Windows 10

[hydra3333]

As far as I was concerned it was just W8 in a new dress

That.
The media hype was usual, about the fluff&bubble "looks", for the more vacuous of us who are excited by "form over content".

[davejavu]

That.
The media hype was usual, about the fluff&bubble "looks", for the more vacuous of us who are excited by "form over content".

Oh I definitely want function from my PC's. W10 didn't do any of the things I need it to do any better than the W8 I already have.

I could live with the bad looks if it gave me a better computing experience but it didn't. I'm not prepared to exchange something that already works for something that wasn't any better and that came at the expense of having Microsoft looking over my shoulder.

And it looked crap!

[Downgraded286]

Windows 10 will become appealing for gamers with DX12 support on the horizon. It has under the hood tweaks that make it faster and more efficient than previous versions of Windows. On the other hand, it still feels like some things are broke, there are increasing privacy concerns, and Windows Update is a bloody mess.

[sophisticles]

Just to clarify because there seems to be some confusion as to when Windows started spying on end users, it's been going on for a while in one form or another, MS has added telemetry to Win 7 and 8/8.1 and even as far back as Win XP MS had spying capabilities in its OS:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/10/298702.html

What happened with Win 10 is that MS took it one (hundred) steps further and as pointed out in its privacy statement, decided to collect all the information on you that it could:

http://www.techworm.net/2014/10/microsofts-windows-10-permission-watch-every-move.html

“Microsoft collects information about you, your devices, applications and networks, and your use of those devices, applications and networks. Examples of data we collect include your name, email address, preferences and interests; browsing, search and file history; phone call and SMS data; device configuration and sensor data; and application usage.”

“If you open a file, we may collect information about the file, the application used to open the file, and how long it takes any use [of]it for purposes such as improving performance, or [if you]enter text, we may collect typed characters, we may collect typed characters and use them for purposes such as improving autocomplete and spell check features.”

The problem is that in a few years, when AVX-512 reaches main stream processors and starts getting used by next gen codecs like hevc and vp9 and when AAA DX12 games arrive, many users are going to come to the unpleasant realization that they don't have a choice but to switch to Win 10 if they wish to stick with Windows and benefit from those features.

[usually_quiet]

What happened with Win 10 is that MS took it one (hundred) steps further and as pointed out in its privacy statement, decided to collect all the information on you that it could:

http://www.techworm.net/2014/10/microsofts-windows-10-permission-watch-every-move.html

“Microsoft collects information about you, your devices, applications and networks, and your use of those devices, applications and networks. Examples of data we collect include your name, email address, preferences and interests; browsing, search and file history; phone call and SMS data; device configuration and sensor data; and application usage.”

“If you open a file, we may collect information about the file, the application used to open the file, and how long it takes any use [of]it for purposes such as improving performance, or [if you]enter text, we may collect typed characters, we may collect typed characters and use them for purposes such as improving autocomplete and spell check features.”

That article you linked to applies to those enrolled in the Windows Insider Program, which is still testing Windows 10. It makes some sense to use the level of data collection in the second quoted paragraph when beta testing, as long as the testers know about it. I think the first paragraph relates to Cortana and searches.

I'm not sure that all of the data collection listed in the quotes above applies to the typical user. I haven't read through the Windows 10 Home license to find out what it says. I did find some discussion of the data collection does for normal users in the links here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2015/11/02/microsoft-confirms-unstoppable-wind...s-10-tracking/
http://arstechnica.co.uk/information-technology/2015/08/even-when-told-not-to-windows-...-to-microsoft/

[Edit]It is hard to say what differences if any there are between data collection for those in the Windows Insider program and data collection for users who are not in that program. All the information Microsoft discloses regarding data collection for the typical Windows 10 user seems to be in their privacy statements. ...but the privacy statements are very non-specific about what data is actually being collected by Microsoft. Mostly of the information provided is about how the collected data is used by Microsoft, whether or not the collected data received by Microsoft is tied to individual users, and whether or not collected data is is being sold to third parties.

