I really dont want to play on an OS thats an open beta right now. So no. Not going to "upgrade" as it were.

No. There are other things to consider when upgrading OS besides graphics. My desktop is overclocked and requires some OEM utilities that controls fans speed, etc. My gaming laptop has an OEM utility that permanently makes it use the Nvidia GPU. I don't want to discover after upgrading that I now have to update the BIOS and a host of other things to make it work again. I don't believe the incremental improvement is worth the time. I'd rather use that time playing games.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. When a DX12 game that I want to buy comes out, then I'll consider Win 10. When I build a new gaming desktop, I will start with Win 10. Until then, Win 7 and 8.1 works for me.

I have to say I really really like Windows 10. I did have to remove ENB from Skyrim. Never did get it to work, and the author says he will not be supporting Windows 10. Everything else runs great. And the Xbox One wireless adapter only runs on 10.

Couldn't agree more - it usually takes a couple of years for a new Windows OS to get the bugs out.

I as happy as a clam with Windows 7 64 bit

So shut it up!

http://www.oo-software.com/en/shutup10

I'm liking W10, once it been shut up.

No ENB with Skyrim on Win 10? That's is not a graphic improvement, that's a downgrade. I also heard that Win 10 broke some ENB for FONV and that kept me from upgrading my Win 7 box. Thanks for that info. No ENB means I will be running Win 7 and 8.1 for a very long time.

My skyrim runs just fine with ENB on WIndows 10.

There aren't a ton of AAA titles that support Direct X12 yet – so if you're upgrading your OS for that reason, I'd hold off. I upgraded because I was already on Windows 8.1 and I needed to escape.

It's not as if I've never heard of that program before. I've had updates off since June. Since then, M$oft has DL'd W10 onto every machine that could be upgraded and http://venturebeat.com/2015/10/15/microsoft-stops-automatic-windows-10-upgrades-says-default-checked-update-was-a-mistake/. I have no doubt there is more of this to play out. M$oft can kill that program and any like it any time it wants. I don't want a program to counteract M$oft's bad behavior, I want M$oft to stop the bad behavior.

I have until late July to upgrade, so I'm gonna watch this cat and mouse game play out over the winter and spring.

For those of you saying no game supporting DX12 wont come out till next year... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_DirectX_12_support

In the past couple days even ive grown more accustomed and even prefer WIn 10 UI to Win 7.

Also if you wanted to roll back to win 7 it IS an option if you upgraded for whatever reason, didnt like it, and wanted to go back.

[Edit: added responses below]

#1 we are talking about upgrading to Win 10

#2 The UI really isint that much different from Win 7. Everyone agrees Win 8 was shiz. Win 10 is the solution. Think about it anyways every OTHER OS was the best OS.

Windows 98-Best

Windows ME-Worst

Windows XP-Best

Windows Vista-Worst

Windows 7-Best

Windows 8-Worst

Windows 10-Best

Rollback lasts only a month.

It's a cute theory, but it's wrong. Not everyone loved '98, and Vista just had a bad launch. Once the launch issues were cleared up (largely by 3rd-parties that didn't have their software and drivers up to snuff), Vista was - IMO - much better than XP.

I agree...

In my opinion, as i owned all versions of those Windows OS anyway:

Windows 98 - WORST

Windows ME- WORST

Windows XP- WORST in general but really "friendly" for gaming.

Windows Vista - GOOD

Windows 7- BEST

Windows 8.1 - BEST

Windows 10 - Can't say yet...

But that's my personal opinion...so somone could just disagree and that's OK.

Clearly nobody here recognizes the superiority of Windows ME.

On a more serious note: Why does everybody ignore Windows 2000 in their lists of bad/good MS operating systems?

Clearly.

Probably because it was still on the Windows NT "side of the road," I'd guess. Most people were still using '95/'98 at home, while 2000 was still more of a business workstation OS and wasn't used nearly as much on home PCs. It wasn't as friendly for end-users as '95/'98.

