This news really doesn't bother me, if I'm honest about it. In fact, I'm surprised Windows allowed backward compatibility as long as they have - that was probably the mistake in the first place.
Apple has changed entire CPU architectures 3 times now, and maintained some level of backwards compatibility immediately after the shift, but it's only been for a handful of years - not quite the decade+ commitment that Microsoft makes.
I never had an issue with Win 10. Its a more stable user friendly version of Windows 8 which is a more stable better performing version of Windows 7. If you are on a Windows version you are going to get data-mined period unless you are on Windows XP. Just rest assured its not as bad as Googles or Apples. Linux is a different story. Also new processor support going to the latest distros is nothing new. You need Windows 8 to get AMD bulldozer cores to work correctly.
W8 is more stable then 7? Sonn you start saying that ME was more stable then '98...
10 is getting better and better though but it still have some issues. Windows tend to take 2 years to actually get rid of most the bugs. Heck, XP took 3 before it worked really well.
But it might be smart to remove old OSes anyways, some people I build new computers for still ask me if I can't put XP on them since they are used to it. And no, I can't.
This just happen when we are so depending on windows not much going scare them off doing just anything Unless Linux or Mac take more a foot hold in the market.
They will never be a major opponent to Windows as MANY games have huge problems running correct on Linux.
And I know a lot of ppl that have problems running MMO's on a Mac because of MS's directx code.
I run Windows 10, always used Windows for gaming as tbh: Linux with Wine etc just sux for gaming.
I like Linux Mint/Ubuntu distros, they are more reliable, faster, stable then WIndows imo, but the fact that I have to patch up Windows games to get them to work in Wine (and other emulation software) after every minor patch in a game made me just uninstall it and go back to Windows. And even then you get graphical glitches, crashes from time to time.
But the moment they (Linux devs) have a way to guarantee 100% that modern games run perfect on Linux like they do on Windows, I will reinstall Mint/Ubuntu.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
They will never be a major opponent to Windows as MANY games have huge problems running correct on Linux.
And I know a lot of ppl that have problems running MMO's on a Mac because of MS's directx code.
I run Windows 10, always used Windows for gaming as tbh: Linux with Wine etc just sux for gaming.
I like Linux Mint/Ubuntu distros, they are more reliable, faster, stable then WIndows imo, but the fact that I have to patch up Windows games to get them to work in Wine (and other emulation software) after every minor patch in a game made me just uninstall it and go back to Windows. And even then you get graphical glitches, crashes from time to time.
But the moment they (Linux devs) have a way to guarantee 100% that modern games run perfect on Linux like they do on Windows, I will reinstall Mint/Ubuntu.
Games are the only reason I still dual boot Windows side by side with Linux. The amount of games that support Linux has increased a lot lately, with Valve pushing SteamOS. There are over 1000 games with Linux support on Steam now, out of around 5000, for example and increasing at an ever faster rate. Most importantly more and more new game releases support Linux, I read somewhere that one third of all games released on Steam over the past three months support Linux.
Windows is better for gaming currently, no doubt about it, and it's the most important thing for Linux to improve currently.
This just happen when we are so depending on windows not much going scare them off doing just anything Unless Linux or Mac take more a foot hold in the market.
They will never be a major opponent to Windows as MANY games have huge problems running correct on Linux.
And I know a lot of ppl that have problems running MMO's on a Mac because of MS's directx code.
I run Windows 10, always used Windows for gaming as tbh: Linux with Wine etc just sux for gaming.
I like Linux Mint/Ubuntu distros, they are more reliable, faster, stable then WIndows imo, but the fact that I have to patch up Windows games to get them to work in Wine (and other emulation software) after every minor patch in a game made me just uninstall it and go back to Windows. And even then you get graphical glitches, crashes from time to time.
But the moment they (Linux devs) have a way to guarantee 100% that modern games run perfect on Linux like they do on Windows, I will reinstall Mint/Ubuntu.
Street Fighter V is the next modern game going run on Linux being perfectly not sure yet, dev and company are slowly getting there game ported over then made on linux but sure for how long most people usely play older games on windows or bad ported game of a console they have problem working on windows some times.
But if Vulkan API don't pan out yeah not much interest of dev or company pushing and making even more games on the API that will work on linux or mac be less interest if code for DX only. Even DX12 be less of a interest just to save money just stick with DX9 or DX11 code if people still don't want to upgrade to 10.