[Steve(MS)]

I'm not sure that all of the data collection listed in the quotes above applies to the typical user. I haven't read through the Windows 10 Home license to find out what it says. I did find some discussion of the data collection does for normal users in the links here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2015/11/02/microsoft-confirms-unstoppable-wind...s-10-tracking/
http://arstechnica.co.uk/information-technology/2015/08/even-when-told-not-to-windows-...-to-microsoft/

If the above holds true, there is no way I would want W10, except perhaps Enterprise.
I don't foresee M$ telling anything about how to turn off W10's blabbing ass.

[usually_quiet]

I'm not sure that all of the data collection listed in the quotes above applies to the typical user. I haven't read through the Windows 10 Home license to find out what it says. I did find some discussion of the data collection does for normal users in the links here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2015/11/02/microsoft-confirms-unstoppable-wind...s-10-tracking/
http://arstechnica.co.uk/information-technology/2015/08/even-when-told-not-to-windows-...-to-microsoft/

If the above holds true, there is no way I would want W10, except perhaps Enterprise.
I don't foresee M$ telling anything about how to turn off W10's blabbing ass.

If I recall correctly, Enterprise is sold only via volume licensing since the product is designed to fill the needs of large businesses and institutions. It isn't an option for individuals and small businesses.

[SameSelf]

If I recall correctly, Enterprise is sold only via volume licensing since the product is designed to fill the needs of large businesses and institutions. It isn't an option for individuals and small businesses.

The important thing to remember about Windows licensing is—not even Microsoft employees understand the licensing; they literally make it up as they go along. IOW, it's a function of how well the OS is selling both market wide and the number of licenses they feel you or your organization should own. It's all about matching your reality with their expectations.

[hello_hello]

I guess people could be forgiven for referring to it as buying a license given Microsoft have been trying to sell us Windows then say "only fooling, you really licensed it" for years.

EULA's are just software makers attempting to rob consumers of their usual rights under consumer law by pretending you're entering into some sort of contract. They should be completely ignored.

At least when it comes to the average computer user, Microsoft offers to sell Windows, not licence it. http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msaus//pdp/Windows-10-Pro/productID.320411600

[PuzZLeR]

Some of my info is a bit old, but I do believe it's been going on for a long time, and still applies today.

Microsoft licensing, and pretty much any enterprise licensing that can do this, is made complicated on purpose so you can buy more services, and further sell you more services, like support, upgrades, etc, with it, and not "just the disc". This way they have better control over you, including planned obsolescence, further software tutorials, and more services, etc.

And when you buy licensing, nothing has anything to do with "the disc". You don't own the license because you "have the disc". If your disc gets scratched, or whatnot, most vendors will be more than happy to send you another one, for free, because the software is sold to you in a way that it's a "complete service".

Ironically, selling "just the disc" wouldn't be nearly as profitable as giving it away, such as in the bubble they create of "servicing you". But, on the other hand, if it's not sold as a service, it likely wouldn't even be worth it for some vendors to get into this business in the first place.

[Cornucopia]

I guess people could be forgiven for referring to it as buying a license given Microsoft have been trying to sell us Windows then say "only fooling, you really licensed it" for years.

EULA's are just software makers attempting to rob consumers of their usual rights under consumer law by pretending you're entering into some sort of contract. They should be completely ignored.

At least when it comes to the average computer user, Microsoft offers to sell Windows, not licence it. http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msaus//pdp/Windows-10-Pro/productID.320411600

I disagree.

EULAs ARE contracts, so they are binding, though they can and have been overridden by other federal/state consumer or business protections (yes, some software makers have put in stuff which won't truly fly). But "completely ignoring" them seems the epitome of folly.

Also, MS isn't alone in this: ALL, I repeat ALL software (movies, music, photos & applications) is licensed in some form or another, not SOLD. It's always been that way with software. Some consumers may not get it (though they should by now), but that doesn't make it the producers' fault - they're not being underhanded or false.

