Windows 10 desktop minimum hardware requirements

Windows 10 desktop minimum hardware Requirements are following; UEFI 2.3.1 with SECURE BOOT ENABLED. Why require secure boot enabled? This is "Yes" garbage ..
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2898...-allow-for-huge-phones-and-teeny-tablets.html
Edit: Enabled and switch to disable is optional.. Began to be afraid ..

 

As far as I know that's requirements for manufacturers so they know how to build new PCs they want to sold with Win10. It'll work without problems on pure BIOS of UEFI full-legacy like in M18xR1.

They also showed new Win10 icons - http://microsoft-news.com/check-out-the-new-icons-from-windows-10-technical-preview-build-9926/

Oh man, worse than windows 98 SE that I was using for years. Sometimes I miss Windows 98 Times where all icons were simply but not UGLY like it is now.

That's 100x times better:


Windows 8 IMHO is a bit better and faster than Windows 7 but I was going to puke when I saw it's design. Had to change it to something like that that's usable without puking.

 

These icons looks like a downgrade compared to Windows 8 tbh...

 

Jesus christ secure boot is such an overblown "issue"

Microsoft DIDN'T create Secure Boot. It's a UEFI specification. It doesn't stop you from running any other OS...most major linux distributions support secure boot and the ones that don't you can just disable it.

What it does do is protect your computer from malware loading before windows (or any other OS loads).

 

But we know that Microsoft didn't created that, what are you talking about? It's UEFI standard but Microsoft wants to force every OEM to do new computers with Secure crap enabled so you won't be able to modify bootloader and probably BIOS(secure flash)

 

Then disable it? You've always (and will always) be able to disable it on computers.

You guys are literally making mountains out of mole hills.

 

You won't be able to disable it on new computers. You don't believe me? OK, just wait.

 

Whoa you must be a seer!

Literally every ****ing Windows release has been filled with some of the most outrageous FUD imaginable. With Vista there were whole topics on how Vista wouldn't let you watch any video files that weren't DRMed and how it would be impossible to bypass that because it was so deeply embedded in the kernel.

Windows 7 apparently had some draconian DRM that realized when someone cracked some software, Windows detected it and then protected a whole bunch of .dll files, opened his firewall so that major corporations could "hack" in and detect pirated software and then disabled the sound card.

Windows 8 it was oh god secure boot is going to render people unable to modify or change any OS on the computer and how you couldn't upgrade anything because the OS wouldn't work blah blah.

And now with Windows 10 its back to that again.

Jesus ****. Last I checked Microsoft has NO CONTROL OVER AN OEMs FIRMWARE. Last I also checked the UEFI specification clearly states that secure boot MUST BE ABLE TO BE DISABLED. MS is only asking that when OEMs ship out a new laptop/desktop they have to ship it with secure boot enabled. The user can then just click F12 when turning on the computer and select "UEFI boot - secure boot disabled" or "legacy boot mode"

The article that was linked has absolutely nothing to do with secure boot whatsoever.

The only restriction Windows places on secure boot is that if the OS was installed with secure boot enabled, it MAY not boot if you switch boot modes to secure boot disabled and then back to enabled again. If you reinstall windows with secure boot disabled then it will continue working just fine. Granted the reinstallation bit is a pain but its not the end of the world...especially with SSDs. A windows re installation takes 10mins or less.

 

Jesus man stop forcing words that I didn't said. I never said that Microsoft is developing Secure boot. Go outside, take a break, seriously. Im telling you other thing and you go with same crappy argument, omg.

We also thought that laptop CPUs will be always on sockets and in 2017 they probably won't so deal with it.

Edit::

@down
What a pack of hate, sorry grew up. I won't talk with someone like that

 

Please point to where I said in my previous two posts that I thought you said Microsoft is developing secure boot.

Oh wait I didn't. So maybe you should go outside and learn some english before replying again. You pointed out that new computers you won't be able to disable it, and I pointed out that people have been spreading random FUD for every new version of Windows and pretty much every single time they've been proved false. The UEFI specification clearly states that there must be an option to disable secure boot. OEMs are going to follow the UEFI specification when building their laptops.

