WHY won't stinking Microsoft create a new service pack for Windows 7?!

This is ****ing ridiculous! When you load a Windows 7 Operating System you will have to spend hours loading all the ****ing Windows Updates! It involves frequent reboots, and then when you do another check for more updates, there they are -- all the updates that you couldn't see until you did the preceding series of dozens of updates.

THIS IS TOTAL BULL****! Today, if you do a clean OS load, you'll have to load approx. 175 Windows updates, and some of them, like all the damned .NET updates take for bloody EVER! Oh, and then, even after you've downloaded all this crap, then it must be installed, and configured, and involves many more re-boots and other screwing around. Plus, you have to re-check and re-check and re-check, over and over for MORE updates or you won't get them all -- THEY'RE NESTED!

Bottom line: when you do a new Windows 7 operating system load, you need to devote about three hours to the total process, and there is absolutely NO valid reason why we should have to do this! MS should have produced a Service Pack 2 for Windows 7 a year ago, and they sure as hell need to do it immediately!

The only reason I can think of why MS would be doing this is to create as much damned misery as they can for Windows 7 users in order to herd them over to Windows 8, which is about as popular with computer users as vomit in a punchbowl! If there was ever a time for someone to swoop in and launch a blitzkrieg on Microsoft's captive market, it is NOW.

 

They will wait until Windows 9 is released and discontinue updates for 7. They won't try to force people onto 8. There is usually a full version between the current one and the one they discontinue updates for. You won't be getting an 8 SP2.

 

I got the latest updates....not a big deal in my case. Did you recently install your OS? That's the only time(a new install) I've ever had to go through massive updates and reboots.

 

Don't you do periodic clean OS reloads on your computer? If you do (and a lot of "power users" do) then you run into this three hour pain in the ass every single time.

BTW, I've done a little over-the-horizon advance research into Windows 9 (or whatever the idiots in Redmond decide to call it). It's going to be like Windows 8, only more so! As it is, if you want access to Direct X 11.2, you cannot get it for Windows 7 because Microsoft doesn't want you to have it unless you buy Windows 8. The whole idea is to sell all the tablet and "smart" phone users apps on the Microsoft Store and incorporate that into the Windows 8 "experience". Oh, and they want you to use the Cloud for everything, going forward.

I'll use the "Cloud" for gaming, like Steam, but in general I remind myself that "The Cloud giveth, and the Cloud can taketh away....". . -- "Oh, no! He wants to have his programs on CD's and DVD's?! Oooh! That's so last century!" . Maybe. But at least I can hold what is MINE in MY HAND....

 

I sympathize with you for your beloved OS... being made difficult to handle.

I can't really relate to earlier Windows versions anymore, though, because I'm using Windows 8 on a Desktop now, after my old PC died on me, and I actually love it. I like the simplicity of it, I actually LOVE launcher type interfaces so Windows 8's whole the start menu is now a full-screen launcher is a natural for me, but I'm a bit bummed out that in the Windows 8.1 update everything becomes slow and they add complexity to the interface, and break some features, so that power users can have more settings to change.

I'm going to be even more bummed out if Windows 9 reverts to a complicated, classic UI situation.

Speaking of the cloud, Microsoft has everyone on Windows 8 signed up with a Live ID and for Skype online storage and synchronization. You'd think all this swapping to the online servers would take up a lot of time and make the interface slow, but Windows 8 is very good at sharing computer resources among all the apps so I hardly notice.

 

At the risk of being a pain. Work out why you need MS Windows and associated projects. If you badly need it (I do, for business reasons) then stay with it. But you may consider a limited use of Windows. I have W7 which is very good for my needs which are limited to use of MS Office which is the business standard and which I need. Other Windows applications I don't need.

Quite a number of years ago I tried out LInux and over the years I've come to rely on a Linux distro as my standard use, even in business, I simply create documents and then go into W7 to tidy them up as necessary for transmission to clients or other business uses.

My desktop is running the KDE version of LInuxMint (I am giving it a try although I am a confirmed Gnome user). My laptop, for business, dual boots Kubuntu and W7.
But my needs may be very different from yours - I'm not advocating what I did, just explaining what I did. Oh and I did it originally because I had too many installs of XP (which I found a very good OS) and the thing wouldn't let me install one more time without going through a call centre, which I refused to do.

 

I'm an old guy who never grew up. I'm a gamer who's been playing games on computer since the very first Star Trek game on a simple X - Y axis came out in the '70's. If it weren't for gaming, then my needs for a computer would be modest, indeed: docs, spreadsheets, internet browsing, occasional online purchases, etc.

But the realm of computer gaming is immersive, complex, and downright fascinating. It is also expensive and problematic because latest-gen computer gaming demands the very best components, and, unfortunately, Microsoft Windows.

It's insane, really. I'm close on to making a decision about a display adapter (video card) for my gaming rig that will cost $500. That's just one component in a gaming rig, but for the same $500 you can buy an entire new computer loaded with Windowns 8.1. Of course, you wouldn't want to even imagine gaming with such an anemic computer, but it shows just how slavish my commitment to this addiction is. Oh, and as many of you know, you can buy video cards that cost close to $1,000 each -- AND -- stack as many as four of these things inside one computer! Thus, my predilection is perhaps modest compared with those of many other gamers.

