NoelC

Google turns up a number of ways to do it, by the way. For example: http://www.howtogeek.com/226638/make-the-windows-10-start-menu-and-cortana-search-google-instead-of-bing/ http://fieldguide.gizmodo.com/you-can-make-cortana-ditch-bing-for-google-in-windows-1-1721950842 http://www.pcworld.com/article/2986172/windows/how-to-make-cortana-search-with-google-instead-of-bing-in-windows-10.html -Noel

I'd have tried to help if I could see the video. As it was all I got was an attempt to show me ads (which failed) and run flash. People who try to push ads on others, even out of ignorance, deserve what they get. -Noel

There's a web site for that... https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/search/default.aspx -Noel

Here's an ultra-pro tip: Stop using Apps; it's one thing to create an operating system, it's another to create an App Store delivery system using a completely different UI that doesn't have any merit over the desktop. If nobody chooses to use it, we won't be stuck with it. -Noel

I'm reminded a little bit of the line near the end of "Cowboys and Aliens" where Col. Dollarhide (Harrison Ford) tells Jake Lonergan (Daniel Craig), after his new female (alien) friend has just blown herself into subatomic particles in a nuclear blast... "She's in a better place..." -Noel

I'm not sure it even exists in the latest builds. I had to deconfigure Aero Glass and ModernFrame to check, but I only have the Settings App. Back when I remember seeing/discussing it, it was three horizontal lines, near the left end of the title bar of the App, which when clicked provided "charms bar" functionality only available to Apps, e.g., to make an app go full screen or to access Settings. As I recall, this button started life as 3 little dots, but people didn't notice it, so Microsoft changed it to 3 little lines. See also: http://microsoft-news.com/leaked-windows-10-build-9879-reveals-that-microsoft-is-changing-apps-options-button/ I guess it must have earned the name "hamburger menu" because the 3 lines look like a (very abstract) bun top, patty, bun bottom. -Noel

I believe ModernFrame has done that since the start. -Noel

Happy 2016 right back at ya! Yes, with caveats. My software works closely with Adobe Photoshop software. Most of their focus seems to be on their continued development for the desktop, so that's where I am now. If Metro/Modern/Universal were to grow up and actually be capable of hosting a serious "to work" App like a Photoshop derivative, and Adobe were to go down that path, I'll be there too. I'm keeping my eye on things like this: http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshop/2015/05/photoshop-mobile-apps.html And there's always Mac... -Noel

So given that StatCounter counts hits, not unique visitors, could it be said that Win 10 somehow encourages 1% or 2% of all computer users to surf more (noting that Win 10 usage is going steadily up about 1% per month there too)? I guess it could be said that the more frivolous the computer usage, the more likely to surf. That would explain StatCounter showing higher Win 10 numbers. Thing is, the trend at each site using the same methodology seems to be differing a fair bit between the two (especially for Win 7), and I don't really see how that should yield anything more than short-term differences in adoption (or de-adoption) trend figures. Let's see what the first week in January, as people get back to work, holds. Like you (I imagine), I'd love to see Microsoft fall on its face with Windows 10, which would finally teach the lesson that they actually DO ultimately have to deliver value in order to be successful, not to mention showing that computer users are not quite so incredibly gullible as a Windows 10 success would seem to imply. -Noel

OK, understood. The telemetry (and other unwanted comms) I block another way. My (probably twisted) logic goes something like this: Win 10 is a whole new approach to Microsoft doing an OS. As such, it's kind of lame to start with. Okay, quite lame. Will they get their footing? Probably. They're so rich they could keep the lights on for a rather long time just playing around to see what works and what doesn't. When they do get their footing they may well make a new OS that actually DOES deliver additional value over anything we've seen so far. THAT will be the one we will want to use every day. But we're not going to get THAT one unless we keep up with what they're doing. Thus it seems like in order to adopt Win 10 you kind of HAVE to stay up to date. If you're just looking for long-term stability, Win 8.1 or even 7 seems the better choice. I have found no new value at all in the Apps, I honestly haven't been able to detect better performance or stability in it, and I can run it for curiosity and testing puposes in a virtual machine, so again I wonder: What new value is there in adopting Win 10 for everything else? In my case - and I suspect that of many others - I'll be running 8.1 / 7 on my systems as long as doing so remains viable, until Win 10 actually overtakes it. There's simply no one reason - or even combination of reasons - compelling the use of Win 10 yet. Let Microsoft get this "reset" out of their system and start building new value back up before changing. It's fun and all to learn what makes Win 10 (and the new Microsoft) tick - and I'm right here for that. But hanging my hat on it? Not yet. -Noel