Actually no. BGA has been around since the days of the pentium processor. There are plenty of laptops that don't have LGA sockets and instead the CPU is soldered onto the board. There are also plenty of laptops that have soldered GPUs.

People want thinner laptops and that's the way the market has been shifting too for a long time. Sure most people on this forum would rather take function over form (me included) and go for upgradeable, extremely powerful laptops. But the vast majority of people who buy laptops couldn't really care more about it. I mean look at it, a few years ago Apple was nowhere to be seen in the top 5 PC sales and now last year they ranked third and they're moving up.

The vast majority of people do not upgrade anything in their computer. When it gets old they toss it out and they buy a new one. It was pretty clear which way the market was headed for a long time now.

 

UEFI Class III - that upgrade will render any user intervention pointless, I guess the MS will go that way sooner or later....

The 2013-14 Alienware lineup suffers with Secure Flash, OEMs and the whole industry coalitions, no one can ever stop those unstoppable forces...

And the truth is Win8+ is a crapload of OS ever made.
Here's a solid proof
http://www.netmarketshare.com/opera...11&qpcustomb=0&qpsp=182&qpnp=13&qptimeframe=M

 

i wonder if you can find out if the alienware 17 r1 has 2.3.1?

 

While BIOS update UEFI version shows up, Don't remember that number though..

 

You know I love it when people use words like Micro$oft or Micro$haft, it makes it so much easier for me to completely ignore the rest of their post.

How exactly can you blame Microsoft for what OEMs and hardware manufacturers do? They have no control over it what so ever. Sure UEFI 3 will get rid of the legacy CSM (the BIOS) but that doesn't mean it will block secure boot or block potential upgrades. I'm going to repeat it again Microsoft has NO control over what options OEMs choose to offer. The only restriction MS is placing on OEMs is that when Windows 10 ships secure boot has to be enabled. Everything else about locked BIOSes or options to disable secure boot or secure flash etc rests solely on the OEM.

If Dell wants to block hardware upgrades in the BIOS and make it impossible to flash an unauthorized one that's Dells decision. MS doesn't give a **** about what hardware upgrades you do to your computer, they're not in the hardware business (except for the Surface line of products).

If you want to complain about it then go complain DIRECTLY to the OEMs and hardware manufacturers. They control what goes on their computers, so they control what upgrades you can do in the future. Make it well known that you won't buy products from Dell and instead choose one from competitors that is more aligned with your views on hardware upgrades. Sitting here and complaining on a forum isn't going to do ****.

 

I don't see how that necessarily proves that windows 8+ sucks. These graphs don't prove anything unless included is the question "Why don't you use windows 8?". You could have the best product and have poor adoption rates of it regardless, adoption rates of new technology tend to be very slow especially in the microsoft's case.

The only issue with windows 8+ in my opinion is the lack of a start button, but that can be remedied.

 

IMHO Windows 8 is a bit better than 7 but very ugly. You need to change visual theme and it will work even faster and use less resources.

 

I don't mind the visual theme too much, imo I like it better than all the stupid aero crap that Windows 7 has but I feel like theres a lot of work that could be done to make the start screen better for desktop users. I don't hate it, I just feel like sometimes its much more clunkier than it needs to be.

But you're right about all the under the hood stuff. Windows 8 is definitely a lot better than 7 in that regard.

 

Did we actually expect something aesthetically pleasing from the imbeciles that are responsible for the atrocious and tacky-looking pastel cartoon vomit tiled abortion affectionately known as Windows 8? The only thing I can see missing is the calliope music and juggling clowns riding on unicycles, but there is a chance they will include that as the default Windows Theme when Windows 10 goes RTM.

Go ahead and ignore my post if that will avoid having a stroke or an emotional break, but Micro$haft certification is important to OEMs because some misguided consumers perceive that having it adds value. While they don't have the power to control or demand that the OEMs do anything, they do have the power to influence and coerce them through unfavorable business dealings, including punitive pricing measures, for "non-compliance" with their directives.

When the Nazi-grade UEFI Class 3 hits and you cannot do anything but use your PC the way they want you to use it, those of us that like to upgrade hardware and use modded drivers and firmware won't regard it as being an overblown issue.

