Is it really that surprising in an office environment? They're probably all using the same model of computer that was purchased around the same time and from a reputable vendor like Dell, etc.

If you read the article though you would see this person's complaints are not with the upgrade process but with the memory usage, touch interface, and other behavior of Windows 10.

Warning: VirtualBox doesn't work in Windows 10. We're a very Vagrant-dependent shop here, so one of my coworkers was forced to spend his entire day in meetings rather than doing real work.

That must be hardware dependent, I was able to fire up VirtualBox and resume working in a Linux VM immediately after upgrading.

Same here. Just booted over to Windows 10, and VirtualBox appears to work fine.

VirtualBox 5.0.0 on relatively modest hardware. I haven't tested it beyond running a couple Linux VMs though.

My issues were all with host-only network adapters. NAT worked just fine.

Thanks for the heads up that's going to be a big deal for developers. I'm sure it'll get fixed. This is probably why our IT folks don't want us jumping on the newest OS right after deployment, even though I did it for my personal machine.

Yes, it's fixed in SVN, supposedly.

Windows development is version controlled with Source Depot (a Perforce customization for Microsoft). Not SVN.

I guess parent is talking about VirtualBox SVN.

With recent versions of VirtualBox?

I had trouble with it months ago in technical previews, but I've been running it successfully for a while now.

That said, I haven't moved to the RTM version yet. Could be another new issue.

I'm getting a not supported error about upgrading to Windows 10 when inside 8.1 in VirtualBox. Apparently the VirtualBox display driver isn't supported.

VirtualBox 5.0.0 works without problems for me under Windows 10. Booted Windows 7 and ArchLinux guests just fine.

There really isn't that much complexity from different hardware configurations. Almost all computers can be covered by drivers for AHCI,EHCI,xHCI,HDAudio, and vendor-specific drivers for graphics and network. There's no longer any need to worry about interrupt sharing or other conflicts between subsystems, so introducing new alternatives doesn't have a multiplicative effect.

Conversely it hosed my test machine (a clone of my main one). I would never risk a shotgun upgrade; I can't afford to lose a day fixing it.

YMMV basically.

I think it has been documented quite well the settings have changed and they have introduced a slew of very unsettling new settings that many view as a security and privacy concern.

Just did the same on my work computer. And its working incredibly well too. Every program works fine and it only took an hour

Yeah, exactly. Try that with a Linux version upgrade (e.g. Ubuntu), hahaha.

My Debian installation has been being updated for years now and went through three different machines, all without any bigger issues. It's also worth noting that this is a version called "unstable".

Unrelated, but I've often found that upgrading hardware is usually easier to do when you're running Linux, and it complains far less. I run Arch primarily, though, so I don't think my commentary with regards to upgrade processes is worth much--being a rolling release distro, it's always in a state of flux so there's no real "major" upgrade unless I've forgotten to run updates for a month or two.

That said, I have updated (dist-upgrade) recent (12.04+) Ubuntu installs more or less unattended with no trouble. So I think the OP was probably a troll.

My existing (home) Arch install has survived through a couple different hard drives, copied over directly from a USB stick, with various hardware changes off and on since. Prior to that, I've had Gentoo and Ubuntu installs persist across substantial hardware changes mostly unscathed (Gentoo required preparations beforehand, mostly because I was an idiot and did extensive kernel customizations I probably didn't need).

I don't understand the trolling, though. There are far too many variables that might affect one particular OS/hardware combination more than others, and that's to say nothing of PEBKAC-related issues...

What? I upgraded a Debian machine just last month.

Had to reboot it.

There was a time when this was true, but this is not how it works anymore.

I just went and updated all my privacy options on windows 10. I'm actually REALLY surprised at how granular it feels.

Just press windows type privacy and shut everything down if you want.

Except you can't shut down everything - it's impossible to disable the sending of "Diagnostic and usage data" in anything but Win 10 Enterprise, for example.

Especially when you consider that most people here, at least in their personal lives probably don't run Windows as their primary OS (I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts). Surely we've moved past 2002 era Slashdot polemics.

What a nonsensical attitude. Ostensibly, any "bashing Windows for UI/Updates/Privacy/whatever reasons" (which is an extremely odd way to say "criticism of Windows") is now equivalent to a Slashdot polemic?

Programming is the only technical field I know where this anti-intellectual sentiment of shutting off criticism and resorting to slogans like "If you don't like it, don't use it!" and "I don't care about X, it works for me!" is somehow considered acceptable.

Are you serious?