience. That wasn’t a what you don’t see don’t bother you thing, this time, unlike his Windows 10 experience.

This whole thing just gives me more evidence about the idea that the OS is for many just a gateway to apps and it almost can be reduced to the list of compatible apps for most people, or a recognizable brand name to others, a default option for lack of interest for the common mortal or lack of benefits perceived for efforts required. However, when your apps start to misbehave, it can be more annoying to even the least interested individuals. If not, what are you doing on a computer if you don’t care at all what it does?

It is already hard to do rapid releases properly. Windows hasn’t been built for that and I don’t believe that MS can turn it that way fast enough. They are not even to not deprecate a system image backup tool they built. We still experience feature upgrades in a similar way to old upgrades that broke systems. It is simply unacceptable.

Even Apple often breaks things when doing their big upgrades with their built for that IOS. Of all the phones I manage, it happens sometimes that one will not survive the IOS update. But as annoying as it is when it breaks, it often remains a mild annoyance, as Apple built a whole way of working to make sure it is easy to “repair” the device: they almost force the user to do a local or cloud backup automatically before (you don’t have to understand how or what it does, skipping common code easily downloadable and system files) and if something break, you can reset your system from the backup without loosing data they backed up for you, except for a few things like if you do weird things like manually managing your music but then you already know better. So, you call Apple for free, they tell you how to fix it, and then you get on with your life for another year without a big OS upgrade. Microsoft is so far from this and let’s not talk about their tech support for home users here.

5 users thanked author for this post.

NetDef, Elly, Noel Carboni, ch100, flackcatcher

Reply | Quote

This is the one issue that we all are dealing with. OEMs are livid with Microsoft for badly botching this. Software developers are screaming about lack of documentation and standards. But this is a serious problem across the software side of the industry. Software Devs are not the problem, it’s the corporate culture we are seeing from these companies that is so disturbing. It is just not Microsoft alone that my IT teams have to clean up behind, this seems to be wide spread. In extreme cases, we bypass the company and deal straight with creator of the software we use. (Our in house law team hates me.) I think we are beginning to see the second and third order effects of hiring policy’s of the past decade, combined with the attitude of profit over growth. What really bother’s me is the lack of institutional memory many of these software companies have. Microsoft’s failure to successfully transfer to cloud computing simply should have not happened. There is way too much institutional knowledge there. We may have a far bigger problem than we understand.

3 users thanked author for this post.

NetDef, AlexEiffel, Elly

Reply | Quote

flackcatcher wrote:

What really bother’s me is the lack of institutional memory many of these software companies have.

There ya go . . .

There are other sides to the argument on not retaining older – long term serving – talent at these companies.  Some argue that newer faces bring more agility to the team.  Fresh energy.  Less likely to want a work/life balance.  Lower pay expectations with their reduced years of experience.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
 – George Santayana

But without certain industry veterans helping to guide the vision, it’s becoming clear that the vision can become very muddy.

 

~ Group "Weekend" ~

1 user thanked author for this post.

AlexEiffel

Reply | Quote

@alexeiffel
You know very well that we don’t always agree, but from my perspective, your posts are always challenging and have substance. Seriously, you and @NetDef should be MVPs on this forum 🙂
In relation to your post, iOS actually has a major difference when compared to Windows. The end user is “never” (at least in the supported configuration, non-jailbroken) the System Administrator of the iOS, but the system is rather managed by Apple, in the good Cloud fashion.
On a different, but related subject, you may find this post interesting, although it is not for the regular, non-power users.
Throwback Thursday: To CBB or to LTSB?
https://www.ivanti.com/blog/throwback-thursday-to-cbb-or-to-ltsb/
and a variation of it from the same expert (by all commonly accepted standards)
Windows 10 servicing branches – CBB or LTSB? A discussion
http://www.htguk.com/windows-10-servicing-branches-cbb-ltsb/

2 users thanked author for this post.

AlexEiffel, Elly

Reply | Quote

Thanks ch100. We don’t agree on everything and I think it is normal because of our different context. As a small businesses and home users stakeholder, I don’t have access to the resources and tools you have to manage Windows the way they would like me to manage it in the new world and I am not ready to let go that responsibility either without trust that they will do it well enough for me, which recent history have shown me more that I shouldn’t trust them than the opposite, unfortunately.