This takes me back to the real basis of my rant, I suppose. To get the very best, latest "bleeding-edge" graphics performance, one must have DirectX 11.2, but Microsoft hoards it, like Aesop's dog in the manger, making it available ONLY on Windows 8.1. That, on top of the willful neglect of a roll-up Service Pack 2 for Windows 7, which is arguably the very best Windows operating system ever produced, simply stinks to high heaven! And there's nothing that any of us can do about it... Microsoft rules the world, and it doesn't give a **** whether any of us like it or not....

 

I so agree!
I HATE window 8! In fact, I got to window 8 not by choice, but because I purchased a new laptop.. . Which is now sitting in a bookcase, unused!

I hated the new operating system so much that I just decided to switch to an Apple products, and I am very satisfied with it, but not happy to have invested in a new HP laptop for it to gather dust because of Window 8!

 

Yeah, Microsoft has all the major manufacturers by the balls! For almost a year now, Microsoft has had contractual agreements in place that all new systems made by any computer company MUST have Windows 8 on it, period. You can still find a few unsold caches of older computers with Windows 7 Professional loaded on them, but even those are almost gone.

One word to anybody who thinks it will be a walk in the park to simply wipe out Windows 8 Core and put an OEM copy of Windows 7 Home Premium on it. No, it will NOT be a walk in the park. It's a surprisingly nasty walk through a dark room with fish hooks on the floor. Don't walk over them barefooted! It was easy to get rid of Microsoft Vista and to put Microsoft XP on the same machine -- but that was then, and this is now. I wouldn't attempt getting rid of Win 8 unless I started with a brand new hard drive and a brand new, from-scratch OEM version of Windows 7 Home Premium. Oh, and hope that your motherboard drivers will work after you get the Win 7 loaded. Remember, if you try to get rid of Win 8 on a machine that came with it, Redmond is NOT your friend, and doesn't intend to be, either....

 

I think when you buy any version of Windows, you get the licensing right to rollback to an earlier version. I don't know the particulars about it, but I heard someone talking about it when they bought computers with 7 on them for their business but needed to run XP because of some of their third-party older software not yet being compatible with 7. He said it took a little haggling with Microsoft tech support, but he got what he needed with no additional expense.

As an owner of Microsoft stock, however, I say:



(which you could say right back to me considering their performance of late)

 

Windows 7 Professional (and also more expensive versions) allow you to run XP in a "virtual operating system": http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/install-and-use-windows-xp-mode-in-windows-7 It doesn't work particularly well, and it doesn't work for all legacy XP-dependent software. It is/was just a half-assed approach to an accommodation for legacy software and games (and it doesn't work worth a damn for older games!).

Best to get away from XP very soon. Microsoft plans to withdraw ALL support for XP at the end of next April. How long will it take for them to abandon Windows 7 completely? Who knows... using the perverse, customer-hostile logic that Redmond uses, they'll probably kill Windows 7 sooner than they've decided to kill XP. Right now, it's a "death by a thousand cuts", and the most painful part of it today is this agonizing process people are put through in order to get nearly 175 Windows updates.

Whether it's being coerced and forced into Obamacare, or being forced into Windows 8, everyone hates a strong-arm bully. I've always defended Microsoft in the past, but after the way they have **** on Windows 7 and all the vast number of people who prefer Windows 7, I want as little to do with Microsoft as possible. We could simply wait for "Windows 9" and hope that Win 8 will soon become just another bad memory, but all the forecasts indicate that "Windows 9" will be even WORSE....

 

I run Linux on 2 computers and OSX on the Macs in my house. I refuse to own another Windows machine. With 4 kids and 2 adults plus an extra desktop, playing Windows IT guy at home just got old. Constant update issues, printing issues, blue screens, malware/spyware/virus issues. I bought a few Macs after I got proficient with Linux on a couple computers and it's now been 2 years since I have had any significant issues to deal with. My evenings are now free again.

I know the OS's I chose are not great for gaming, but for getting work done they're superb. With Steam on Linux now it would be interesting to see how well the games work, but I haven't tried yet. And updates are a breeze on OSX or Linux, and so is reinstallation if necessary. I can load a ready to go Linux OS in 15-20 minutes, including office suite, additional browsers, addons like Adobe Flash, etc.

 

All hail glorious Windows XP master race.

 

Windows 10 will be even worse. Microsoft plans on making it a Cloud based OS. This is one of the scarier trends in technology. Gaming systems like the Xbox One or PS4 have been stressing cloud technology as part of the package for a while now, and computers are starting to head in that direction of all your computing in the hands of a server farm hundreds of miles away.

As for me, I have a desktop and a laptop, each with Windows 7, and I intend to keep it that way. I'm good at making my devices last, so hopefully I can skip a few generations of these rushed OS's that Microsoft plans to put out. Then again, as you said, 7 will eventually be unsupported, and I'll be coerced into upgrading.