Things have already gotten out of hand, but we ain't seen nothing yet. I'd much rather deal with the overblown malware "issue" than having to deal with the kind of fallout that will accompany the Micro$lop Mafia's technology dictatorship which is facilitated by draconian UEFI Class 3 restrictions.

I'm just surprised that so many OEMs are willing to go along with the extortion and pay the ransom for bragging rights about having utterly worthless Micro$hift firmware signatures and driver certification.

 

It's not because of the visual theme only the Win8+ suffers from a variety of broader spectrum of issues...

All gamers and enthusiasts are on Win7 those net stats show that plus the adoption rate with Win7 was fastest and the quite opposite with the new 8+, there are so many issues in Win8+ like DPC latency (8, 8.1 both have high latency despite the machine feels fast, everything that Win8+ shows is all smoke and mirrors. heck even the Fastboot it just loads up neccessary resources plus only UEFI w/o legacy/CSM bootup which is default on all machines is pure castration of features), RTC (this is enough to state that all true gamers are on Win7 OS), Driver sign enforcing, Lack of full control over taskmanager unlike win7....except that Win8 boosts Firestrike score but crunches down the Physics performance these are not my views, these are facts !!

 

Yeah that was what I meant. You're right. That's essence of capitalism.

As far as I know that only affects Windows 8 without Windows 8.1 big update 1

 

Blah blah blah. Yet again I choose to completely ignore any person who uses childish terms like Micro$haft. Still living the dream of the 90s?

The only restriction that Microsoft is placing on OEMs is that secure boot is enabled when the OS ships. Thats it.

Microsoft cannot force OEMs to block another OS install or hardware upgrades in their firmware. It doesn't benefit MS at all (well the hardware upgrades) and it'll be grounds for an absolutely massive anti-trust lawsuit if Microsoft is caught forcing OEMs with coersion. We've already seen what happens in the early 2000s with MS when they tried something similar. And we've seen that in the EU with Intel when they tried something similar.

The only overblown issue here is you and your childish "micro$haft"

So yet again, if you want to complain about that issue complain directly to OEMs and device manufacturers. They control what goes into your laptop or desktop. Not MS.

 

Microsoft wants to make it harder to install alternatives to Windows on new PCs. To get a sticker that hardware was designed for Windows 8, this was a requirement from Microsoft to use Secure Boot. This is essentially the same as a monopoly. Of course, Microsoft has talked with OEM manufacturers (of course under the table). Microsoft wants to remove anyone who can compete against Microsoft. we have hardware manufacturers (OEM) that is going to let people use the hardware as they will but not all. All this is guaranteed agreed between Microsoft and OEM manufacturers. Microsoft wants a larger monopoly. What we know is that it will be harder to be a small Linux distribution, but the biggest will find solutions. Microsoft has not set a requirement for OEM manufacturers that one should not be able to disable secure boot. They have given manufacturer choice. To avoid that they are accused of monopoly. One ends up with a pc which secure boot can not be disabled, then this is OEM manufacturer's fault . Just wait; Some OEM manufacturers going to deny you to disable secure boot, by agreement under the table with Microsoft. Long live the monopoly .

 

Everything can be agreed between Microsoft and OEM partners...

 

I guess when you claim it's all under the table you can say "See!! I told you so! It's a conspiracy" and not have to provide any proof. That's crap and you know it.

 

No it cannot. We have anti-trust laws for a reason and Microsoft has lost quite a lot of money going up against them in the past.

Microsoft cannot go to another company and say "hey block out all our competitors and only install hardware that we want you to" They'd get sued by the time the sun went down.

Now if Microsoft made its own hardware then they can do that, but they don't (except for surface).

I mean think about it. You can argue that theres a benefit to blocking linux installations but we have laws that protect that. What benefit does MS get by blocking hardware upgrades and / or custom firmwares? There isn't any. Microsoft doesn't give a **** if you use Intel or Amd or Nvidia or upgrade your GPU. They've still made the money anyways.

OEMs on the other hand lose sales when people upgrade their hardware. It's in their best interest that if you want to upgrade your PC, you buy a new one from them instead of upgrading components. So they're the ones you need to complain to.

 

How do you know what Microsoft thinks and does ? Microsoft has done a lot of things they should not. But have they learned ?