Yes, you are right about IOS. I noticed this distinction you always make in our previous discussions and I agree with you on this. I, however, find as an Ipad and Iphone user, I have enough control with the settings offered to not care being administrator, which should be the case for a whole lot of users if the OS is well-made. On Unix/Linux, you don’t run administrator either, in a way, although not as completely out of the equation as with IOS. You set things up and then you run standard user. I never feel not in control, especially compared to being an “administrator” on Windows that see his settings changed by an update to clearly a value I don’t want that is the opposite of the one I set myself.

Thanks for the articles. They just reinforce my understanding of the situation. I find the LTSB avoidance recommendation for general-purpose computers from MS more a wishful thinking about where they want us to go than a real necessity. Maybe they foresee technical issues between their new model of rapid development and incompatibilities between let’s say their latest Office update and an “out-of-date” LTS version that doesn’t support the latest bells and whistles they added to Office. However, if they considered Office should run on LTS as well, they could probably easily avoid this issue. As for other softwares, unless they go full store or take advantage of the latest capacities without consideration for compatibility, it shouldn’t pose an issue. Seriously, with so many Windows 7 in place, if the app run on 7, it should run on 10 LST, don’t you think?

I think I understand where MS wants us to go. I am not sure they are right. I think they make a false analogy between simpler OSes or browsers and the big, complex, beast that is Windows and all its legacy ecosystem. This might not be easily doable to follow a full rapid release cycle in this context, unless they would limit to extent of changes to some non disturbing one and have special more disturbing releases announced once in a while.

The problem with such an approach is that it might end up with the undesired effect of making the user have to choose not the best software to meet its need, but the less bad software to meet its need among the ones that are following Microsoft model, especially for apps with a small development team whose specialized knowledge is what makes the app so great, but who don’t have the resources to follow MS new way of doing things. What about all those nice free projects on the web that gets a bit of development, but not that often or sometimes still work although they are not maintained as much? There will be an acceleration of obsolescence of software and I am not sure it is such a good thing.

And regarding this idea discussed about needing to adapt and MS making things smoother for upgrades. I see that as a false dilemma. Either the old way with huge expensive updates or the new way with constant easy updates. I think they could a long time ago made the updates much more smooth (and the rapid ones aren’t that smooth anyway today), reducing costs and complexity for everyone. They could introduce small non-disruptive changes and have bigger deals once every three years. I don’t think it was a black or white issue that needed a simple black or white solution that doesn’t work that well in a gray world.

Reply | Quote

AlexEiffel wrote:

I find the LTSB avoidance recommendation for general-purpose computers from MS more a wishful thinking about where they want us to go than a real necessity.

I found interesting that in recent versions of Citrix XenDesktop, LTSB is supported by Citrix as VDI.
Previously the support option was vague, in the sense of only Enterprise being mentioned, which leaves room for interpretation as LTSB about which we keep discussing is one of the Enterprise versions. I think there is an IoT LTSB as well, which is like an LTSB core version, intended for embedded devices or thin clients.
http://docs.citrix.com/en-us/xenapp-and-xendesktop/7-15-ltsr/system-requirements.html#intro

For XenApp and XenDesktop components and features that can be installed on Windows Servers, Server Core and Nano Server installations are not supported, unless specifically noted.

For components and features that can be used on Windows 10 machines, the following Windows 10 servicing options and editions are supported:

Current Branch for Business (CBB): Pro, Enterprise, Education, Mobile Enterprise (the IoT Core Pro Edition is supported only for Citrix Receiver)
Long Term Service Branch (LTSB): LTSB
Current Branch (CB): Not supported

Citrix have their equivalent of CBB, released about every three months and once every year or so, some of the versions are also declared LTSR (LTSB/LTSC equivalent) with special (more expensive) support plans and updating. Unlike Microsoft, Citrix supports fully LTSR for larger implementations with complex Change Management processes.

1 user thanked author for this post.

