Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
> On 29 Mar 2023 12:33:29 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> >Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 17:55:59 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On 3/27/2023 10:59 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 01:33:12 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> In alt.comp.microsoft.windows Minoru Osaka <minoru.osaka@asahi.net> wrote:
> >> >>>> I have Windows 10 Home & Pro - which is nagging me to move to Windows 11.
> >> >>>> I do NOT wish to establish a Microsoft Account under any circumstances.
> >> >>>> If I move to Windows 11 (on Pro or Home) - must I establish a M$ Account?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Or better. Don't upgrade. :)
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I completely disagree. In my opinion, for almost everyone, it's almost
> >> >> always the best choice to run on the latest version of Windows.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >I think you're dead wrong.
> >>
> >>
> >> OK, we all have different opinions and different preferences. See
> >> below for a couple of comments.
> >>
> >> > And this is why.
> >> >
> >> >This is what happens when reach exceeds grasp.
> >> >
> >> >http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3CXnsAFD496534B6Fnilch1%40wheedledeedle.moc%3E
> >> >
> >> >Windows 7 would not do that, because it does not
> >> >have the technical capability to do that.
> >> >
> >> >The Task Manager is no longer sufficient to keep control of your machine.
> >>
> >> I don't use the Windows task manager. Instead I use the third-party
> >> Task Manager Deluxe, which I think is much better.
> >>
> >> I don't think everything built into Windows 11 is great, nor did I
> >> think everything in any prior version was great. So I use third-party
> >> utilities and application programs whenever I think they are better
> >> than what comes with Windows or what Microsoft offers separately. I
> >> won't bother to list them all, but there are a bunch besides Task
> >> Manager Deluxe, starting with Start11, Winaero Tweaker, and Firefox.
> >
> > So basically you're saying you need third-party utilities/programs to
> >un-break stuff in the newer Windows version, which wasn't broken in the
> >earlier version(s)! :-( I think you just made Paul's point.
>
> No, that's not at all what I'm saying.
>
> I wasn't talking about broken stuff. Yes, occasionally something
> doesn't work the way it's supposed to, but in my experience that's
> been rare.
>
> What I was talking about was stuff that doesn't work the way *I* would
> like it to. Note the stress on "I." Just because I don't like the way
> something works doesn't mean everybody doesn't. Some people like
> changes that I dislike. As an example, I know several people who like
> and use Edge, even though I think it's the worst of all browsers.
>
> So whenever I can make things more to my liking with third-party
> utilities/programs (continuing my example above, I use Firefox instead
> of Edge) that's what I do.
>
> And there's nothing special about Windows in this regard. The same is
> often true of new version of most software. I don't like all changes
> and when I can set things more to my liking with third-party
> utilities/programs, that's what I do. As an example, I use many
> Firefox extensions.

"I don't like all changes" is what I meant by "to un-break stuff in
the newer Windows version, which wasn't broken in the earlier
version(s)!". Many and even most changes are for no good reason and - as
also you've said - they *change* things, instead of offering new
functionality and leaving the old functionality in tact.

> There's not a single program I have ever used, by Microsoft or anyone
> else, in which everything is completely the way I would like it to be.
> If I were in change of designing them, I would make a number of
> changes,
>
> And note that there would certainly be some people who wouldn't like
> the changes I would make. We're all different, work in different ways,
> and have different likes and dislikes. That's why options in programs
> are good; in a sense, using a third party utility/program is
> exercising an option that just wasn't built in.
>
> You said "need" above. No I don't "need" to do that. I do it because I
> want to and prefer the result if I do.

Effectively, people *do* need to do that or be forced to live with the
changed and often decreased/worse functionality. The change is forced on
us, whether we like it or not.

> >> But I do think it's best to stay up-to-date with Windows versions,
> >> primarily because sooner or later some hardware or program or an
> >> updated version of a program you run is released and you want or need
> >> it. And when that happens, you may find that it won't run with an
> >> older Windows version.
>
> > And *if* such a thing happens, which isn't all that likely,
>
> On the contrary, I think it's virtually guaranteed for most people.
> The only questions are what hardware, what software, and when does it
> happen.