The stats I look at don't say that at all - but show Win 10 adoption at about 12% now and following the expected more or less straight line to overtaking Win 7 in early 2017 and hitting 50% in mid 2018. I imagine there's a bit of a holiday bump because people ran more toy operating systems when they were off work for the holidays. -Noel

Yes, it is right to mention that our ability to trust Microsoft to release updates that never cause failure is at an all-time low at the same time they're removing our ability to be a part of the choice to install them. But even in a much bigger picture sense, it's possible any given update could "work" and STILL just make the system useless to us. It's funny how the risk of Microsoft going "off reservation" and creating an OS that's unwanted every 3 years is so different than the risk that they'll do it 10 times as often, eh? It's only about 2 months until the NEXT one, yet 10586 feels pretty darned iffy still. Time flies, eh? Always hovering in the back of my mind is that while with hacking we can still control Windows Update well enough that it can be stopped from loading the next major Win 10 build (just as we can stop GWX on our older systems), it seems to me that Microsoft could simply choose to not allow any given build of Win 10 to run indefinitely. I imagine any one of the major Win 10 builds could expire at some future point - though I admit I could be wrong about this. We've certainly been made to get used to that sort of thing with the insider builds, and there IS a "long term servicing branch", which does imply something about the systems that are NOT "long term". It's also possible that stopping GWX could cause the same thing in Win 8.1 or 7 (though I dearly hope not). Since the "upgrade" is free, it always makes me wonder how much more they could get away with legally. -Noel

I'm not sure I can get a license for the Long Term Servicing Branch. I'm not an enterprise-sized business (which pretty much shuts me out from buying Windows Enterprise), and I'm not at all interested in running improperly licensed systems. I am certainly willing to pay for proper Windows licenses, but the price of getting into Enterprise may be daunting since I only need two seats. What's the minimum? 5 seats with yearly subscription (I admit to not being totally sure about today's options with Win 10). Microsoft has always pushed "Pro" to small business users, but now "Pro" seems more closely aligned with "Home" than "Enterprise" in the ways that matter here. -Noel

I'm just thinking long-term, and not under the misconception that keeping an older system running forever is a viable option. I like to plan ahead rather than wait for something to force me into a path as an emergency. The beginning of January is a traditional time to look ahead. 1. Hardware that runs the older systems will ultimately fail. It may not be possible to resurrect the preferred older system on newer hardware, or the newer hardware may simply come with the latest system. 2. Microsoft will strive to make it less and less pleasant or viable to run older systems. They've already started on that path with the GWX nagware and many updates designed to "ease the upgrade experience into Windows 10". That could even culminate with them simply disallowing older systems to run by revoking the license, citing them being a "security threat to the community" or some BS like that. 3. Sooner or later, something new may be invented that is a "must have", and it will only work on the latest system. Right now, as far as I've been able to tell, there's literally nothing from the App Store that I need or want, but that could potentially change. Will it be true in 2020? And, I can run the development tools I need on Win 8.1. But what if, for example, Microsoft were to release a new version of Visual Studio that only works on Windows 10? 4. It may be that someone in my business (software engineering) will ultimately want to sell products into the "Windows 10 and newer only" market. I'm presently doing "wait and see" on my business systems, and you're right, I'm working just fine right now. I have Win 8.1 purring along like a well oiled machine, never failing, never giving away the farm. I run Win 10 in a virtual machine, so I can quite easily develop and test for it. I have Win 7 purring along on a small business server, since it just works for months on end with minimal TCO. When "wait and see" changes to "got to upgrade for xxxx reason" I just want to be ready with a strategy that doesn't risk my livelihood based on "let's try this and see if it works". -Noel

Heh, well I do try to think that way, though I like to think I'm a bit conservative. I find it's most important that things actually work. I've had a pretty good time of it keeping up with "the latest" - with a few notable exceptions (early Vista, early Windows 8, early Windows 10). In the past it's been occasionally a good idea to "wait and see". Invariably the world DOES need things that actually work. -Noel

