Yeah, I really liked 2000, used it for many years. Kinda like XP but without the bloat

But then in 2007 it became noticeable that it lacked some more modern features that new software took for granted, so I had to upgrade.

Yep, Vista just had a bad launch. Requirements were higher for Vista users because yes, the OS consumed more system resources than XP. Incidentally, so do Windows 7, 8, and 10.

You state some valid points.

Yeah the "not old enough" was kinda out of line I apologize.

But i do disagree with your statement saying im comparing new gen OS to old gen OS. Its only fair to compare OS that are only a few apart. like 98-2000-ME or XP-Vista etc... You cant compare 98 to 7 or XP to 7 or vista to 98

------------------------------------

To get back on point im simply stating a case for why windows 10 is better for gamers. Right now the popular opinion is Windows 10 is bad, and as you even stated yourself, sometimes popular opinion is wrong.

I used to hate on Windows 10 myself until i did more digging. Nobody is going to read all the articles and statements i read through to come to this conclusion so you'll have to do it for yourself.

If you have a GTX 900 series graphics card and still using Windows 7 I promise you, you are doing yourself a dis-service.

Yeah, I agree with that. You can't make an apples-to-apples comparison of OS's that are many years apart...technology changes too much. I suppose you could make an assessment as to how good they were for their time, but it would likely involve a lot of opinion.

Agreed.

Thats probably why myself and others get worked up about this is because its a lot of opinion involved. lol

------------------------------------------

I guess i cant fault anyone for liking 7 over 10, after all I was one of those people a few days ago...

I'm still pretty excited about DX12 even if it will be a while before its implemented in more games.

All in all if i maybe convinced at least one person who read this thread (not likely) to switch to Win 10 and they're more happy about it than they thought, then my work here is done lol.

I wonder if you even read my whole post, specifically the part where I say: In 5 years I might not have the same monetary issues I have now & also: I have a 5gb Data cap, and every gig I go over I have to pay $10 more, and that price starts at 5.01, 6.01, 6.02, etc. So if I d/led it now, It wouldn't be a free upgrade at all, because I'm already using my entire data cap every month, and if I downloaded a 3-6gb OS, I'd be paying $30-$60 for something that has zero value to me(it's not going to radically change what I use my computer for, actually it wouldn't change it at all).

And the thinly disguised insult of "I"d rather be an early adopter then a late accepter"...yeah. That was unnecessary and a poor insult to boot. Who cares if someone comes into an OS later in it's life span? Are you seriously going to laugh and point and go "Oh, look at that guy, he didn't switch to Win10 until Win12 was already out. What a loser".

*sigh* this is the reason i get into more arguments through texts than in person....

That was never meant to be an insult. If you want to read it that way thats fine, go ahead and be mad. But im not apologizing for something you interpreted offensively.

----------------------------------------

Now that we can go back to being advlts here I'dd like to say I've made my point and you have made yours. Your main concern is data cap and thats a valid reason for you.

Just out of curiosity... what service are you using that has a 5gb data cap? or are you on some sort of tablet/laptop that uses "cellphone data"?

I live in the middle of nowhere, my only choice is a mobile hotspot 4G LTE device from AT&T which is the 5gb data cap, or Satellite. Unfortunately I game online to much(Path of exile, Guild Wars 2, Diablo 3) so a Satellite connection is outright dismissed as viable. There are literally no other services that make it out here, not even Verizons comparable 4g LTE service reaches here.

And if it wasn't meant as an insult, then what exactly did you mean by "I'd rather be an early adopter then a late accepter" because I can't find any meaning in that statement that isn't negative in connotation. I would like to understand what exactly you meant. I was never mad, just mildly irritated, I mean even if it was meant to be an insult, as I said it was a fairly poor attempt ^^

That svcks man I know where you're at i truly do. I had to deal with dial up all through my youth and probably the worst satellite you could imagine later. Your only hope would be to get all the surrounding residents to sign a kind of "pettition" to get a cable laid out. (companies need an X amount of people to sign up for DSL before they will lay the cable.) Or you could move, but that's usually out of the question lol I don't wish slow or limited internet on my worst enemy.