 

You say; OEMs on the other hand lose sales when people upgrade their hardware. It's in their best interest that if you want to upgrade your PC, you buy a new one from them instead of upgrading components. So they're the ones you need to complain to.
Do not think OEMs earn more money when I am not satisfied that they close out the upgrading of hardware. Selects either another OEM manufacturer that is not so restrictive. Do you think Dell is going to make money on me? Do you think that I upgrade to their new Aw laptop? No .. Dell has lost. I had purchased new hardware from Dell when my pc had been old even though I have upgraded a bit. But this I'm not going to do because of their restrictions. Dell has lost my money that has gone to another computer manufacturer or manufacturer of hardware.
Edit: A new Aw 17 R2 with full package and a G/A with desktop graphics card costs over $ 4750 here at home where I live (a high cost countries). I and 7-8 people have decided and not buy a new Aw. Dell loses over $ 33,000 just from us buddies. This only by 1 generation Aw. What they're going to lose during 10-12 year?

 

And thats what I'm getting at lol.

If you want this to change make Dell and other hardware manufacturers know that if they choose to block secure boot from being disabled, and to block hardware upgrades that YOU will choose another OEM that doesn't do that.

Write their executives an email (please keep it civil or they'll ignore it) and say something along the lines of dear blah blah, I was looking forward to purchasing your alienware 17 (for example) because I've always been a strong supporter of your products. However after learning how you will not be giving me an option to disable secure boot and you're blocking my ability to make future upgrades to my purchase, I regret not being able to purchase this product from you. I cannot support a company who treats its users this way and therefore I will be spending my money elsewhere with another OEM. I still like Dell/Alienware and in the future if you choose to get rid of those restrictions I will consider coming back to your platform.

Then let your friends know and so on. Most gaming PCs and laptops are bought by a niche group of people. Pissing them off could cause a serious loss in sales for those companies but complaining on this forum won't do much. You have to let the executives know and have to prove to them that you were really interested in buying a product from them but you can no longer do so. If enough people do that then they WILL pay attention to it.

 

I'm pretty sure Dellienware representatives have seen what we write . Dell and other OEM manufacturers of gaming laptops are going to lose money .. Now comes small online stores and earn a little more on different high end hardware. If only 5-7% stop and buy high end gaming laptops, coming producers to notice this.

Secure boot is not the biggest problem when you building a PC yourself, but the problem is going to be noticeable for gaming laptops.

 

Because there are laws that prevent this and they've been bitten before? How do you know what they do then too? Same question to you. You and your conspiracy theory BS, ****posting on here speculating about things being "the worst" before they're even released trying to draw up reactions.

 

The engineers and the tech support people read these forums, but they do not make the decisions...they do what the executives tell them. They can make suggestions to the executives but if the executives say otherwise then they're out of luck.

Dell executives do not read this forum lol, so if you want to make it known you have to contact them directly. But like I said, be civil. If you rant at them using swear words and incoherent dribble, they'll just delete your email. If you treat them like an adult and make your case properly, they will read it.

 

Frank Azor has read this forum, he's the Senior Vice President of Alienware/General Manager. The lack of happiness with the direction the company is taken is well established with Alienware's side of Dell. Not necessarily with Dell though as far as I know.

 

Oh well there you go, didn't know he posted / read here.

Still emailing them will be a better way to get their attention directly.

Yeah thats a sad thing but what can you do.

When they were a private company they had far more control over what they could do. But now that they're part of Dell they have to answer to the shareholders. Considering that the past few years has been difficult on PC OEMs you can see why they've made the decisions they have whether or not we agree with them.

 

LoL.. You should follow some of what is written ....
Alienware Khan is also one of decision-makers at Dellienware who has been on the forum ... They're watching everything.

 

Like I said, I didn't know that Frank Azor posts here.

Either way my point still stands, contacting them directly is the best way to get their attention. Even if Frank does read this forum he's not going to read every single post made. When you email them, however, they can directly see it and (if needed) forward it on to other equally important executives.

 

He hasn't been on since early February due to business (obviously, he's very busy). But he has addressed a fair amount of concerns (Check the Ask Frank thread). There's another guy that works in the alienware head office that comes on here to get feedback but isn't just a rep. So our voices are heard, it's just can alienware actually do anything? I think maybe Dell's hand is a bit stronger in this.