MS were obviously going to do this because it is cheaper to support. Getting rid of older - hard to keep secure - hardware/software combinations is a part of that.
Moving towards a common OS across PCs / consoles / phones a further step.
And never forget the key market for Windows is ....... businesses not games, most games are not on PC.
No one has to upgrade but don't cry when the non-updated OS is infected by a virus.
Edit: and if one was to adopt the line that some people have taken regarding Steam then: it's their (MS's) OS and they can make you upgrade. Not a view that MS share obviously.
And never forget the key market for Windows is ....... businesses not games, most games are not on PC.
LOL...
I call BS on that graph, there are like 100 million+ mobile phone "gamers" way, way more than PC/console combined.
I mean, ever since the iPhone really and that was 2007.
Good thing the graph represents revenue not warm (well, mostly) bodies.
"I used to think the worst thing in life was to be all alone. It's not. The worst thing in life is to end up with people who make you feel all alone." Robin Williams
Makes sense to me - much easier to kill off support for old OS`s and get everyone on win10.
They want everyone on windows 10 to data mine people what they do everyday, there as been a few update from windows 10 if you even try to run off there spyware microsoft just go's around turn them back on. Just been sneak latey so people don't even know what there date mining and how much info there are getting. But yeah does make sense to kill off older OS but will not stop people from holding on to a older OS until it's broken.
But on the gaming side is better be on windows 10 if people want newer and better game running on DX12.
...if you think MS, Google, Apple and your ISP don't datamine everything you do every day regardless of what version you're on you're an idiot. Your data is not OS-Version-Centric, and it hasn't been for a decade.
I don't trust them given how hard they are pushing me to move up to windows 10. I'm sticking with Windows 7 until I HAVE to upgrade. I sense a money making scheme from them on this.
And never forget the key market for Windows is ....... businesses not games, most games are not on PC.
LOL...
I call BS on that graph, there are like 100 million+ mobile phone "gamers" way, way more than PC/console combined.
I mean, ever since the iPhone really and that was 2007.
Good thing the graph represents revenue not warm (well, mostly) bodies.
The difference between someone who reads before answering and someone who answers before reading...
Oh I saw it was revenue, that's why I said it is BS.
A stupid phone game like that Game of War or whatever was making a million bucks in revenue per DAY!
That's one game. How much does Candy Crush and Minecraft mobile and Plants vs. Zombies and Forge of Empires and the dozen other mega huge mobile games make?
And never forget the key market for Windows is ....... businesses not games, most games are not on PC.
LOL...
I call BS on that graph, there are like 100 million+ mobile phone "gamers" way, way more than PC/console combined.
I mean, ever since the iPhone really and that was 2007.
Good thing the graph represents revenue not warm (well, mostly) bodies.
The difference between someone who reads before answering and someone who answers before reading...
Well, it says revenue,
But then the Y-axis is labeled in Units, which does lead to thinking number of boxes/keys/whatever shipped.
I suppose it could just be some generic "Units" of currency, but I doubt that's true either, since it's in tens of Millions, and a company like EA pulls in Billions per year. Supercell (Clash of Clans) pulled in $5MM per ~day~, in 2013. Speaking in units of US Dollar, just to be clear.
So yeah, I think that graph is BS. Reading doesn't really help at all.
But then the Y-axis is labeled in Units, which does lead to thinking number of boxes/keys/whatever shipped.
I suppose it could just be some generic "Units" of currency, but I doubt that's true either, since it's in tens of Millions, and a company like EA pulls in Billions per year. Supercell (Clash of Clans) pulled in $5MM per ~day~, in 2013. Speaking in units of US Dollar, just to be clear.
So yeah, I think that graph is BS. Reading doesn't really help at all.
Well, according to this article, PC gaming is accelerating, and poised to take over console sales by the end of 2016. That implies that it hadn't done so yet at the time of the article being published (June 2015).
Here is another article that essentially says the same thing, only mobile vs console. Mobile is set to overtake console revenue sometime last year, but hadn't yet at the time of the publishing of the article (Jan 2015).
