• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

*** AMD "Zen" thread (inc AM4/APU discussion) ***

ubersonic said:
Functionality wise there is little that Windows 10 offers over previous versions aside from looks and ease of use (not saying they are not valuable but it's hardly a landmark improvement).
Click to expand...

Yeah, the problem they've got is that 7 worked. The tagline for 10 was basically "at least it's not 8 again!"

I don't have any objections to my Win 10 installs, they're all fairly solid and seem less prone to rotting than earlier versions... but I upgraded to keep up with DirectX and that was basically it.
 
Going forward there will be no more new versions of Windows as such, what i mean is we wont get Windows 11 or Windows 2020.

Microsoft moved to Windows 10 and are keen to get everyone onto it as they can deliver newer versions of windows via the Windows Update system now. Much like when they done the anniversary update, it was fairly seamless for most people (there was a lot of weird issues with it for many though) in regards to the update, it effectively reinstalled windows over the top of the current windows.

This is how Microsoft want windows to develop further on, they dont want to release windows 11, windows 2020 etc, they want it just to be called Windows and you subscribe to new features when they make them available, as far as im aware its going to become a base OS with a ton of add on options. They are gearing towards an entire eco system where you buy your "Windows" license, and decide you need "Office" so buy the addon, then later you need "Super Calculator Pro 9999" so buy that add on etc, its all delivered to you via the Windows Update method.

Anyhow, Windows 10 i find very good, im currently rolling it out at work, i took the decision to EOL roll outs of 7 and 8.1, infact i took the 8.1 image off our SCCM server, i left 7 on as theres some legacy apps that wont run on 10 yet which once finalised and working means i can remove 7.

Overall the userbase is happier with 10 than 8.1, but more importantly just want something that works regardless of how it looks lol.
 
eddiew said:
Yeah, the problem they've got is that 7 worked. The tagline for 10 was basically "at least it's not 8 again!"
Click to expand...

In fairness, it's not like 7 really did anything better than Vista, the only difference was that Vista was launched in 2007 and aimed at 2005+ hardware whereas 7 was launched in 2009 with the tagline "better than Vista!" and still aimed at 2005+ hardware.

It was kind of comical really having seen how god awful 95/98/XP were when run on the hardware of the day, but by 2007 the amount of PC users had exploded so nobody really understood the concept of minimum requirements.

Then came Windows 8 and despite no performance loss people sulked about the GUI being improved, all I can say is thank god those people weren't using computers when 95 launched XD
 
Wah007 said:
"RyZen" sounds really good if they go with that name for their Zen CPU's.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.ga...core-zen-cpu.htm?client=ms-android-sonymobile
Click to expand...

Good spot for early December!

According to that link, not long after the time (edited for accuracy) AMD trademarked "Ryzen", they also trademarked "Threadripper" (and a few other names). Wonder what that might be?

I recall back in 2006-2010 there was some talk of AMD working on a 'reverse hyperthreading'. Supposedly it was intended to take single threads and intelligently split them up - effectively using a multi-core CPU to emulate a really fast single core one. It went very quiet eventually and I recall people saying it was unworkable. Well I don't know, but if I was AMD and that's what I was naming, "Threadripper" doesn't seem that bad a name.
 
Last edited:
ubersonic said:
Well neither did a DOS system running XTREE, I wouldn't wanna use that in 2016 either :P
Click to expand...

A bit OT but I use AmigaOS 4.1 daily. Admittedly it's not my main OS, but it's still very usable by today standards. AmigaOS 3.9 on my A1200 is also perfectly usable as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SiDeards73 said:
Going forward there will be no more new versions of Windows as such, what i mean is we wont get Windows 11 or Windows 2020.
Click to expand...

It is pretty much the same model that Apple Uses with Macintosh O/S. When they his O/S version 10, they just kept the OSX name.

Windows will probably drop the 10 in a year or so and just be called Windows.
 
ubersonic said:
Yeah but at least nobody was refusing ot use it on mass because the GUI had been improved :P
Click to expand...

I was working at the BBC in the mid 90's when 95 came out, BBC was the launch site in the UK for a corporate roll out of Windows 95, coupled with Dell Hardware and their love of buying different hardware for their "Standard" machines meant it was a real headache to roll out smoothly.

You would have 3 Dell Optiplex machines all identical to look at, same model number etc, but pop the lid and you would find they all had different GPU's and NIC's etc lol, it was a right headache, we thought we was going to ghost a master image across a load of standard machines.. that never happened :)
 
amigafan2003 said:
A bit OT but I use AmigaOS 4.1 daily. Admittedly it's not my main OS, but it's still very usable by today standards. AmigaOS 3.9 on my A1200 is also perfectly usable as well.
Click to expand...

Funnily enough I was gonna mention AmigaOS. If somehow I could wave a wand and it became the new gaming platform I would be perfectly happy using that instead.

No surprise MS use DX as a carrot every time they release a new Windows. And of course they do everything they can to make LibreOffice an annoyance to employers / orgs rather than simply supporting it. The idea of paying for an OS and office suite is so antiquated yet here we are still supporting the abusive monopoly in 2017 because we don't want to give the council an excuse to throw out our planning application because it's not in .docx.
 
ubersonic said:
He is correct though, XP was just a prettied up version of 2K and the only reason people moved form XP was because Microsoft deliberately withheld feature updates (I.E Direct3D) and then cut support altogether.

Functionality wise there is little that Windows 10 offers over previous versions aside from looks and ease of use (not saying they are not valuable but it's hardly a landmark improvement).
Click to expand...

Well no, Windows 2000 had no D3D support so didn't run any games and was useless for a lot of home users. Windows XP basically married Windows NT with DirectX and became ubiquitous.

The only real improvement since then was the addition of native 64-bit versions, which started with Vista. Since Vista was such a big jump from XP after such a long time, it had inevitable issues and thus Windows 7 was basically "Vista as it should have been" and it then became the "de facto" OS.

Nothing since then has necessitated a new OS except for stylistic changes (which Microsoft is terrible at anyway - look how many visual styles exist in Windows 10, plus the fact that there's two Control Panels now, so awful), so Microsoft has instead pushed for the Apple model where you have to buy into their ecosystem (Windows 10, Office 365, Windows Store, etc.) instead so you're "forced" to upgrade. Only supporting the latest CPUs on the latest version of Windows is just one aspect of that.

Hopefully Linux will sort out the whole user-friendly thing eventually, but the general attitude of its proponents and developers doesn't suggest it'll happen any time soon. Game developers are the biggest influence on this, IMO. If Linux supported an actual good version of Office (sorry Libre Office, you suck) and all new games, Microsoft would be in trouble.
 
Last edited:
DragonQ said:
Well no, Windows 2000 had no D3D support so didn't run any games and was useless for a lot of home users. Windows XP basically married Windows NT with DirectX.
Click to expand...

You could install Directx on windows 2000 pro and play games perfectly fine, i used it as my main O/S till i had to migrate to XP.
 
DragonQ said:
Well no, Windows 2000 had no D3D support so didn't run any games and was useless for a lot of home users.
Click to expand...
You could install D3D on 2000, the whole reason Microsoft made home/pro versions of XP was because they saw so many "home" users using Windows 2000 instead of Windows ME.


DragonQ said:
Hopefully Linux will sort out the whole user-friendly thing eventually
Click to expand...
I've been saying that since the late 90's lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom