Windows 10 'home' edition is Windows 'freemium' edition, you can't deny that.

Apple switched to free upgrades for their OS several years ago, and everything is just like it was before, except free.

Just because something is free, doesn't mean they are out to get you.

Headline features are malware eh?

Well.. that mindset explains a lot...

Might I suggest that if you don't like what an OS or program provides you use something different?

No one is forcing you to use it after all so your choices are pretty much

a) put up and shut up

b) use something else

Don't get me wrong, I'm getting a good laugh from this thread and the mindset of people in it..

Well, I went ahead and downloaded the iso for the Enterprise version from MSDN and upgraded my home desktop. Aside from some weirdness getting the new NVidia drivers for Windows 10 installed, so that it would give me the right screen resolutions and pick up my multiple monitors, I haven't seen anything too heinous.

My machine does seem to boot a little faster.

I'm not crazy about having 25% of my taskbar taken up by a search bar.

To be honest, I don't really use the start menu that much anymore - everything I use on a regular basis is pinned to the taskbar or has an icon on the desktop in Nimi Places, so although the new start menu seems to be a step back from what I had with Classic Shell, I probably won't care that much.

Task View looks mildly interesting.

For some reason it lost my OneDrive settings and I had to sign in again and resync the files I used to have on the machine.

Haven't seen any bad driver issues yet; even the slightly dodgy usb-vga adapter I use to drive my third screen worked.

Not too bad, so far.

Headline features are malware eh?
Well.. that mindset explains a lot...

Might I suggest that if you don't like what an OS or program provides you use something different?
No one is forcing you to use it after all so your choices are pretty much
a) put up and shut up
b) use something else

Don't get me wrong, I'm getting a good laugh from this thread and the mindset of people in it..

Or I choose option C...

C) Talk about the problems, make it well known that we as consumers are not interested in a malware infested product and boycott it in hopes that they rework it into something better. It worked for Windows ME; they finally ditched their old code base and moved to a Windows NT base bringing in the awesome Windows XP, which no one can deny wasn't one of the best PC OS's ever. It worked for Vista, ushering in Windows 7 which was solid by any OS standard. It can work again.

But seriously why are you even posting in this thread? If you think Windows 10 is great and needs no modification then a topic with 'any tips on how to fix' in the title kinda isn't what you're looking for is it? Gotta love how you and the other senior members feel the need to denigrate anyone who disagrees with you. Criticizing a PROGRAM in a forum that is designed for talking about programming IS NOT an ad hominem attack on anyone; but comments like "I'm getting a good laugh from this thread and the mindset of people in it.." and "doesn't mean are out to get you" certainly are.

I'm not crazy about having 25% of my taskbar taken up by a search bar.

Right click on the search bar, select the "Search >" option, and pick hidden, icon only, or full bar

I'm not crazy about having 25% of my taskbar taken up by a search bar.

Right click on the search bar, select the "Search >" option, and pick hidden, icon only, or full bar

Thanks, that's much better

Upgraded to Windows 10 from Windows 8.1 yesterday and it is disappointing imo.

In order to make Windows 10 "a desktop OS" in my mind,

- Installed with offline account

- Disabled Windows Defender

- Disabled Windows Update somehow (still not sure how to install selected updates only)

- Deleted all apps (including Cortana and OneDrive)

- Got rid of "Folders" and Quick Access

- Somehow got active windows color back

And still there is something not fitting in, not to mention it is slower than Windows 8.1.

C) Talk about the problems, make it well known that we as consumers are not interested in a malware infested product and boycott it in hopes that they rework it into something better. It worked for Windows ME; they finally ditched their old code base and moved to a Windows NT base bringing in the awesome Windows XP, which no one can deny wasn't one of the best PC OS's ever. It worked for Vista, ushering in Windows 7 which was solid by any OS standard. It can work again.

Firstly, you are a tiny subset of the consumer base, you are not a "representative" of anything.
Secondly, again with the malware. Really?

Third... Your history seems off.
Like... way off.
Yes, it is accepted that WinME was terrible but there wasn't a 'consumer bashlash' which 'caused XP'; hell, XP was roundly setup upon on release for being slow, bloated and horrible looking and yet later was hailed as 'the best OS' by many. (I avoided it until Win2K was no longer supported, as did many others.) WinME was the last gasp of the 9x kernel before the NT kernel took over and it existence and the comments on it had no real impact on the existence of XP.
Vista however wasn't ME, yes it was a little heavier than XP but that was due to the nature of the thing, generally in the are of things like VRAM where the driver system required a system copy making it much heavier on the system than it was in 7 which has a different model (one which was always coming) - Vista is what happens when you get your marketing wrong. I ran it from release and until Win7 came along and found it fine (as did many others, most of the complaints about it I saw came from people who never even tried it!), hell I was happier with that on release than I was with XP on release. Win7 of course improved on Vista because, shockingly, newer products tend to be better. Hell, I found Windows 8 to be better than 7, yes I agree that the full screen menu wasn't a great move which is why I advocated and used Start8 to get back to amore Win7 workflow; but the rest of the OS was better. (And, fyi, I had more stability issues and problems during XP's lifetime on my machine than I have with Vista/7/8 combined, so I don't by the 'best OS ever!' BS which is thrown around about XP, maybe I just missed my shipment of rose tinted glasses every other XP lover seems to have?).