I spoke with some executives on the phone and they more or less said they're looking into the feedback but they can't say anything because of internal policies. So maybe things are going to change, who knows.

Yeah, he hasn't been on in a while now, so the best thing to do would be e-mail him. But last time I was in contact with him he told me he was very busy and would arrange a phone call with me but he didn't want me to wait so I spoke with other people. Then I spoke with Dell executives instead to solve my issue.

 

It's possible. I mean Alienware is a part of Dell, at the end of the day if someone higher up in Dell says "nope do this" Alienware executives / engineers don't really have a choice...well if they want to keep their jobs lol.

 

Alienware Khan is also one of decision-makers at Dellienware who has been on the forum ... They're watching everything.

 

Yea from my experience the higher ups in both companies are VERY interested in feedback and very open to customers who provide feedback in a helpful way. If all the customer service reps were similar in attitude to the executives I've talked to, I would say Dell/Alienware would be the best company I've dealt with to buy a laptop.

Here's the thread, Frank joins in after a bit:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...al-manager-frank-azor-anything-on-awa.770195/

 

You guys think talking with any of those execs would impact, Please go through that thread and you will know what happened.

Alienware is not an enthusiast brand anymore, they just make bullcrap machines using the established fame and name of the former self, Clevo FTW.

And regarding the Win10 & Micro$haft, help yourselves with...
http://arstechnica.com/information-...ke-the-secure-boot-alt-os-lock-out-a-reality/
http://techreport.com/news/27999/windows-10-pcs-wont-need-a-secure-boot-off-switch

My two cents (2¢)

 

Yes and? Like I've already mentioned three times now, since you clearly don't understand english, Microsoft is making OEMs enable secure boot when their computers ship. The option to disable it rests SOLELY on the OEM.

It clearly says it in the slides

"Windows 10 Desktop: It's OEMs option whether to allow the end user to turn off secure boot"

It's literally right there in front of your eyes and you're still spewing crap. With Windows 8 MS mandated that OEMs give users that option. With Windows 10 MS is saying "it's your decision not ours"

 

@cookies981

How did you survived long enough in capitalism to post that on this forum? Im impressed that you still don't understand how things works.

 

Oh please do tell me how things work. I'd love to hear it.

We have anti-trust laws. If Microsoft is caught pressuring OEMs to block competitor products they will get sued and they will lose. They've tried it in the past and they've lost massively both in the US and in the EU, and when other companies like Intel have tried to do similar things by offering lucrative deals to OEMs to block competitor products they got caught, sued and lost too.

I'm impressed at your complete lack of understanding English at this point. I'm not claiming that secure boot doesn't hurt us in some way, or secure flash is a great idea. I'm pointing out that if you want to things to change making it seem like Microsoft is responsible and complaining to them won't do ****. They've clearly said the choice rests SOLELY on the OEM.

If Dell ships their next PC with Secure Boot missing from the UEFI/BIOS options, then complaining to MS won't bring it back they don't control it. Complaining to Dell might have an effect.

If you want to complain to somebody complain to the OEMs about it. But nooo that's too difficult...instead you'd rather stick with conspiracy theories and FUD.

 

Why are you so sarcastic when you write in this forum ? You lack manners?

 

Today enthusiasts distinguish "good OEMs" from "bad OEMs" based on what they choose to do in this regard. Those that sell machines that lack CSM support and the ability to disable Secure Boot are peddlers of garbage. The proverbial shoe has yet to fully drop and ruin everything for enthusiasts... but, D-Day is approaching for laptop owners and desktop owners that buy a prefab cracker box PC instead of building their own.

The problem will become a crisis with the advent of UEFI Class 3, which includes zero CSM support and no ability to disable Secure Boot as a matter of specification. I don't have the source handy, the spare time or desire to bother looking for it. Micro$haft can require whatever they want for "certification" and can refuse to "partner" with OEMs that don't see things their way. There is no law or regulation to stops them from controlling OEMs through "influence" (a subtle and legally palatable form of extortion).