The way to fix this, and give consumers a better shake, is to fix the laws that govern this area, but that can only be done when consumers stop voting in people who are not working for their interests.

Scott

[sophisticles]

EULAs ARE contracts, so they are binding, though they can and have been overridden by other federal/state consumer or business protections (yes, some software makers have put in stuff which won't truly fly). But "completely ignoring" them seems the epitome of folly.

Also, MS isn't alone in this: ALL, I repeat ALL software (movies, music, photos & applications) is licensed in some form or another, not SOLD. It's always been that way with software. Some consumers may not get it (though they should by now), but that doesn't make it the producers' fault - they're not being underhanded or false.

The way to fix this, and give consumers a better shake, is to fix the laws that govern this area, but that can only be done when consumers stop voting in people who are not working for their interests.

Scott

I disagree. an EULA can't possibly be a contract, a contract an agreement by 2 or more parties where the terms are negotiated, the final documents are reviewed by attorneys by both sides and the need to be sign by the parties involved, and in some cases they even need to be filed in order to be enforceable. I do remember from my civics classes that a contract that isn't signed is null and void, as is a contract signed under duress, with unconscionable terms or where either party isn't mentally competent to sign or if one side is a minor without a legal guardians signature.

That means if your 17 year old buys himself a Windows license he can't be bound by the EULA, just like if you hit "agree" while you're drunk or under any circumstances, as in all, where an attorney representing you hasn't reviewed the agreement or where you haven't signed the agreement.

In fact, the courts have ruled against software companies in cases involving "shrink wrap" licenses.

[usually_quiet]

In fact, the courts have ruled against software companies in cases involving "shrink wrap" licenses.

They have also ruled for software companies, or have reversed a previous decision on appeal.
https://www.eff.org/cases/vernor-v-autodesk

As Cornucopia wrote, whether or not the terms of a EULA are enforceable or not depends on what they are, and the jurisdiction, since the laws in some places are more favorable towards consumers than they are in others. Whether or not it is possible to use the software without agreeing to the EULA also factors into whether a EULA is binding or not.

[sophisticles]

Whether or not it is possible to use the software without agreeing to the EULA also factors into whether a EULA is binding or not.

I don't know of any software that will allow you to install it without agreeing to the EULA and since you can't know what the EULA says until after you have bought the software and tried to install it, I don't see how it can be binding since you weren't made aware of the terms prior to making the purchase.

[usually_quiet]

Whether or not it is possible to use the software without agreeing to the EULA also factors into whether a EULA is binding or not.

I don't know of any software that will allow you to install it without agreeing to the EULA and since you can't know what the EULA says until after you have bought the software and tried to install it, I don't see how it can be binding since you weren't made aware of the terms prior to making the purchase.

In Specht v. Netscape Communications Corp., the licensee was able to download and install the software without first being required to review and agree to the EULA, so it was held to be unenforceable. http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/contracts/contracts-keyed-to-murphy/the-bargain-rel...s-corporation/

[Cornucopia]

Also there have been a number of cases (sorry not going to quote them right now) where a user bought a packaged app, loaded it up, got to the EULA screen, read it, decided it wasn't for them (and obviously didn't proceed to install it), and then proceeded to attempt to return it. IIRC, most all of those sided with the consumer claimant when stores/mftrs tried to deny a refund.

Scott

[hello_hello]

In fact, the courts have ruled against software companies in cases involving "shrink wrap" licenses.