As far as a "use Win 10 with no updates" strategy, I'm not sure I see an advantage to that over a "continue to use Win 8.1 or 7" strategy... That's not to say the latter is not valid; I'm still on it myself. But I imagine this path might not be viable forever. Then this discussion has to occur - either now or later. \ Maybe the time when we'll all be compelled to move to Win 10 will come because some must-have feature will be developed - or maybe it'll come because Microsoft will have made continuing to run an older system MUCH more painful. Regarding upgrading to Win 10 and just not doing any updates... Perhaps that used to work because Microsoft would test Windows thoroughly before releasing it. But now... Which Win 10 would you choose? Would you want to be stuck with build 10240 for years, or 10586.0? Because of Microsoft's reorientation to have primarily users test the system the experience of the past no longer applies - so how do you imagine picking a particular Win 10 build+update to install and stick with? Would you think installing the latest Windows 10 build and latest cumulative update, say, just before the next build comes out might be reasonable? That cycle though delayed would be about 4 months long - not a few years. I don't see a way to get around the 4 month reinstallation cycle to be honest, and yes, that's precisely the core problem here. I said as much in the first post. The idea of using a Server OS for running systems on which serious computing needs to be done hasn't crossed my mind and up to now I've simply ignored it. Thanks for bringing it up, aviv00. I need to do some more reading on that. I hadn't really imagined Microsoft would create a Server variant that isn't going to be subject to the same "Windows as a service" type update philosophy as Win 10 Home/Pro/Enterprise, but I admit to being COMPLETELY ignorant regarding Microsoft's Windows Server strategies. Off to start reading some more... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Server_2016 -Noel

I don't know about others, but I see nothing related to this thread at that link, just a note that "This site requires Flash 9". You might want to try to find a less intrusive way to share your photos. -Noel

I'm sure I count as a Win 10 user, inasmuch as I have it running on a VM under the real OS being run - WIn 8.1 on the host. I also run Win XP, 7, and 8.1 VMs. One device, multiple Windows systems to support whatever stats they want to push. Imagine that. I also doubt that the published stats reflect any reversions. If you've ever installed/run Win 10 your stats are no doubt logged and used in Marketing hype forever. -Noel

My feelings as well. More such anti-FUD needs to be spread. People somehow lose sight of the fact that Microsoft built the vulnerabilities into Windows in the first place. -Noel

How do you resist the feeling "OMG, I'm going to become infected the instant I start my browser" that's brought on by the hype in the security bulletins? -Noel

I mentioned this in another thread, but it probably merits its own thread. Start with the assumption that you're going to adopt Windows 10 for your operating system. I know that some (myself included) have not yet made this decision, but what if... What combinations of Windows Update settings and processes to follow would YOU choose? Of course, your goals are supremely important in determining your approach. Your choices will depend on your goals, so please list them if you choose to discuss the above question. My goals are (more or less in order of priority): Windows must support my ongoing software engineering and business management needs on my current workstation and future systems. I have a small network of systems in my office connected via Ethernet. I do NO gaming, though I do use these systems to serve files and collaborate online with others in selective ways. Windows must be stable. I do NOT want to have to futz with my system to get my work done. It needs to "just work". I have not had to spend a lot of time after initial setup and tweaking with prior versions of Windows in order to be productive - Windows Vista, 7, and 8.1 "just worked". Windows needs to be able to run on the same bootup for weeks without so much as a glitch. I must be able to use Windows in a high-privacy fashion. I know very well what advantages full cloud integration could provide, but I choose to keep all my information off the cloud. I have ALL my backup and coordination needs covered locally. I need to be able to do just what I want online, and keep everything else offline. Given the above basic goals, and recognizing that there's some difficult-to-quantify value from doing things "Microsoft's way", I've already researched running Windows 10 in a configuration that could support these goals. I've made tentative choices, but some are still not clear. Here are my current thoughts... In addition to visiting all privacy settings (those offered by Win 10 itself and through tools such as O&O ShutUp10 and W10Privacy), I would use a deny-by-default firewall setup, that would NOT allow the system to contact online servers without my approval. I've already developed a setup that will accomplish almost perfect privacy yet allow Windows Updates to proceed when I choose. I would take over control of when updates get installed, as well as exercising some selectivity using the Update Hiding Tool as needed (e.g., to hide hardware driver updates that are problematic). This can be done in combination with 1 above by disabling / enabling certain services and altering the firewall setup slightly when choosing to check for a Windows Update is appropriate. Thus updates will ONLY be applied when it's appropriate and I have no critical work pending. Before initiating/allowing any cumulative Windows Update, I would vet it by reading online (e.g., here) about problems people have encountered, and which might affect my systems. I would have set up a Windows 10 system in a virtual machine (as I have now) with which I would test any proposed updates after vetting them, and before allowing them to be installed on my hardware. I would opt for the several month extra delay provided for the ongoing in-place upgrades enabled by the [ ] Defer upgrades checkbox. Thus I would hope that the OS installed plus subsequent Windows Updates would have solved the most basic stability and functionality problems foisted on the public. What I don't know is whether Microsoft makes a new ISO for these deferred upgrades, or just lets you install the public build everyone else got months ago, then you have to install the latest cumulative update over the top. If the latter, that's kind of stupid but I wouldn't put it past them. Every 4 months I would be resigned to the fact that a few days to a week of intensive work will be needed in order to do the in-place upgrade (or a fresh install) then re-tweak the system for productivity and privacy. If down the road Microsoft does something SUPREMELY stupid (like removing the desktop/Win32 or some feature that I absolutely require, causing a "can't get there from here" situation), I'll just stop initiating all updates / upgrades and try to run the current system as long as possible while at the same time researching a move of all my operations to another OS - e.g., Linux. I don't know how long a non-updated Win 10 will run, but I'll bet it won't be forever. Since I'm a small business, I don't have the luxury of the extra functionality of the Enterprise edition to accomplish some of these goals, but I don't think there's too much I can't solve (at least today) with the above strategy. I guess one of the most difficult parts to swallow in choosing to embark on this path is that every 4 months Microsoft will be delivering a new OS build that has altered features and limitations, which will require a concentrated effort to get working right again. Changing requirements are scary... It's not hard to imagine they could come out with a version that simply WILL NOT RUN without Cortana, OneDrive, etc. (today these can still be removed now with some hacking, and what's left will still hang together). I'd love to hear your thoughts on how YOU would move forward with Win 10. If you've already started on the path, please share your experience. If you're still doing what-if like me, please share your thoughts and plans. -Noel