When the Micro$haft Mafia begins to require UEFI Class 3 compliance (which I understand they will) as a pre-requisite condition to receive favorable treatment, all of the big OEMs, those that want to play nice, remain profitable and sell systems with Windows pre-installed will be lead around by their short hairs. This is how Micro$haft deflects responsibility, playing the role of Tech-Nazi by ensuring compliance through financial coercion.

Anti-trust laws are applicable when they create imbalance and inequity within an industry. This has nothing to do with consumers. As long as Micro$haft's program creates a level playing field to receive "certification" they can write their own rules for minimum system specifications without fear of losing any lawsuits. The smart OEMs that are focused on profits at the expense of customer love will go along with their program because it helps them peddle disposable machines that cannot be upgraded, and they get to do it behind a facade of "enhanced security" LOL. Enthusiast don't buy that kind of garbage as long there is an option available to do something different. When the option to do otherwise vaporizes, so will many enthusiasts. There will be nothing left to be enthusiastic about. Have another glass of Kool-Aid.

 

@cookies981 I found an old picture of you:

 

There actually is. Quite a few laws in-fact.

They've tried and they've failed miserably. Intel has also tried and failed miserably.

Nope. They can write their own specification and say Windows requires so and so to be enabled.

They cannot write their own specification to say "Windows requires so and so and there has no be no option to disable it" That's when it becomes illegal because its CLEARLY anti-competitive. Microsoft will lose that lawsuit pretty dam fast.

To explain that they can say:

Hey OEMs we need to you enable secure boot when the laptop ships. But it's your choice whether or not to give users the option to disable it. <- This is what they're doing.

They cannot force OEMs to lock out a competitors OS or influence them in a way that makes an OEM do that. It's blatantly illegal.

So you just proved my point? I'm not sure what you're arguing here.

This is literally the fourth time I've said this now. Complaining about this regarding Microsoft WILL NOT DO ANYTHING. Microsoft will simply just say "IT'S NOT OUR DECISION, IT'S THE OEMs" You're not going to get what you want by complaining to MS.

If you want things to change complain to the OEMs. They're the ones who hold the power whether or not to give you that option. While sure the enthusiast / gaming community is not gigantic, for companies like Alienware, Asus, MSI, the gaming community is probably their biggest money maker. They will listen to you if they want to still make money.

Do you understand yet? I'm not disagreeing with you about UEFI 3 or about how secure boot / flash is bad for the enthusiast community. I agree with what you're saying, my ONLY point is who you should complain to. And thats the hardware makers (Intel/Nvidia in particular) and OEMs. They are the ones that will eventually decide what is best for their company, they are the ones that will decide what parts to put in your computer, what parts to not put. If you want things to change make your voices heard with THEM.

 

Well, in the spirit of TL;DR, let me respond with a similarly long-winded rant.

[START]
C'mon now. We've read it all four times and it didn't change anything the second, third or fourth time. There is nothing to prove and no argument being made. I can't speak for the others you have said it to already, but if you want to interpret that as me proving your point go ahead, I'm fine with that. It's really not a big deal to me what anyone thinks and it's kind of silly to burn so many calories trying to convince anyone that one person's opinion or interpretation is better than another's. If it will help sooth your angst over the situation, I am more than happy to say "OK, you win" so we can move on. But, it's cool that we agree that UEFI 3 blows. I doubt you will get any disagreement about that in this forum.

The reality of the situation is that Micro$haft does messed up stuff all the time. Past legal battles have never been a deterrent to them doing what they want to do. They don't seem to learn from the past. All of us already know they have been sued and lost more than once. Process takes time and once the damage is already done they can actually consider it a quiet win for the Redmond Mafia because their plan is already in motion as an established norm. They do what they want to and we live with the implications of their actions. Until adjudicated and an interpretation is rendered by a trier of fact, they are free to (and do) ride on the fringe of regulations. The OEMs do what the MicroNazis suggest almost all of the time and, long story short, we end up with their crap in our laps; with Monkey$oft claiming innocence for the actions of their "partners" in crime. Paint it any way you want to and it still sucks. Influence is influence, whether subtle or not.