I don't think it's all that likely. People often 'upgrade' because
they think they have to or/and they throw their hands in the air at the
first minor hurdle.

Anyway, I haven't had any real compatibility problems yet in two
decades. But yes, that's anecdotal (non-)evidence and so is yours, so we
better leave it at YMMV.

> >it's early
> >enough to consider 'upgrading' to a newer Windows version. BTW, "an
> >updated version of a program you run" is even less important/common,
> >because in most cases you can just continue to use the 'old' working
> >version.
>
> True of many programs, but far from all.

I'll settle for "most"! :-)

> >> Another reason is that if you let a version or two go by before you
> >> upgrade to the latest version, most people will find it harder to
> >> adapt to all the changes in the new version. Getting changes a little
> >> at a time is easier.
> >
> > 'True', but it's probably better to have a week of horror
>
> What you might find "a week of horror," for many other people might be
> many weeks of continuous problems trying to figure out to how to do
> things.

Well, the new version is supposed to be "better", "improved", etc.,
isn't it? So it should be a piece of cake! :-) Just kidding.

FWIW, I jumped from 8.1. to 11, so a *BIG* jump and it only took about
a week.

> >instead of
> >many years of constant annoyance from changing/breaking stuff.
>
>
> I've been running Windows 11 since it was first released--about a year
> and a half now.. I have had *no* constant annoyance. Almost no
> annoyances at all. don't remember having any problems with something
> breaking and the things that were changed that I wanted back the way
> they were, I adjusted by choosing options and using third-party
> software almost from day 1.

I wasn't referring to just Windows 11, but to the whole Windows
lifecycle, i.e. from XP on. For me that's 20 years. From 8.1, it's 8
years.

As to breaking things, I lost track on how many things Windows 11
broke in my five months of (real) use. Most things broke in the last
month (granted, I delayed 22H2 because of extended (3 month) absence).
And by broken I also mean (substantially) changed functionality which
needs fixing or working around.

This month list from the top of my head:

- Broken Command Prompt windows (Windows Terminal instead of Windows
Console Host).
- Totally changed Notepad,
- Icons stuck (can not be moved) on Taskbar.
- Windows Update restarting the system without warning (on the Taskbar).
- Internet access broken by new driver (installed by Windows Update)
or/and 'something' changing an advanced driver property.

> Yes, it would have been better if those options were built into
> Windows; an example is the inability to have a vertical task bar
> without using a third-party program. Perhaps that could be called an
> annoyance, but as far as I'm concerned, it's a very minor annoyance
> since it can be fixed so easily and so quickly.
>
> Yes, I know there are some people who refuse to use third-party
> programs and are therefore stuck with whatever is built into Windows.
> Sometimes they can't use a third-party program because their employee
> forbids, so yes, those thing that I consider minor can be very major
> for them. But for home users of Windows 11, refusal to use a
> third-party program is just foolishness as far as I'm concerned.
> Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly on producing quality software and in
> many cases they are way behind the competition in my opinion.

Yes, I also use third-party software. For this new Windows 11 system,
I started again from scratch and only installed my 'must have' add ons
and will install others as the need (re-)arises.

My point is that whether we like it or not, we *have* to adjust, there
is no other choice. Do we get anything in return? AFAIC, no. For me,
Windows 11 offers no functionality over 8.1 (or even Vista and XP (never
used 7)).

Bottom line: Let's agree to 'disagree'.

> Is Windows 11 perfect? No. Far from it. Yes, I wish it had been
> designed more to my liking, but it's been easy to adjust it more to my
> liking and I'm generally happy with it.
>
> > But yes, I have 'upgraded' too, but only because 1) a new machine came
> >with Windows 11 (and most likely could not be 'downgraded' to 8.1) and
>
> Couldn't you clean install 8.1?

8.1 was an OEM license, i.e. no install media and not allowed to be
used on another computer. And it's unlikely that it would work_on/
support the new system.

> >2) the wife's 8.1 machine ran out of (Extended) support , so I 'had' to
> >'upgrade' it to 10).
>
> Had to? Not as far as I'm concerned.

Agreed, that's why I wrote "had" in scare quotes.

Thanks for your response and sharing your view(s).