Windows 9

Does anyone have an idea when windows 9 will be out and will it be retail or update?
Thank you, Peter

 

Microsoft has not announced when it will be released and I suspect it won't be released for quite some time yet. And, I believe Microsoft has not publicly stated whether it will be available as an update; my guess is that it will not be available as an update. Reference: Windows 9 release date, news and rumours

 

I appreciate the link; it was interesting.
At this point it is up in the air and much will transpire meanwhile. I think 8.1 is much better than the older os's and will be happy with it if it stays this way for awhile. I just wondered if there was some hint out there about MS next step.

 

In all honesty it is probably going to look a lot like windows 8 and 8.1 and it is probably going to be another add-on to windows 8.

I am still stuck in XP mode which i find that it is still Microsoft's top windows Operating software in the world.

Would be nice if they brought the Old Xp version back in windows 9.

Xp was more stable then any other version of Operating software,If they would bring back xp in windows 9 and make its update as a visual update.The Visual needs to be reworked in XP they really need to keep things simple.

 

Am hoping Windows Nine is a return to the grass roots for Microsoft, leaving 8.x for the phone and mobile devices. Tried Windows 8 on the desktop for a month, 8.1 for a week, and am dual booting 7 with a linux distro on the desktop, again, with XP on the laptop.
If I can get a new desktop, with a new operating system that suits my needs, I will be purchasing one. As of late am just looking at desktop models with Windows 7 Pro on them, and not knowing which way to jump. Heck, the touchscreens we use on the job have Windows 7 Pro on them.
My needs, a Blu-ray optical drive, a few USB 3.0 ports, gigabit Ethernet, a fourth generation Haswell i7 (or better) processor, and a GPU with 2 gigs of processing power (DVI). Seems the market is changing so fast these days that the quad-core will soon be obsolete. Maybe AMD will be my go to again. So I keep waiting, and replacing or upgrading old and worn out components when I can. Who knows? :confused

 

While some may feel that Windows XP was the most simple of the consumer NT OSes, it is not, and never has been, the most stable. Windows XP has exponentially more bugs that had to be patched than anything that came after (skipping Vista).

In fact, Windows 7 only needed one service pack. Windows 8 didn't even have a service pack before 8.1 came out. 8.1 is a full OS, not an add-on.

As it stands, XP is more vulnerable than Windows 7 or 8 (or even Vista) to exploits and malware.

 

Microsoft is not going to abandon the change they started. Nor should they; that would be more damaging than continuing forward and refining. OS X and Windows have been moving to help unify their mobile and desktop OSes. Every release, OS X becomes a little more iOS-ified. Microsoft's biggest mistake was not making it a gradual change. The sudden lurch of dropping a new UI on their customers proved to be too big a shock to the system. Their customers will recover as MS refines it, but they should have been more gradual about it. MS just didn't want to miss out on potential markets with tablets like they did with phones. It was a bold move, and one that they honestly needed to take to remain relevant.

I am not a fan of Metro, but I understand why it is there. The desktop is legacy and is meant to be treated like an application, not a separate UI. It needs refinement, and 8.1 is a step in the right direction.

I mean, lets face it, there is not much difference between this:

http://km.support.apple.com/library/APPLE/APPLECARE_ALLGEOS/HT2476/en_US/HT2476-Lion-LaunchpadApp-002-en.png

and this:

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-IVTpZK_QQS4/UmCy2EREjgI/AAAAAAAACQ0/Jzt6z1xK7Uo/w1552-h873-no/Untitled.png


People just like to be dramatic.

 

When I began the thread I never expected so many diverse replies and that is good.

I am having a problem I have not seen before. When I use Explorer to open my inbox for MGs I see the replies as longer strings of sentences requiring a scroll at the bottom.
This is the only place it occurs. Is anyone experiencing the same?

As far as OSs go, I am very happy with 8.1 but will get a Chromebook for my wife. We have tried to show her around but she is not at all techy and without my support would have issues even with imaging. She can do what she needs to with the Chromebook,i.e., surf and email.
She will not have to maintain or repair parts and the privacy is easier for her. She will still use the old checkbook so no issues there except the cost of stamps.
Let's hope I stick around if for nothing else but to maintain her pc.

I always enjoyed XP and Win 7. Win 7 was the easiest of all I think although there is nothing terribly difficult about Win 8.1. After familiarizing yourself with it and with a little intuitiveness it is a fine OS.
I am just an average user so if I can use it anyone can.

 

I agree with those of you who like Windows XP. I don't think the marketplace ever has had the opportunity to take advantage of the simplicity with which it can be configured from the UI standpoint. This has been a key reason why I have been so satisfied to stay with the OS.

The biggest problem I see for XP has to do with the .NET framework. As far as functionality is concerned, including .NET, XP is basically fully patched to stay relevant. However, MS did not extend compatibility for .NET framework 4.5 to Windows XP. Overall, I am keeping my eyes open for any open source type of project that might address this situation. My instincts are telling me that long term something for this is bound to come along. More than likely I would say out of the far east where Windows XP is still particularly popular.