If any thing the complaints about Vista improved MS's marketing and that's about it; they managed to sell people a new OS (7) with hardly any changes over the old OS and some how get it to be loved. I'm sure even Jobs would be clapping that bit of marketing.

If you want to play the revisionist history game feel free, but ya know what? Best not to do it with someone who has experienced, first hand, every new MS OS which the average consumer could get hold of first hand from Win95 onwards - frankly trying to paint XP as some kind of 'darling of the OS world' makes you look a tad silly to anyone who, ya know, lived it.

The fact that you seem to think XP was the darling of OSes (spoiler alert, it really wasn't), frankly to me makes your view of Win10 completely suspect... maybe your rose tinted specs are calibrated in such a way they don't make Win10 look any good? *shrugs*

So, I say again, don't like it? Don't use it.
The fact you think a small subsection of a user base posting on website is going to 'force change' or whatever I continue to find amusing.
(And if you think that finding someone's mind set, activities or thoughts amusing as an 'attack' then I feel really sorry for you, I really do... I'm sure you'll think my pity is an attack as well... )

Firstly, you are a tiny subset of the consumer base, you are not a "representative" of anything.

And yet I represent a larger subset of the consumer base than you do.

Yes, it is accepted that WinME was terrible but there wasn't a 'consumer bashlash' which 'caused XP'; hell, XP was roundly setup upon on release for being slow, bloated and horrible looking and yet later was hailed as 'the best OS' by many. (I avoided it until Win2K was no longer supported, as did many others.) WinME was the last gasp of the 9x kernel before the NT kernel took over and it existence and the comments on it had no real impact on the existence of XP.

And talking about revisionist history. I ran NT till XP came out. XP was BY FAR better than ME, 2K, 95/98, and even NT (which granted was pretty solid) even if driver support was lacking. Just because YOU didn't like the look of it doesn't mean that no one else did. Sure Windows 8 has better driver support and was more stable... probably because XP was released in 2001. Hardware standards were alot messier back then.

Vista however wasn't ME, yes it was a little heavier than XP but that was due to the nature of the thing, generally in the are of things like VRAM where the driver system required a system copy making it much heavier on the system than it was in 7 which has a different model (one which was always coming) - Vista is what happens when you get your marketing wrong. I ran it from release and until Win7 came along and found it fine (as did many others, most of the complaints about it I saw came from people who never even tried it!), hell I was happier with that on release than I was with XP on release. Win7 of course improved on Vista because, shockingly, newer products tend to be better. Hell, I found Windows 8 to be better than 7, yes I agree that the full screen menu wasn't a great move which is why I advocated and used Start8 to get back to amore Win7 workflow; but the rest of the OS was better. (And, fyi, I had more stability issues and problems during XP's lifetime on my machine than I have with Vista/7/8 combined, so I don't by the 'best OS ever!' BS which is thrown around about XP, maybe I just missed my shipment of rose tinted glasses every other XP lover seems to have?).

Wow more hyperbole and ad hominem. What a surprise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems

Even after 14 years, XP is still neck and neck with 8.1. Vista is barely holding off Linux in popularity, and Windows 7 is destroying 8 and 8.1 so badly its funny. How you can possibly say that calling XP and Windows 7 good OS's is 'revisionist history' then claim Vista and 8 were just as good (or better)? You call my post revisionist history???

If any thing the complaints about Vista improved MS's marketing and that's about it; they managed to sell people a new OS (7) with hardly any changes over the old OS and some how get it to be loved. I'm sure even Jobs would be clapping that bit of marketing.

The idea behind the tech changes in Vista were never the problem, it was always the implementation. Vista was just not ready at launch. It was unstable and for the most parts unusable. Windows 7 was pretty much Vista without bugs (and with a few less annoyances). The problem was never that people 'weren't willing to change', or any of that nonsense. The OS didn't work for the majority of people. Maybe for you it did, but for the majority of people this wasn't the case.

If you want to play the revisionist history game feel free, but ya know what? Best not to do it with someone who has experienced, first hand, every new MS OS which the average consumer could get hold of first hand from Win95 onwards - frankly trying to paint XP as some kind of 'darling of the OS world' makes you look a tad silly to anyone who, ya know, lived it.

Irony...

The fact that you seem to think XP was the darling of OSes (spoiler alert, it really wasn't), frankly to me makes your view of Win10 completely suspect... maybe your rose tinted specs are calibrated in such a way they don't make Win10 look any good? *shrugs*

And more ad hominem.

So, I say again, don't like it? Don't use it.
The fact you think a small subsection of a user base posting on website is going to 'force change' or whatever I continue to find amusing.
(And if you think that finding someone's mind set, activities or thoughts amusing as an 'attack' then I feel really sorry for you, I really do... I'm sure you'll think my pity is an attack as well... )

And even more... You can play the passive aggressive game all you want. You are insulting, denigrating, and attacking others intentionally. To imply otherwise is completely disingenuous.

Everyone...

(click on it to hear Thumper's wisdom)