I have to ask: Is it reasonable to run Windows 10 without doing any Windows Updates? Assuming you still download and install an ISO every 4 months when they release a new "major build", wouldn't you then be using the least stable version possible? The one right out of the development chute? I admit, the idea of having a system that's unchanging for 4 months at a time does have some merit (though it ought to be years, not months). But there would be those who would say you're going to be vulnerable to things like zero-day threats when badware writers discover vulnerabilities. Microsoft appears to be releasing software that's less perfect/stable than ever on these 4 month intervals. They're NOT like the Service Packs of old. The whole idea of the business delay (waiting to get builds for an additional 3 months) seems to have merit, but do you get a new ISO then or just the same one the hapless public installed 3 months earlier plus a bunch of Windows Updates? MaxXPsoft, what benefit do you get from running the LTSB? Besides avoiding the forced in-place upgrade every 4 months I mean. DirectX 12 support? That's the only feature I've heard anyone tout that's available exclusively in Win 10. -Noel

See post #63. Also: It's not that it's all that much, but why would I want stuff like sihost.exe, RunTimeBroker.exe, SystemSettingsBroker.exe, and ShellExperienceHost.exe hanging around if I have no interest in Modern Apps and only very rarely run Settings? Why do I need ApplicationFrameHost.exe and SystemSettings.exe hanging around after running Settings? I actually like having my system resources available for doing things I want to do. The only thing I ever use Settings for is to initiate a Windows Update, and a workable alternative to the Action / Notification Center slide-out would be welcome. I have no love for XAML-based stuff, because it's clearly sluggish. Every time I go through this thought process I ultimately land on "keep running the older system I have now, which is perfectly functional", and so that's what I'm doing - for now. Win 10 does nothing new that I want or need, and it does some things much worse. But that doesn't mean I don't want to keep on top of how it works, inside and out. Trouble is, Microsoft is clearly going to make it harder and harder to hold back and continue to run an older Windows release. As it is now, most days I run a well-tweaked Win 10 inside a VMware virtual machine in order to keep familiar, and I'm always looking for more tweaks. -Noel

That it might be possible to cut deeper and remove more of the "Modern App" support garbage is one of the most encouraging things I've heard about Windows 10 in a long time. -Noel

At this point of those 7 I still have these 4 remaining: RunTimeBroker.exe ShellExperienceHost.exe sihost.exe taskhostw.exe You're running without sihost.exe? If so, do you see notifications? Can you run the Settings App to initiate a Windows Update? Each person clearly has a level of functionality they expect. A Win 10 system without the ability to run Windows Update is acceptable to me, and though notifications may be few I do expect some working method for the system or other applications to notify me of things. To be viable it seems to me a tweaked Win 10 system needs to be as functional as - nay, better than - a well-tweaked Win 7 or 8.1 system. Otherwise, what's the point? I suppose a system optimized for nothing other than running DirectX 12 games - assuming one ever comes out - might be useful for some. I haven't seen Mobsync since I can recall looking, and I have never deleted all those registry keys. Perhaps it has to do with something else I've deconfigured or removed. What doesn't work with RuntimeBroker hacked out of the system by deleting all those registry keys? I'll have to try some experiments. Such information could be useful to Win 8.1 users as well. -Noel