The Fortune article I believe as at least semi-accurate. The CNet article maybe. In both cases, it shows Console revenue was higher than either PC or Mobile gaming for some period up until 2015. That completely contradicts the graph. I wasn't able to find more current data (although I expect it will start to come out soon, a lot of companies are releasing year-over-years now)
Maybe the graph is 100% accurate, but so far nothing on it really passes the smell test. So I think it's closer to the total bull category than just a skewed perspective of otherwise accurate numbers.
So yeah, PC gaming isn't dead, that's a good point. The graph may be attempting to paint it in too-favorable of a light, but the data clearly indicates that it's still significant. But gaming revenue doesn't address the issue of PC sales and revenue, the two aren't necessarily linked or even proportional.
But then the Y-axis is labeled in Units, which does lead to thinking number of boxes/keys/whatever shipped.
I suppose it could just be some generic "Units" of currency, but I doubt that's true either, since it's in tens of Millions, and a company like EA pulls in Billions per year. Supercell (Clash of Clans) pulled in $5MM per ~day~, in 2013. Speaking in units of US Dollar, just to be clear.
So yeah, I think that graph is BS. Reading doesn't really help at all.
I had some comp-sci / math class where we screwed around with stats, graphs and pivot tables in Excel to show that we could make the numbers look however we wanted to suit our agenda. It was fun.
Unless it's just total bull, which we won't know one way or the other unless we know more about the quality of the numbers, it does show the popularity relative to the other platforms. What would make the graph much more interesting would be to see a per user and units pivot on revenue and specific platforms (each console and version, each OS, mobile OS, etc).
You mean just like BS myths that were floating around that Skyrim sold only 15% on PC, when it may be up to 50% by now?
Consoles have inherent flaws, and the only way to fix them is to make them more like PC which obsoletes their purpose. And consoles will take even bigger hit with all those small format PC boxes coming out.
I just dont see bright future for consoles, back in the day of Amiga and Atari they had much more going on for tham against PC than todays consoles and they still failed.
And i alredy said that PC entertainment is growing at a rapid pace, but that hardware was too powerful lately and software is only now catching up, hell only lately we see that games use more cores on your CPU and that dual cores are starting to lag behind 4/8 core CPUs. DX12 will make that even more evident in near future so it may actually pick up soon as all those buying dual cores will have to upgrade.
How about they fix windows 10 so it isn't a piece of crap first before they stop support for the older OS's? Just once I'd like to see them actually release something that resembles a retail product and not something that takes 2 years to "fix" before it actually works. People are putting win7 and win8 on new pc's because win10 is not ready for prime time yet. Too many glitches and compatibility issues still. No games run DX12 anyway, so there really is no advantage to getting win10 for gamers right now. I guess 18 months is when they expect win10 to actually be a solid product. They might be giving themselves too much credit.
I run Windows 10 at home, works etc.. Never seen one glitch of any substance. I hightly doubt the vilidity of your statement.
this. Windows 10, at this stage, is by and large a more effective version of windows 7 now.
How about they fix windows 10 so it isn't a piece of crap first before they stop support for the older OS's? Just once I'd like to see them actually release something that resembles a retail product and not something that takes 2 years to "fix" before it actually works. People are putting win7 and win8 on new pc's because win10 is not ready for prime time yet. Too many glitches and compatibility issues still. No games run DX12 anyway, so there really is no advantage to getting win10 for gamers right now. I guess 18 months is when they expect win10 to actually be a solid product. They might be giving themselves too much credit.
I run Windows 10 at home, works etc.. Never seen one glitch of any substance. I hightly doubt the vilidity of your statement.
this. Windows 10, at this stage, is by and large a more effective version of windows 7 now.
^Agreed.
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
Makes sense to me - much easier to kill off support for old OS`s and get everyone on win10.
They want everyone on windows 10 to data mine people what they do everyday, there as been a few update from windows 10 if you even try to run off there spyware microsoft just go's around turn them back on. Just been sneak latey so people don't even know what there date mining and how much info there are getting. But yeah does make sense to kill off older OS but will not stop people from holding on to a older OS until it's broken.
But on the gaming side is better be on windows 10 if people want newer and better game running on DX12.
I have a pro-tip for you. They don't need you on Win10 to datamine you. No one does. Welcome to distributed networking.
Yeah I have to agree, they started in 1935 with J Edgar Hoover, and they have never looked back.
The Net just makes it easier, for all the good it's done... pffft
See the world and all within it. Live a lifetime in every minute.
