Windows 10 has been very stable for me.
That's great, but as a few moments searching the web could tell you, not everyone has been so fortunate. There have already been several widespread instances of hardware/driver issues, reboot loops, software being uninstalled due to being deemed no longer compatible, and similar problems reported by Windows 10 users.
But this isn't really about new hardware, it's about people with existing hardware being tricked into updating to Windows 10 when they don't want to.
Shame on Microsoft for making people get off an OS that isn't receiving updates and for pushing for people to get off an OS that will stop receiving them in a handful of years.
Windows 7 extended support runs until 14 January 2020.
That's almost four more years that Microsoft have committed to supporting the OS.
A significant number of computers that haven't even been bought yet could run Windows 7 for their entire working lifetimes and still be within the extended support period.
Also, merely "connecting to the Internet" is highly unlikely to leave a system vulnerable even if it isn't fully patched, and I'll take "outdated and unsupported" over "actively damaged at arbitrary intervals by compulsory updates you can't block".
What do you think happens after the 1 year anniversary of Windows 10 launch?
If adoption rates are still unimpressive, I imagine Nadella gives a mea culpa speech as he decides to spend more time with his family, and the new CEO starts making highly publicised changes in strategic direction as soon as possible to reassure the big corporate customers and to some extent home users that Microsoft is still looking out for them.
What that direction would be is interesting, as Microsoft is one of the few IT giants that probably still has the resources and credibility to shift the entire industry. Apple is another. Both seem to have lost their focus in recent years, but one or two big new ideas could change that.
You make a good point, though it probably requires some degree of actual knowledge and skill, or at least a suitable malware toolkit, to cause damage by playing with electrical levels. Any script kiddie can do 'rm -rf
It's still crazily easy to do this by mistake as well, though.
Exactly. The real problem here isn't that root can do stuff. The real problem is that root can do stuff accidentally by sneezing five metres away from the system at lunchtime.
Of course, the other real problem is that anyone is crazy enough to make hardware/firmware where you can delete essential data like this and have no recovery or at least factory reset mechanism, regardless of anything the OS might be doing. People making hardware vulnerable to this should be getting named and shamed as well.
Yes, malware is probably the biggest real danger here.
That said, over the years I've also seen my share of very sheepish-looking engineers whose scripts didn't guard against an empty environment variable...
I didn't write those, so I can't comment on why they have the limitations you're reporting. All I can say is that the similar software I have developed, in some cases also related to networking hardware, has never run into these "must have exactly JRE version X" issues as far as I'm aware, nor can I see any likely reason they ever would (other than now not working with any future versions of some browsers or Java plugins beyond support being cut off, obviously).
I'm not saying the version ties you're complaining about don't happen. I have no reason to doubt what you're telling us. However, I am questioning whether they are due to some inherent problem with Java or just to developers not doing a great job when writing certain specific programs. Without knowing the actual limitation and why it happens in each case you mentioned, it's impossible to say.
Odd, I found about 50% of such things don't work anymore.
A lot of things -- useful things -- provided as Java applets have stopped working lately as the browsers and Oracle itself have increasingly locked down what plugins can do and how they are integrated. There have been ever-increasing numbers of scary warnings about things like who signed what and ever more hoops to jump through just to publish or run an applet. The thing is, those are almost 100% artificial barriers put there by Oracle, Apple, Google, Mozilla, and friends. The underlying Java code that actually made the applet go in each case would probably still work fine today if the artificial barriers were removed again.
I agree about the current state of web app development, but unfortunately there are few organisations with enough influence to significantly affect the course of the industry, and for now their interests seem more aligned with the status quo than radical change. There are some interesting ideas around, web assembly for example, that might open up some more radical options in the future, but then there are always new ideas in the background in web development and all too often they don't achieve the critical mass of interest and support to become established. I guess time will tell.
I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but so far I haven't seen any report of malware that can successfully bypass the click-to-play limitations in both the browser and Java itself. There have been some ingenious attacks on parts of the infrastructure, such as the Pawn Storm issue a few months back, but as far as I'm aware even those required the browser itself to have Java enabled and only compromised the Java plugin's security architecture.
As an aside, if such malware did exist, it would self-evidently indicate a browser bug as well as a Java one. That would not be a good sign for a more secure future when browsers are taking on all the jobs plugins used to get.
The UIs I've worked on in that field aren't.
I agree up to a point. Functionality is more important than presentation, and certainly we want readable and usable over flashy. That said, there is definitely a place for well-designed visualisations and custom interactions in GUIs, not to be flashy but because they are more efficient and less error-prone. Implementing that functionality in a web context does need some capable tool, whether it's Java, Flash, a D3-backed SVG, or something else entirely.
That's probably just poor programming by whoever developed that particular applet, then. I've worked on projects that used applets for similar embedded UIs and they continued to work fine through many years of JRE updates.
If it happens once, it's a bug. If it happens twice, it's a feature. If it happens more than twice, it's a design philosophy.