Izotope recommends NOT applying the Win 10 Anniversary update..yet

[Jason[_15_]]

https://www.izotope.com/en/community/blog/product-news/2016/08/izotope-
and-windows-10-anniversary-update-plug-in-compatibility.html

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 8/22/2016 9:05 PM, Jason wrote:
>
> https://www.izotope.com/en/community/blog/product-news/2016/08/izotope-
> and-windows-10-anniversary-update-plug-in-compatibility.html
>
Is Windows 10 Anniversary a recent update to earlier versions of Windows
10 or is it "Windows 10" that's been around for months now? We Windows
XP users are really interested in keeping up with this.

--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Ron C[_2_]]

On 8/22/2016 9:29 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 8/22/2016 9:05 PM, Jason wrote:
>>
>> https://www.izotope.com/en/community/blog/product-news/2016/08/izotope-
>> and-windows-10-anniversary-update-plug-in-compatibility.html
>>
> Is Windows 10 Anniversary a recent update to earlier versions of Windows
> 10 or is it "Windows 10" that's been around for months now? We Windows
> XP users are really interested in keeping up with this.
>
This is the "latest/greatest" update from a few weeks ago.
I've been reading lots of reports of this latest update
breaking lots of drivers and stuff. The first "upgrade"
[Ver 1511] gave you 30 days to evaluate or go back. The
latest "upgrade" [Ver1607] only allows 10 days.

I "upgraded" my Win7 machines to Win 10 and
reverted all of them to Win7.

Hate the Win 10 GUI, and a few programs became
unstable.
[YMMV]
==
Later...
Ron Capik
--

[jason]

On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 22:04:08 -0400 "Ron C" > wrote in
article >
>
> I "upgraded" my Win7 machines to Win 10 and
> reverted all of them to Win7.
>
> Hate the Win 10 GUI, and a few programs became
> unstable.
> [YMMV]
>
I applied the upgrade and have not yet seen any problems, including a
little use of some Izotope stuff. The GUI can be replaced with any of a
number of alternatives - "Classic Shell" makes it look just like Win 7 for
me.

[None]

On of the things about the Windows 10 anniversary update is that now a
bash shell is available.

[JackA]

On Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:31:38 PM UTC-4, None wrote:
> On of the things about the Windows 10 anniversary update is that now a
> bash shell is available.

Unix?

Jack

[Nil[_2_]]

On 22 Aug 2016, "None" > wrote in rec.audio.pro:

> On of the things about the Windows 10 anniversary update is that
> now a bash shell is available.

You have to be running 64-bit Windows 10, though.

[Trevor]

On 24/08/2016 4:01 AM, Nil wrote:
> On 22 Aug 2016, "None" > wrote in rec.audio.pro:
>
>> On of the things about the Windows 10 anniversary update is that
>> now a bash shell is available.
>
> You have to be running 64-bit Windows 10, though.
>

And why would you run a 32 bit version? Stick with Win7 or XP if you
can't run 64 bits.

Trevor.

[Nil[_2_]]

On 25 Aug 2016, Trevor > wrote in rec.audio.pro:

> And why would you run a 32 bit version? Stick with Win7 or XP if you
> can't run 64 bits.

Nonsense. There are exactly the same reasons to run Win10 as 32 or 64
bits as there were with Win7. Unless you must have bash.

[John Williamson]

On 25/08/2016 18:12, Nil wrote:
> On 25 Aug 2016, Trevor > wrote in rec.audio.pro:
>
>> And why would you run a 32 bit version? Stick with Win7 or XP if you
>> can't run 64 bits.
>
> Nonsense. There are exactly the same reasons to run Win10 as 32 or 64
> bits as there were with Win7. Unless you must have bash.
>
For the rest of us, there is Powershell, which will run a selection of
DOS and Windows command line utilities. The utilities in Windows bash
are only of use to developers, as Windows 10 will only run a command
line version of bash, and it runs in a sandbox anyway.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Scott Dorsey]

John Williamson > wrote:
>On 25/08/2016 18:12, Nil wrote:
>> On 25 Aug 2016, Trevor > wrote in rec.audio.pro:
>>
>>> And why would you run a 32 bit version? Stick with Win7 or XP if you
>>> can't run 64 bits.
>>
>> Nonsense. There are exactly the same reasons to run Win10 as 32 or 64
>> bits as there were with Win7. Unless you must have bash.
>
>For the rest of us, there is Powershell, which will run a selection of
>DOS and Windows command line utilities. The utilities in Windows bash
>are only of use to developers, as Windows 10 will only run a command
>line version of bash, and it runs in a sandbox anyway.

