Upgrade to Windows 11 quite possibly is free, for Windows 7 and 8.1 users as well

The reason that Microsoft is so willing to hand you a "free" license is that you are actually testing their updates for their Enterprise customers, so that issues are found in the large Home and Professional user base before they are unleashed upon their paying Enterprise customers.

So you are sort of a permanent Beta tester/coal miner's canary for their Enterprise customers and as such the pay you with a free license.

It is that simple.

 

Even with a fully updated windows 10 pc fresh off the update server, DX12 still stutters and lags in every single game, with different GPUs and CPUs DX12 is not as smooth as DX11. There is no benefit or gain from using DX12 over DX11 that I can visually see other than performance. Some systems run better and some systems run worse with DX12. Well if your system runs worse, I cant see a feature in windows 10 over windows 7 that I would use. Always be weary of someone offering something to install on your computer for free or even give you something for free for that matter. Whats the catch besides telemetry data?

 

If your system is having problems like that, then that is a user problem or defective hardware. Using Windows 7 in this day and age is ridiculous no matter how you cut it... but keep on making excuses.

 

Facebook is free...Now Windows 11, what could possibility go wrong?

 

I hope there will be LTSB or LTSC version. Just the core OS without all the consumer / spy bloat.

 

Actually I use Linux for most of the things since 1997
Have tried to instal WOT with Lutris script and crashes.
Everything else I use Manjaro from Epic games to Steam, to MMORPGs, and all my applications

Tried time and again, the script crashes. Everything else works, all Epic games, Steam, GOG, apps. WOT is the annoying ***** -_-

 

I like Windows....but then again, it's all I know.

 

Seems to me that in my experience in games that offer both dx11 and dx12 renderers the DX12 option runs like crap. Perfect example would be Battlefield V. Yea the average FPS is slightly higher but the game is a stuttering mess. I've experienced this on multiple different machines btw.
However games designed exclusively for DX12 and offer no other render option seem to run beautifully in my experience. A good example of this is the current COD engine. Even in a game like warzone, which I would assume would be just as CPU intensive as BFV, I get great framerates and my frametimes are extremely consistent on my 240hz gsync display.

I run a 3080 + 10700k @ 5.1GHz with 32GB of 3200mhz ram on a 1440p Samsung G7 which like I mentioned earlier is a 240hz gsync compatible monitor. Its normal to see FPS fluctuations in Warzone between 140-200FPS (RTX On) but the frametime graph looks very good even during abrupt FPS changes and feels very good to play. Whereas with BFV in DX12 most the time things run well but its the frequent enough massive frametime dips that cause a noticeable stutter. However BFV behaves pretty good in DX11, not as good as Warzone when it comes to frametimes, but still very well with few noticeable frametime spikes.

It seems to me that games designed from the ground up with only DX12 in mind turn out great from a performance point of view. While tacked on versions of DX12 run like crap compared to their DX11 counterpart.

As to still running windows 7. You need to upgrade man. Game developers probably aren't even considering windows 7 as a priority, not to mention drivers. Modern games are designed to run on Windows 10.

 

Are people so quick to forget how Microsoft's got people on Windows 10?

 

Just to circle it back to software, privacy and the sorts.
Just recently I wanted to record a clip of the bo burnham special on netflix.com with amd relive. guess what happened

to anyone on linux: I wouldn't mind to know what happens on linux

 

Still on Windows 7 ahem....

 

Seeing some interesting performance numbers, i wonder how long they will stay on top before they add all the pointless junk no one wants.

 

This is a huge misunderstanding. Linux isn't free to create, and it's not sustained by donations. Huge corporations have seen it's cheaper to contribute to a single kernel instead of reinventing the wheel for every piece of software or hardware they need to push next year.

This is the Board of Directors of the Linux Foundation:

Spoiler

This is the "Platinum & Gold Member List":

Spoiler

What does this mean for the actual code? Nothing. It's just a structured way for companies to get better ROI, as end users are also contributing. Read the report, it's very eye opening. That doesn't mean it's sinister, but it's not really geeks in their basements anymore. It's a way to use geeks in their basements.


There is also a bit of a misunderstanding about Microsoft's telemetry. Yes, it does gather data, but for it to be legal in the EU and California, that data cannot be identifiable. Also they need to state what that data is used for.

The system telemetry data effectively works like performance counters and automatic bug/compatibility reports, and in my book it's a good thing. I cannot imagine how else they could respond fast to changes in the hardware, in this day and age.

For every single other option there is the long-winded new account screen that literally informs you very clearly to what you agree, things like, yes, they need to send your handwriting to the data center if you want handwriting recognition etc. My only issue would be if any of this was not used as described in the EULA, which is the real concern IMHO.

 

Thanks to telemetry, they do know what are the things that people actually use and want, and what they can drop from maintaining. I bet they would be the first to drop things if they could. Windows is used so widely that you would be surprised about the "needs" and the "wants" it covers.

Do you have anything specific in mind? I would personally drop every single software that is not written with a 64 bit component, and make that optional like macOS on the M1 does with Rosetta 2.

 

Ah another one persists 32bit slows us down a billionth times. Whatever pal. 64bit is the way of the force. Blah blah.

 

You do have the issue that you need to have 2x the libraries for 32 bit to work. I'm not suggesting to remove them entirely, just to make them an optional component that might need installation if you use it, like .Net 3.5.

Dropping them from default also means that you can slowly transition away from them. The exact same thing happened with a lot of Linux distros.

 

You say "the script", as in, one specifically. Have you tried any of the others?
I've found that sometimes one script isn't always so up-to-date on Lutris, but others might be. So even if you depend on one script, you might be able to mooch off some changes from a different one.

 

I quite liked 8.1 too,it was a bit weird as far as interface,but that's not important.It was very stable and gave me zero problems.
10 is good,and as long as I don't need 11 for a big+little cpu I'm gonna stay on 10.
agree about dx12 too,it's been years and it's still troublesome.

 

Can I say here that whenever I read threads like these, the more I get convinced that the best thing Microsoft did was forcing updates.

 

My favorite forced update was the one that killed a wireless adapter so it couldn't receive an update to fix the wireless adapter.

Microsoft Big Brain.