I'll be on Windows 7 until they discontinue support for it most likely. Wouldn't touch Win 8 with a 20 foot pole, and while Win 10 is a step in a better direction, the other crap I keep hearing about it is nothing I'm interested in dealing with.

Edit: Not to mention, even if they fix the spyware issues with it(like someone else said, I'm not interested in d/ling a program to counteract Microsofts crappy behavior) and the other stuff I don't like, I couldn't get the free upgrade anyways, I have a 5gb Data cap and the download is anywhere from 3 to 6gb. Not interested in not being able to do anything for an entire month because of one download.

Yet, they have not.

Well that is your prerogative. (And I do understand the reasoning!) A couple years ago, I'd probably have been right there with you. I'm just not willing to pass up a free OS upgrade. (Being poor and all.) Frankly, I do quite like it. (Once you get passed the spyware/control issue.)

That's like complementing the cannibal on how well the recipe tastes. (Once you get passed the you're-eating-a-person issue.)

Sure, they are the exact same thing...

Anyway, to each their own.

I'm dirt poor myself, but there is no zero reason for me to upgrade to Win 10, it's not going to radically change how I use my computer, and Win 7 is likely going to be supported for another 5 years or so, and in those 5 years there is a possibility that I won't be poor anymore and will be able to afford it, compared to now when I can't and neither can I afford to waste an entire months data cap on downloading it.

I admire your honesty. !!! Stick with W7.

Actually, there is nothing of such great importance that you can do on W10, and can't do on W7.

At least, normal things that normal people do with a computer, and not only...

BWAHAHAHAH! Vista just had a bad launch? Yeah i guess thats why requirements for games were just HIGHER for Vista users because vista itself took up too much resources itself just as an OS.

Vista was probably The Worst of all time. and im not so sure you even knew what an OS was when windows 98 was out.

You're comparing these OS against todays OS. You cant compare windows 98/ME/XP/Vista to windows 7 and 10....

Thats like saying Oh the Supernintendo and N64 svcked and Playstation 4 is the best. Its ridiculous.

Windows 2000 was decent. The thing is it wasnt around for very long. 2000 launched early in the year and ME launched later in the year. It was almost the beta test for ME.

Actually being dirt poor would be a reason due to the fact that Windows 10 will not be a free upgrade forever. So 5 years down the line itll just end up costing you 100 bones.

Every OS is still technically supported for 10+ years after they're done and gone. idd just much rather be utilizing the full potential of my $370 graphics card. That and be an early adopter rather than a late accepter.

[edit: added response below]

Idd hope that in a MONTH you've decided if you like something or not...

Because they are old, that doesn't mean they must be sloppy programmed. !!!

All windows operation systems including XP, are "garbage" OS full of bugs, very unstable and they BSOD very very easily.

That's not the case with Windows Vista and never OS's

And for the history the most stable of all those above mentioned OS's was Windows 3.1 (or 3.11 if you like).

Very old OS - not much features - yes, but super stable. !!!

I think you misunderstand. When Windows Vista first came out and even while it was the newest OS before windows 7 came around game requirements were higher for Vista users than was for XP users.

And im not so sure you understand the definition of "unstable". It was Vista that was unstable and XP/ME/98/7 that was stable.

http://blog.pluralsight.com/top-10-reasons-people-hate-windows-vista

Heres a better list of reasons more thoroughly explained.

That was not the case with me, playing games on Windows 98 and similar OS. A pathetic OS, really...

I am really surprised you liked that system.

Windows 98 had a major problem with code that was running outside the operating system's kernel. This area of memory contains code that is critical and very crucial for the OS to function correctly.

Any applications that would write to that area, could crash or freeze the whole OS.

So any faulty application that could write in that area, there was a huge possibility to crash the system. !!!

Meaning W98 memory protection was a nightmare for many applications. !!!

So please don't tell me that this piece of is a good OS. !!!