 

I hadn't heard about this, but it doesn't surprise me. Did you mean Windows 10 or Windows 9? All it's been since Win8 came out is, "Cloud this... cloud that". My proverb is, "The cloud giveth, and the cloud can taketh away!" Still, for gaming, I have been very satisfied with Steam. The jury's still out on Origin.

MS will roll the first beta for Win 9 will be this October, and then it is supposed to go on sale to the public next April (2015). Physical media may be all "old school", but I can hold it in my hand....

Windows 8.1 is no improvement over Windows 8, as far as I'm concerned, and evidently that's the opinion of about 90% of the rest of computer users, too. I do not know one business owner or manager who has any plans at all to adopt Win8.1 for business use.

 

they are a for profit company, how else do you keep people on the treadmill if you keep supporting old products

 

the NSA is happy about this trend

 

Maybe it will be more cloud friendly, but if it is cloud based it will be the biggest windows bust ever. Not everyone is connected to the web 24/7 and most businesses are not going to want their enterprise totally at the mercy of their internet connectivity.

 

Exactly.

All the whining about being "forced to upgrade".

Microsoft is in business to make money. Why should they support old OS' just because people moan about it.

 

exaclty, when your on the network you will need support, be it from a networked frig, washer and dryer ,or even your car.... ect... plan to be on the upgrade treadmill

 

Microsoft's business model is to drive people to upgrade. You should not be surprised about continually degrading performance, and lack of support, and forward incompatibility (in the case of Office). You will always be plagued by these things, and malware and viruses for as long as you continue to be a Windows user, because Microsoft has based their business on these things degrading your computing experience to the point where you get fed up and upgrade. There is little reason home users should continue supporting Microsoft at all.

 

Not sure if it's purposeful misery so much as reallocation of resources to develop Win 8, Win 9 and so on. They seem to pushing hard to release new crap.

 

Apple does this to an even greater degree. I can't run Mountain Lion or Mavericks on a first-gen Mac Pro (64-bit machine) simply because it has a 32-bit EFI and the original video card is, for some odd reason, apparently not supported by a 64-bit driver.

Thanks to that, I'm stuck choosing between Leopard, Snow Leopard and Lion for it. I also had to modify the Win 7 disc so that it would install on here.

I wish the jerks in Cupertino would at least offer a 64-bit EFI upgrade for this thing. Instead, though, they just expect me to trade up to some newer model even though this one still has plenty of muscle and life left in it.

Commercial development does give us decent software products pretty often, but here we see the pitfalls of that model as well -- namely forced obsolescence.

 

All a Service Pack mostly is is a collection of updates. And bundling them together into an SP is not really of any kind of benefit unless you do a large number of computer updates (say a computer repair place). In the mid 2000's I had SP2 on a disk, and it saved about 20-30 minutes on each machine as opposed to downloading it. But it was not much smaller then all of the individual updates that it replaced, it was just easier to move at once.

And there are a number of unofficial user made "Service Packs" out there you can get, and if you really want to get into the nuts and bolts you can always make an Automated Install, download all of the updates at one time and do it that way.

But unless you are doing a large number of reloads, it is just not worth the bother. In 2004 when I was working in a computer store, I used several methods to quicken XP instillation. Ghost, AIKs, and update servers are great when you reload 10-30 systems a week, but not really worth the effort if you do say 1-2 a year.

And it really does not compare with Linux at all. Linux is much less "update" intensive, generally rolling out an entirely new version instead of doing "service packs". For example, in the last 7 years we have gone from the tail end of XP to Vista, then 7, then 8. Mint has gone through 16 major and 3 minor revisions (Ada, Barbara, Bea, Bianca, Cassandra, Celena, Daryna, Elyssa, Felicia, Gloria, Helena, Isadora, Julia, Kayla, Lisa, Maya, Nadia, Olivia, and Petra). And of all of those versions, all but 3 are no longer supported (Maya, Nadia and Petra), with support for Nadia ending next month.

 

God, don't even get me started on Mac.

I use a Mac for work, and it is a freaking nightmare. We have to hack the heck out of it just to get things we use on a daily basis (Terminal, IPSec, VNC, X-Lite) to work at all. And it seems like every other time they push an update to us, it breaks things. Sometimes it is a software package that we have to run (which means we have to buy a new version), sometimes it is hardware.

The update to Mountain Lion completely killed all of our USB to Serial adapters. Now this may seem like a minor issue, when you need to get into a router or some other item because it will not respond to a network interface, that is the only way to do it. When our storage area reached 15 broken items last week, I finally had enough. I took 2-3 items home every night (I am on a motorcycle), and have been hooking them up to my home machine (Windows 7 with Serial ports) to reconfigure and clear their settings.

My biggest issue with Apple is that they dictate from the top down what we should be able to do with our computers. And all of us on the tech team hate them, but the CEO and President of IT are Mac fanatics, so we continue to use them.

Oh, and the workaround I am doing now? Configuring one of our old mini-servers with Ubuntu so I can access serial ports at work. So I will have 2 computers on my desk, 1 just so I can use a serial port.