I don't really buy the notion that XP is less secure than other Windows operating systems. There are many patches, yes, but this isn't a bad thing. It would be nice if the patches could be made part of the OS as I read somewhere users can do with Vista (and I guess Windows 7...not sure)

 

You don't have to believe it, but it is a fact.

If you would like to start a thread on the comparison of security features it does not have, and never will, I would be happy to show you how it is less secure. I don't want to hijack this one further.

 

In the start of XP no it was not stable but at the end of the life span it is now.

 

Please quantify your claim with some examples of where XP is more stable than 7, or even 8.

 

It's because of Adrynalyne's GARGANTUAN pics in post #7, stretching the page out sideways.

 

A feature for feature comparison wouldn't explain why Windows XP is as secure I believe. Later versions of Windows needed more security and Microsoft added some. However, look at the situation with Vista and with Windows 7. MS simply shut users off from using widgets over security issues. What kind of support do you think you'll get when something similar happens with Windows 8? Don't tell me they will fix it. Tell the users of Vista and Windows 7 who still don't have their widgets after all this time, a feature they paid for. Tell the developers who poured themselves into widgets for Vista and 7 just to roll over and forget about it...

Windows XP is simpler to protect than anything after...

 

Get a bigger monitor!

 

Look at the logic of this in general.

You are absolutely right, but not because those versions were less secure, but because the threats were greater.


Therefore by that alone, shows that XP is less secure, because it doesn't have the extra security. We should ask chaslang. I don't think he will be singing the songs of praise in XP security, but I could be wrong

As for the widgets, that is no different than Apple (somewhat inconsistently) blocking java plugins with their browser. They didn't fix it, they just blocked it.

I don't pretend to know why MS blocked widgets, but it isn't because they couldn't secure it. Their reasonings border on an entirely different subject, and lets face it: widgets are dead. They have been dead for some time before the flaw was found. They are just as dead as the dashboard on OS X. New ones were not really even trickling in. This probably resulted in MS just offering of an 'off' switch for it.


http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20063220-83.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-xp-windows-7-windows-vista-viruses-malware,18306.html


XP simply does not have all the enhanced security measures of more recent OSes, and that is not a good thing. Once it is completely EOL, it is a ticking 0-day exploit timebomb.

ASLR in Vista and above alone mitigates a lot of attacks that still work on Windows XP. Microsoft has been improving it every version too. Windows 8 has the best ASLR so far.

UAC, for lack of many liking it, still mitigates some attacks that would walk their happy butt right through the front door on XP. Windows Defender in Windows 8 protects the OS straight out of the box from malware and viruses. The list goes on and on (smart screen in windows 8, Bitlocker, http://secadmins.com/index.php/windows-8-enhanced-security-features/) , but one thing MS is not doing, is making less secure OSes as time goes on.

 

I disagree with this statement. If there is a ticking 0-day exploit timebomb, it's Windows 8. The hackers aren't in it for the fun of it or to break PCs. They're after money, and they will believe they can find it on Windows 8 PCs. MS couldn't protect Windows 7 or Vista, and they won't be able to protect Windows 8, either. At least with Windows XP, I don't have to fight through a phony effort at security from MS to secure my PC...

This makes no sense to me. The only claim MS ever made about widgets/gadgets was that they were a security threat. Evidently the threat was one they weren't willing to invest in beating, even if their customers paid for the feature:

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/gadgets

Their reasonings look an awful lot like greed. Greed to destroy consumer confidence in Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Windows 7 to try to raise money from selling copies of Windows 8, an operating system that wasn't getting the reviews they wanted...

Anyway, it's all bad business this mess. Bad business always bites back...

 

I will go ahead and respectfully bow out here. You are posting out of emotion, not logic, or technical details. Do you even know what a 0-day exploit is? I am not interested in continuing further in any case. Good day to you, sir.

 

AtlBo can you tell me your background in tech? Im just curious as i know a bit about where and what adry has done, but am curious as to your background.

 

Gristle and grit Colemanguy. This is my background in tech...and good old fashioned discernment...

 

I can tell you that my system with Xp still on it is more secure then windows vista,7,8,8.1,.

I rarely get any virus or malware on my system.Xp is more simple to use then any other Operating software's i have used every thing from MSdos to windows 1.1 till now.But Mac that is one thing i have not used.

Out of all the Systems i find that any OS from windows 8 and on are going to suck big time.Microsoft is trying to make every thing too complicated.And too fancy.

We don't need Operating Systems that look like cell phones.They need to keep them two things apart.

It need's to be more simple.

Yes Xp has had it's ups and downs over the years.But it is one of them things where it is hard to switch over.Be cause Windows Xp has pretty much every file base out there.

Any thing newer and it is going to be harder to find them files you need.

And you don't see me complaining on the malware forums.

If people would just learn on how to manage there Operating system correctly then there would less problems.

 

Really!!
http://www.howtogeek.com/77788/online-safety-why-you-should-give-up-windows-xp-for-good-2/
http://blogs.technet.com/b/security...of-running-windows-xp-after-support-ends.aspx

Cheers..