They have also ruled for software companies, or have reversed a previous decision on appeal.
https://www.eff.org/cases/vernor-v-autodesk

That wasn't a typical case of "shrink wrap" licences.
AutoCad had an earlier dispute with a company using their software because it was unlicensed. The dispute was settled and as part of that settlement the company licensed 10 copies of the software and they were supplied with a copy of the software licence, which was also included in the settlement agreement. Later on the company upgraded the software at the upgrade price, but sold the copies of the older version to Vernor contrary to the licence and settlement agreement

The appeals court ruled that in this case the software was in fact licensed and therefore the first sale doctrine didn't apply, while Verner claimed he didn't agree to the software licence, he'd never read it or installed the software, and so he shouldn't be bound by it. I can see both sides to that one.

https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/vernor_v_autodes/vernor_9th_cir_opinion.pdf

I really don't know why so many people seem to readily accept "shrink wrap" licences as though you should be bound by them. Imagine if you bought a book, took it home, opened it to the first page and found it contains a EULA stating you can't re-sell the book or lend it to anyone, and if you don't agree you must return the book for a refund. And of course if it works the same as it does for software any attempt to return the book will be refused by the book store who'll claim they have no way of verifying you didn't read the book before returning it.
Or you get take that new car home and open the glove compartment to find it contains a EULA stating you really only licensed the car, you may only use genuine replacement parts, you're forbidden from letting anyone else drive it and limited to carrying a maximum of 10 passengers per month unless you pay a monthly passenger carrying fee.

[Cornucopia]

That's the difference between software that's bound (integral) to hardware and software that isn't.

Scott

[SameSelf]

I did a quick audit of software installed on my PC that I absolutely need if I upgrade to W10. Can anyone tell me if they are successful in getting these to run under W10?

- Avid DNxHD
- Avisynth
- Debugmode Frameserver
and either
- Lagarith
- HuffYUV
- GPAC toolkit which contains MP4Box

These programs are critical to my workflows that involve frameserving or lossless intermediate exports out of Adobe PPro for x264 or HCenc encoding.

[glenpinn]

Why not contact the Developers and ask them directly, surely that would be the most logical thing to do, given how many people in this Video forum would not have a clue about anything related to Windows operating systems, even tho they think they do.

[usually_quiet]

Why not contact the Developers and ask them directly, surely that would be the most logical thing to do, given how many people in this Video forum would not have a clue about anything related to Windows operating systems, even tho they think they do.

BTW, this will be my final comment on this topic in this forum, becoming very clear that having a computer sub forum in a video forum is just a pointless exercise and a complete waste of time.

I wondered how long it would take before you broke that promise.

[glenpinn]

I wondered how long it would take before you broke that promise.

LOL I couldn't give 2 hoots about this windows 10 sub forum in here, but i got an email notification to say that SameSelf posted another comment, so i read it in the email, and i just couldn't resist the temptation to pop back in to have my say

I simply would have thought it was common sense to contact the software or apps developers directly and ask them if these apps has full windows 10 support, rather than rely on a few members of a video forum to answer, and if you can't get a response from them, then try and locate one of the specific forums dedicated to that software, as most of them do exist.

Just saying that's all, the same as i wouldn't go to a Windows 10 forum to ask about Video cameras or editing software.

If i need specific help with something, i go direct to the source first to get the correct information, rather than be misled by people in forums who don't have a clue about what is being asked.

Cheers

[usually_quiet]

I wondered how long it would take before you broke that promise.

LOL I couldn't give 2 hoots about this windows 10 sub forum in here, but i got an email notification to say that SameSelf posted another comment, so i read it in the email, and i just couldn't resist the temptation to pop back in to have my say

I simply would have thought it was common sense to contact the software or apps developers directly and ask them if these apps has full windows 10 support, rather than rely on a few members of a video forum to answer, and if you can't get a response from them, then try and locate one of the specific forums dedicated to that software, as most of them do exist.

Just saying that's all, the same as i wouldn't go to a Windows 10 forum to ask about Video cameras or editing software.

If i need specific help with something, i go direct to the source first to get the correct information, rather than be misled by people in forums who don't have a clue about what is being asked.

Cheers

VideoHelp doesn't have a Windows 10 forum. VideoHelp only has a computer forum, which covers Windows and personal computer hardware. I have been a member here for some time. I suspect there are at least a few members here who fix computers for a living or work in IT and are better qualified to give help than you are.