Complaining to the OEMs is always the right thing to do, but it seldom produces the desired outcome. It seems about as futile as whizzing into a headwind. And, the OEMs are as good at passing the buck as Micro$haft is. Been there, done that... Enthusiasts are but an inconvenience to their agenda. Understand that you are preaching to the choir here about how much the ODMs and OEMs suck. We all know that. Most of us are still livid about NVIDIA's clock-blocking crap and all of their excuses. The ODMs and OEMs don't need any help being sucky... they've become experts at it. None of them listen. But, we should still keep telling them their babies are ugly, because they are. Unless or until it starts affecting their bottom line, nothing will change. As long as idiots are willing to pay money for garbage, their bottom line will be fine.

Micro$haft is no better. Look no further than Windows 8 and their feeble attempts at pretending to care with 8.1, 8.1.1 and 10 and it's readily obvious that Micro$haft doesn't give a rat's butt what the masses want. They are still hell bent on ramming their tacky pastel cartoon UI crap down everyone's throat. They will win. Again. Because the sheeple end up swallowing it... eventually... and the rest of us fall in line when there are no options left. Giants like Micro$haft and Intel win by default through eliminating options. We can take or leave it. They give us what they want us to have. We can choose to buy into it, or have nothing, or live with old tech. No court battle will ever change that. They win. Again.

Enthusiasts used to be Alienware's bread and butter, but now that they have gone mainstream the same is true for them. We are an impediment to their agenda. Their products used to be awesome because awesome was just what they did without having to be told. The only thing that has changed now is they are no longer selling awesome stuff. They have been pretending to listen, but their inaction tells a different story. Most of the issues with the last generation 17 and 18 remain unresolved. The new product line is undesirable to enthusiasts and can only be viewed as average. ASUS and MSI laptops have been garbage all along, but most gamers either don't know the difference between awesome and average, or they aren't spending the money it takes to have awesome.
[STOP]

On topic: How 'bout those Win10 hardware requirements? Cell phone? No problem. Raspberry Pi? They got your back. Pathetic touchscreen tablet? You bet! Gamer-boy Ultrabook BGA turd? Of course! High performance, overclocked enthusiast PC? *crickets chirping*

One OS for every platform. Yeah, right.

 

I hated the aesthetics of Windows 8 at first, but after using it, it grew on me. I kind of like the simplicity of it.

 

In its default form, I think there is still a lot to hate about it. But, I've made it completely tolerable in terms of aesthetics. I have tweaked it to the point that it has become nearly indistinguishable from Windows 7 while working from the desktop. I've got my Aero goodness back thanks to Big Muscle's handiwork. In fact, as long as I forget about the tiles, worthless adware apps and stay on the desktop it's actually a cleaner environment. There are even a couple of nifty features that add value.

The tweaks that make it tolerable are taken for granted, but it has always been the work of end users and third-party tweaks that make just about everything awesome in the PC world. There has never been a Windows OS that doesn't benefit from tweaks. It was that way long before the Modern UI was even invented. Assuming there is a good foundation to work with as a starting point, it is largely the effort and talent of the aftermarket that makes most things PC worth having. Funny, we can say pretty much the same thing about most machines... computers, cars, motorcycles, etc.

The only part left to hate about Windows 8.X.X is the degrading effect the OS has on CPU performance and the RTC reliability problems it has that disqualify it from some benchmarks. Unfortunately, it is looking like those problems will remain broken with Windows 10 unless they have an 11th hour fix to surprise us with once 10 goes RTM. Perhaps it can't be fixed. But, since it's going to be a free upgrade for at least the first year, I suppose we should all be grateful and not be tacky by looking a gift horse in the mouth.

The pathetic part of all this is the fact that it is becoming increasingly difficult to tweak and tune due to roadblocks designed to force a cookie cutter one-size-fits all hardware, firmware and software garbage model down all of our throats. But, hey... that is for our own good, because they love us so much and know what's best for us. Right? They think they can weld chintzy mainstream chips to a PCB, stuff into a fancy wrapper and decorate it with pretty lights, and nobody will be the wiser. Sadly, that turns out to be accurate far too often. This has worked for crApple and it will work for Micro$haft. Many fail to recognize there is no longer a good foundation to work with as a starting point, and it is probably safe to say that most consumers are oblivious to the roadblocks.