And i thought we were past this. *sigh* It means I as in ME would like to be ahead of the curve rather than behind it. Idd rather have to deal with the difficulties of early adoption than the difficulties of staying with the old OS until i cant take it any more and HAVE to accept the "new". ME and ME ALONE. You're lumping yourself in with "late adopters" because you're reading that statement thinking; im thinking about you. Let me make this reeaalll clear. Im not arguing over whether or not I offended you.

Much like I won′t be getting Fallout 4 I won′t be getting Win 10. At least not until I have no other choice.

What? If you dont want Fallout 4 name a situation you would have no choice? O.o

(and your family being held at gunpoint dosent count)

My PC can't even run Fallout 4, I don't think upgrading to Windows 10 is going to help.

Just as a quick fyi, I really wasn't arguing with you, I was genuinely curious as to what your meaning/intent was with your previous statement. Like I said, it hadn't even made me mad, just a little irritated. Now that I understand, it's all good.

Anyways, I already tried the petition, didn't work, Verizon(the only major thing in the area) said there just weren't enough people to merit the laying of all new lines at this time. Primary issue with living out in the middle of nowhere I guess. I had to deal with dial-up as well btw, all the way up until 2 years ago when this 4G LTE thing stopped by.

Lolz no it probably wont. If you own a desktop not a laptop you can tell me what processor, graphics card and RAM you have and i can suggest the cheapest upgrade options for you if you do want to run Fallout 4. Unless ofcourse you have a PS4 or Xbox one you plan on playing it with

When it comes to big downloads you could ask someone you know with DSL or something to let you borrow their internetz lol.

That svcks hardcoe donkey di... genitalia

No worries. I'm not interested in Fallout 4. I will upgrade one of these days, but I'm not really motivated to do so right now. Maybe when it's so bad that I can't run even Kickstarter indies...

My puter crashes and burns and I have to buy a new one. Win 7 won′t be available forever.

It's important to note (and this may automatically invalidate a lot of what was already posted here) that Windows OS's can be grouped into 3 'species' of OS:

Win9x (Windows 95/98/98SE/ME)

WinNT Pre-Vista (Windows NT4/2000/XP)

WinNT Post-Vista (Windows Vista/7/8/8.1/10)

It's hard to say, for example, that Windows 2000 was a beta for ME when the two operating systems are vastly different from each other. Windows ME was still DOS with a 32-bit layer, 2000 was a tru 32-bit OS based on NT 4.0. In fact, Windows 2000 is NT 5.0, and Windows XP is NT 5.1.

Lolz fair enough

My question was about Fallout 4 not Windows 7... but... okay

I somewhat disagree with your 3 groupings. As I stated before its a bit unfair to compare two OS's that are several years apart, several meaning more than 3 or 4. I feel you should only compare an OS to its time, which was conclusively agreed upon earlier that those conditions require quite a bit of opinion. Even though they may be similar in build Vista-10/NT4-XP/95-me cannot be compared because there are several advances between them.

I think he was talking about how they relate to one another as software. Windows 95/98/ME all share a common codebase wherein Windows was just a shell running on top of DOS...98 and ME are both a direct evolution of 95 (Chicago codebase). NT4, 2000, and XP are all built around the older Windows NT architecture, and 2000 and XP are both a direct evolution of NT4. Vista, 7, 8, and 10 all represent the newer, unified Windows codebase, with 7, 8, and 10 all being a direct evolution of Vista.

Yup, pretty much this.

Also, food for thought, Intel processors since the Pentium line first launched went through different 'species' of CPU architectures. Something like:

Pentium Pro

|

v

Pentium II -> Pentium IV (Netburst)

|

v

Pentium III -> Pentium M -> Core -> Core 2 -> i-series 1st-gen -> i-series 2nd-gen -> i-series 3rd-gen -> i-series 4th-gen -> i-series 5th-gen -> i-series 6th-gen

This is kind of like a family tree. Obviously, the Pentium 4 performed liked garbage allowing AMD to take marketshare and grow as a competitor. Good thing they didn't try to evolve the Pentium 4 into a Pentium 5. 1000wt power supplies would be the standard today if so.

Lol and thats where i got my 1100T for cheap! lol except now AMD has fallen behind the curve and it seems i need a new board and processor in my next update

And thanks Softnerd for further explaining to me.