Jump to content

Windows users beware


Recommended Posts

Since M$ have announced the Windows 10 I thought that it might be good to spread this info so everyone is aware of this very annoying feature.

Microsoft has changed how updates will work with Windows 10. Although the Pro and Enterprise editions will both be able to defer updates for a while (not permanently), Windows 10 Home users will not have the option. Updates will instead be downloaded and installed automatically as soon as they're available.

Even pro and enterprise users will only be able to defer the updates for a while and not indefinitely. I think it is not only annoying but also risky for most users. Since my license is not Pro edition I think I will stick with Windows 8.1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would NSA fund anything like this? In that case they are already funding the practically free OSX versions as well, and not to mention all the free Linux dists. They could just keep doing what they already do and keep their money. I think it's good Microsoft is offering it for free, although only for the first year for existing customers.

 

Free stuff != NSA.

#tinfoilhat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mantragora

I will wait one year, to be sure that they fixed everything. Just like with Windows 8, it was shit. But then there was 8.1 update and 8.1.1 or something like that, and I love it!

Edited by mantragora
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Windows 10 will be available as a free upgrade for Windows7 and Windows 8 users if you upgrade within the first year of its release. Windows 10 Home will cost $119 and Windows 10 Pro will cost $199 per license. Windows 10 Home users who want to upgrade to Pro will have to pay an additional $99 for the Windows 10 Pro Pack. Since I am a laptop user I will wait and see how updates work on Windows 10. I think it's best to wait until the end of the 1 year period and see how everything goes. Windows 8.1 will be supported until 2023 anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mantragora

Time for Windows users to move.  :-P

 

Sure. But where?

 

OSX?  => http://www.macworld.com/article/2922722/no-oculus-rift-for-the-mac-but-your-mac-couldnt-handle-it-anyway.html

For the price of MAC Pro with FireGL cards I can get a lot better PC. And no OGL problems. I don't need mobile hardware in desktop computer.

And that's just one of many examples.

 

Linux? 

UE4 is still not officialy supported there. Graphic driver support is laughable. Wacom support is laughable. Shitload of programs is not there. 

And that's just couple of many more examples.

 

Dual boot?

If companies needs pipeline, and they hire many people to takes care of that, than I need this pipeline even more. And dual boot is the last thing that comes to my mind when I think about smooth pipeline.

And that's just one of many examples.

 

Sorry, there is still no alternative to Windows out there if you need to be flexible and have access to bleeding edge hardware. And with Nutella behind the Microsoft drive wheel (geek not a salesman) I don't think that you will see this day anytime soon. Hololens is prime example of it.

 

EDIT. And to keep it on a joke side, Jordi, let me end it with a quote from Body Snachers: "Where you gonna go, where you gonna run, where you gonna hide? Nowhere... 'cause there's no one like you left."

 

 

;)

Edited by mantragora
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Windows is against my religion.

But I have to admit that OpenGL performance is way better than in any other platform.

Visual Studio compiler generate faster code than GCC.

So for me, as a Mac and Linux user I can understand why so many people prefer to work on Windows.

When the Open Source community stop their disputes?

When Apple will decide to have decent OpenGL drivers (yes they have been improved in the latest versions but still not at the level of Windows)

I always think that if instead of Linux, Free BSD would be the standard Open Source platform, then thing will be much different.

But this is like the VHS vs BETA battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How's windows 8 in terms of performance and memory usage? I am using Win 7 at home and explorer is creeping up to use all of my CPU at 99%, and memory is shown incorrect. When I add the memory of all open processes, it's way less than used physical memory.

 

If I knew win 10 didn't have these issues, I would use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... and memory is shown incorrect. When I add the memory of all open processes, it's way less than used physical memory.

That's exactly the way it should be. Processes should use no more memory than they need. This allows for copious amount of caching done by the OS for performance.

Besides, it's likely that you're misinterpreting what those memory numbers in the Task Manager mean (and ditto to what people see in top on Unix platforms). Memory management on modern OSes (unlike the DOS) aren't that simple.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's exactly the way it should be. Processes should use no more memory than they need. This allows for copious amount of caching done by the OS for performance.

Besides, it's likely that you're misinterpreting what those memory numbers in the Task Manager mean (and ditto to what people see in top on Unix platforms). Memory management on modern OSes (unlike the DOS) aren't that simple.

 

I thought the total number of memory used should be the same as the Physical Memory at the bottom right corner of the task manager:

 

c6xCmie.png

 

It's not my screenshot but I add the used memory of all those big processes and I get for example 10GB, and my PC has 32GB, it still say I use 80% for example. Also if that memory amount goes to 99% or so, I get reports of low memory and crashes, but I don't see the amount reflected by the processes, so not sure if they are really reserved. I never observed this behaviour before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That column isn't just "Memory", notice that it reads "Memory (P" here the (P is truncated. It can be the peak working set, paged pool, etc. Regardless, the memory numbers in the task manager are for comparison purposes. They are meaningless to add up.

Sorry, it's too big a topic to explain, I recommend googling "windows memory management" ... random link: http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2008/11/17/3155406.aspx

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Edward, it was Private working set. I will read your link. Last question though, is the Physical memory at the bottom right corner is reliable though?

 

Also not sure if this is normal, but since I use Houdini mostly, sometimes doing expensive calculations and then opening a new scene, or deleting the contents of your scene doesn't release memory. I just restart Houdini in this case. Just thought maybe this was a common issue on Windows but not on Linux?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Physical Memory at the bottom of the Task Manager should be a reasonable estimate.

As for "memory" not being freed, again the situation is far more complex because various caches are not flushed when you do File > New. Just because the memory in the Task Manager doesn't go down, it doesn't necessarily mean that the memory will not be reused as needed. Of course, you could be be hitting a real memory leak but it's hard to say without a low level analysis of specific scenes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...