My guess is that SameSelf knows that Cornucopia and a few others currently using Windows 10 are likely to be using at least some of the programs he is asking about and could be helpful to him. Your continued participation in this thread is more about indulging your own pettiness and trying to discourage people from asking questions here and in the computer forum in general than being helpful.

[Cornucopia]

I did a quick audit of software installed on my PC that I absolutely need if I upgrade to W10. Can anyone tell me if they are successful in getting these to run under W10?

- Avid DNxHD
- Avisynth
- Debugmode Frameserver
and either
- Lagarith
- HuffYUV
- GPAC toolkit which contains MP4Box

These programs are critical to my workflows that involve frameserving or lossless intermediate exports out of Adobe PPro for x264 or HCenc encoding.

The short answer is "I'm not sure yet..."

Long answer: AVID just released updated codecs in December, so I would expect them (incl. DNxHD/DNxHR) to be compatible with Win10. Not sure whether 32bit/64bit variations affects this. AVISynth should work, but I can't guarantee all the plugins would. DbgMdFS, no idea (haven't used it in years). Lagarith ought to work without problems, but I've read of a few recent (newbie) users having problems (not Win10 anyway). Take what you will out of that. Stopped using HuffYUV when better intermediate codecs (for my purposes) came along. GPAC seems to have always been iffy/buggy, so I doubt that would have changed for the better with Win10.

Scott

[SameSelf]

Thank you.

One question, I seem to remember you were the one who recommended lossless intermediates. What codec do you use if you don't use either Lagarith of HuffYUV? Thanks.

As for GPAC, I don't actually use it. I just haven't bothered trying to figure out how to install MP4Box without the entire package.

[_Al_]

I use utvideo, it was recommended here recently.

about that software running on win10, just use whatever you have/use now if it works. You must persuade yourself you are not missing anything yet. You can stop windows to get to internet. So far it works like that. Perhaps in 5 years it would not but so far it is possible. So use a portal to web like cheap, old laptop. Set up storage on LAN and/or exchange data through that if necessary.

About asking developers if this or that run on win10,..., they perhaps wait for someone else to report if this or that works, if they care. Not sure how dmfs for example, is it still in active development, I remember it took a long time always to adjust that software for new Adobe or Sony Vegas releases....

MP4Box you do not need to install, you just need 5 or 6 files in a directory and it would run with cmd line (do not know about gui). Go to the Mp4box videohelp download page, read comments at the bottom, I remember there was someone who posted those files you need.

[hydra3333]

MP4Box you do not need to install, you just need 5 or 6 files in a directory and it would run with cmd line.

Confirmed.
You could build mp4box yourself in an ubuntu VMware VM.
https://ffmpeg.zeranoe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&p=8920#p8920
https://github.com/rdp/ffmpeg-windows-build-helpers

[sophisticles]

I simply would have thought it was common sense to contact the software or apps developers directly and ask them if these apps has full windows 10 support, rather than rely on a few members of a video forum to answer, and if you can't get a response from them, then try and locate one of the specific forums dedicated to that software, as most of them do exist.

Just saying that's all, the same as i wouldn't go to a Windows 10 forum to ask about Video cameras or editing software.

Maybe he heard that we had a member here that holds certifications in every Windows version ever made, in addition to all his other accomplishments, and figured that said resident Win 10 guru/apologist may be able to give him a comprehensive answer to his question.

[Steve(MS)]

If i need specific help with something, i go direct to the source first to get the correct information, rather than be misled by people in forums who don't have a clue about what is being asked.

Cheers

I figured with all your massive knowledge @W10, you would appreciate the below link concerning W10 with your name included in this reply.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2016/01/06/windows-10-spying-secrets-revealed/

[El Heggunte]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2016/01/06/windows-10-spying-secrets-revealed/

[OT]

Maybe it's time for us to start an anti-Forbes campaign...

because unless the URL includes some sort of referer string, I am always redirected to their useless 'Welcome' page

[/OT]