Powershell is weirdly crippled... it will let you pipe data from one
executable into another, but the first one has to complete before the
second one starts. It has a lot of things like that, including some
regexp strangeness, as if it was written by someone who had seen Unix
shells but didn't really understand the fine details.

It's much the way MS-DOS feels like the command language was written
by someone who had seen CP/M but didn't really understand the fine details.

That said, Powershell is still useful, it's just not as useful as it
could have been and I'm hoping the Microsoft adaptation of bash is
a little better.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[JackA]

On Thursday, August 25, 2016 at 4:31:19 PM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
> On 25/08/2016 18:12, Nil wrote:
> > On 25 Aug 2016, Trevor > wrote in rec.audio.pro:
> >
> >> And why would you run a 32 bit version? Stick with Win7 or XP if you
> >> can't run 64 bits.
> >
> > Nonsense. There are exactly the same reasons to run Win10 as 32 or 64
> > bits as there were with Win7. Unless you must have bash.
> >
> For the rest of us, there is Powershell, which will run a selection of
> DOS and Windows command line utilities. The utilities in Windows bash
> are only of use to developers, as Windows 10 will only run a command
> line version of bash, and it runs in a sandbox anyway.
>
> --
> Tciao for Now!
>
> John.

How you can tell how many in the US are computer illiterate. Maybe DOS 5+, they offered a DOS Shell. You could switch between multiple open programs, with Ctrl+Tab. I thought it was neat, but never seen anyone else use it!!

Jack

[geoff]

On 26/08/2016 5:12 a.m., Nil wrote:
> On 25 Aug 2016, Trevor > wrote in rec.audio.pro:
>
>> And why would you run a 32 bit version? Stick with Win7 or XP if you
>> can't run 64 bits.
> Nonsense. There are exactly the same reasons to run Win10 as 32 or 64
> bits as there were with Win7. Unless you must have bash.

Only reason I can think, unless one can't envisage ever emerging from
one's cave, is having an essential 32-bit app that won't run in 64-bit
despite all compatibility modes having been tried, and the app will
never be updated to the current standards.

OK another one - a old computer that can't run 64-bits efficiently
enough, and can't envisage upgrading hardware.

geoff

[Nil[_2_]]

On 25 Aug 2016, John Williamson >
wrote in rec.audio.pro:

> For the rest of us, there is Powershell, which will run a
> selection of DOS and Windows command line utilities.

I've never been able to get the hang of the syntax in Powershell. Maybe
someday I'll knuckle down and pursue it, but until then I can get most
of what I need done with plain old DOS batch files.

[None]

"John Williamson" > wrote in message
...
>> Nonsense. There are exactly the same reasons to run Win10 as 32 or
>> 64
>> bits as there were with Win7.

Yes. At my day job, 32 bits is essential, because some things I depend
on use 32 bit DLL's, and no 64 bit DLL is available. I don't have the
time or resources to develop a 64 bit DLL'sfor some competitors'
products, when 32-bit win 7 machines are ubiquitous in these parts.
And we make extensive use of competitors' products (and they surely
return the favor).

>> Unless you must have bash.

It might be extremely useful, but it's new in Windows, and is an
interesting development. Cygwin is doing the job at the moment.
Running "make" on Windows is critical. Of course, I could come up with
an alternative, but readily available wheels are preferable, for me,
to inventing a new wheel.

[Trevor]

On 26/08/2016 3:12 AM, Nil wrote:
> On 25 Aug 2016, Trevor > wrote in rec.audio.pro:
>
>> And why would you run a 32 bit version? Stick with Win7 or XP if you
>> can't run 64 bits.
>
> Nonsense. There are exactly the same reasons to run Win10 as 32 or 64
> bits as there were with Win7.

The old reason was hardware, drivers and software that doesn't support
64bit. The last two have now all but disappeared, and I have yet to see
a reason to upgrade hardware that doesn't support 64 bits to Win10.
Actually I have yet to upgrade ANY of my computers to win10, and I'm not
the only one I know of. One things for sure though, I wouldn't be
installing Win10-32 on ANYTHING myself, but I have upgraded computers
for others to Win10-64 without complaint. But as usual, whatever works
for you...

Trevor.