AlexEiffel

Reply | Quote

Yes, very interesting, indeed. What if major third-parties all supported LTS versions. Wouldn’t it become tempting for lots of big businesses to just run LTS despite MS recommendation and bet they will be fine for a while? They could miss the store apps, but I don’t see anything happening on that front until 7 is out, because software won’t stop supporting the non store OS as long long as it remains so present and an important market.

I’m sure lots of businesses wouldn’t miss much of what MS will issue in the near future and certainly not the constant check, test, deploy small, deploy large, start over cycle.

When you think about it, MS should not have done smaller release cycles, but longer ones. They needed more time between releases, not less. Vista wasn’t polished when they rushed it out because it was getting too long between releases after XP. 8 was the worst release since Me in terms of lack of polish. There was so many clearly bad UI mistakes in 8 it was practically unworkable. 8.1 was quite fine apart from a few important details like the distracting disappearance of the background when you pres the Windows key. So it should have been 98, XP, 7, maybe 8.1 or 8.2 and still not 10 because it is far from what they envision it will become. They could have made 10 similar to what it is now in many ways, though, more polished, classic style and work for a few years on converting the old control panel to the new Metro style instead of switching a few things during each release.

Reply | Quote

This makes it even more interesting because Citrix is not any third-party, but a very close partner and in some ways even acts like a highly specialised Microsoft subsidiary.

1 user thanked author for this post.

AlexEiffel

Reply | Quote

@AlexEiffel,

Apple built a whole way of working to make sure it is easy to “repair” the device: they almost force the user to do a local or cloud backup automatically

Can’t imagine selfish and greedy M$ doing automatic Cloud backup for Win 10 users because it would reduce M$’s profit$ considerably;

1. The Win 10 ISO or upgrade file is about 4GB in size (64bit) while that of iOS 10 is only about 1GB in size. The risk of Cloud backup recovery or inplace upgrade failures for Win 10 is much higher, eg due to connection problems.

2. The number of Win 10 users could potentially reach 2 billion in 2020, ie when Win 7 reaches EOL. 2 billion X 4GB = 8 billion GB of Cloud backup = 8 million TB or 8,000,000TB.

Reply | Quote

You missed a teachable moment with him. 🙁

Certainly he’ll again voice a complaint, and you two can have a conversation. 🙂

Reply | Quote

Thing is, some of we “old guys” who have embraced technology our whole lives and who are now being marginalized as “resistant to change” are no strangers to change. Many/most of us here vocalizing criticism for “the new Microsoft” are actually those who embrace change. We know that with change comes opportunity. We also know the smell of BS all too well. 🙂

Heck, I’ve personally set up one of the more productive Win 10 systems right here in a virtual machine in front of me, having done with it what few others have just by applying knowledge and a sense of joy in discovery of new things.

And oh and by the way on the subject of this thread, I actually use ReFS every day. I know from experience what it means to make creating volumes with it unavailable to most users.

Just keep in mind the possibility that some of us might just be wise enough to see what’s going to be able to work – and what is not. Hard to believe but we have already lived through paradigm shifts before. Many of us trying to influence the direction of computing have made a life out of making the best of them.

But hey, go figure it all out for yourselves. The journey is the fun part! You feel like you see things in a new way. Just try not to become bitter when the next generation comes along all too soon and tells you how things REALLY need to be done, because THEY of course know better. 🙂

-Noel “makin’ the best of Windows one day at a time…” 🙂

3 users thanked author for this post.

AlexEiffel, Elly, flackcatcher

Reply | Quote

What you say resonates with me, Noel. I am probably the person who pushes change the most when it comes to technology at work when I feel it is worth it. In the past, I redirected our focus away from fads and pushed technologies that, although appearing less sexy, ended up being the key differentiation for our business. Experience brings that distance that helps not fall into the traps of the latest and greatest fad.

I share your enthusiasm with discovery and tweaking. The only problem is when you feel you do all that for nothing, because the result of your work has much less long lasting effort, it gets tiring and much less inspiring. You still don’t use your Win 10 in a production environment and the one you tweaked is going to be irrelevant in a few months. You are the Sisyphus of technology. I salute your courage, I might just leave the boulder where it rolls at some point.

 

Reply | Quote