Comments
Apple has changed entire CPU architectures 3 times now, and maintained some level of backwards compatibility immediately after the shift, but it's only been for a handful of years - not quite the decade+ commitment that Microsoft makes.
10 is getting better and better though but it still have some issues. Windows tend to take 2 years to actually get rid of most the bugs. Heck, XP took 3 before it worked really well.
But it might be smart to remove old OSes anyways, some people I build new computers for still ask me if I can't put XP on them since they are used to it. And no, I can't.
And I know a lot of ppl that have problems running MMO's on a Mac because of MS's directx code.
I run Windows 10, always used Windows for gaming as tbh: Linux with Wine etc just sux for gaming.
I like Linux Mint/Ubuntu distros, they are more reliable, faster, stable then WIndows imo, but the fact that I have to patch up Windows games to get them to work in Wine (and other emulation software) after every minor patch in a game made me just uninstall it and go back to Windows. And even then you get graphical glitches, crashes from time to time.
But the moment they (Linux devs) have a way to guarantee 100% that modern games run perfect on Linux like they do on Windows, I will reinstall Mint/Ubuntu.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
Windows is better for gaming currently, no doubt about it, and it's the most important thing for Linux to improve currently.
But if Vulkan API don't pan out yeah not much interest of dev or company pushing and making even more games on the API that will work on linux or mac be less interest if code for DX only. Even DX12 be less of a interest just to save money just stick with DX9 or DX11 code if people still don't want to upgrade to 10.
MS were obviously going to do this because it is cheaper to support. Getting rid of older - hard to keep secure - hardware/software combinations is a part of that.
Moving towards a common OS across PCs / consoles / phones a further step.
And never forget the key market for Windows is ....... businesses not games, most games are not on PC.
No one has to upgrade but don't cry when the non-updated OS is infected by a virus.
Edit: and if one was to adopt the line that some people have taken regarding Steam then: it's their (MS's) OS and they can make you upgrade. Not a view that MS share obviously.
I mean, ever since the iPhone really and that was 2007.
Oh I saw it was revenue, that's why I said it is BS.
A stupid phone game like that Game of War or whatever was making a million bucks in revenue per DAY!
That's one game. How much does Candy Crush and Minecraft mobile and Plants vs. Zombies and Forge of Empires and the dozen other mega huge mobile games make?
But then the Y-axis is labeled in Units, which does lead to thinking number of boxes/keys/whatever shipped.
I suppose it could just be some generic "Units" of currency, but I doubt that's true either, since it's in tens of Millions, and a company like EA pulls in Billions per year. Supercell (Clash of Clans) pulled in $5MM per ~day~, in 2013. Speaking in units of US Dollar, just to be clear.
So yeah, I think that graph is BS. Reading doesn't really help at all.
Here is another article that essentially says the same thing, only mobile vs console. Mobile is set to overtake console revenue sometime last year, but hadn't yet at the time of the publishing of the article (Jan 2015).
The Fortune article I believe as at least semi-accurate. The CNet article maybe. In both cases, it shows Console revenue was higher than either PC or Mobile gaming for some period up until 2015. That completely contradicts the graph. I wasn't able to find more current data (although I expect it will start to come out soon, a lot of companies are releasing year-over-years now)
Maybe the graph is 100% accurate, but so far nothing on it really passes the smell test. So I think it's closer to the total bull category than just a skewed perspective of otherwise accurate numbers.
So yeah, PC gaming isn't dead, that's a good point. The graph may be attempting to paint it in too-favorable of a light, but the data clearly indicates that it's still significant. But gaming revenue doesn't address the issue of PC sales and revenue, the two aren't necessarily linked or even proportional.
Consoles have inherent flaws, and the only way to fix them is to make them more like PC which obsoletes their purpose. And consoles will take even bigger hit with all those small format PC boxes coming out.
I just dont see bright future for consoles, back in the day of Amiga and Atari they had much more going on for tham against PC than todays consoles and they still failed.
And i alredy said that PC entertainment is growing at a rapid pace, but that hardware was too powerful lately and software is only now catching up, hell only lately we see that games use more cores on your CPU and that dual cores are starting to lag behind 4/8 core CPUs. DX12 will make that even more evident in near future so it may actually pick up soon as all those buying dual cores will have to upgrade.
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
The Net just makes it easier, for all the good it's done... pffft
See the world and all within it.
Live a lifetime in every minute.