Windows 10: W10 CPU Requirements not fully stated

There's new model for updating Windows 10, MS has bean talking about that long time now, even before it was decided on name. Service packs were too far apart and changed/updated too many things at once. With many, smaller updates and occasional upgrades everybody has more time to implement smaller updates mostly bug fixes that do not intrude too much.
''Windows as a service", as they called it is better way although it may not look like that at first. SP 1 for Win7 took over an hour to do and could have larger consequences than small updates/ fixes.

 

@OP. In addition, update/version control is implemented for business or enterprise systems so maybe some more reading would help.

Try here Windows 10 for Enterprise: More secure and up to date | Windows For Your Business

 

The Windows as a service and "branch" deployment methodology will probably be more unwieldy than the service pack system. The primary reason for this is that M$ has a history of bringing buggy software to market before it's ready with many known deficiencies. This appears to have occurred again with W10 and now their approach is to make retail users beta testers!? There is a reason why enterprise customers have mostly remained on W7. Again, this is going places that should be discussed in other threads.

 

Actually, a lot of them are still on XP and even NT, that has nothing to do with updates, anywho, Enterprise is handled differently than consumer products. That has completely different update structure.

 

Not to mention that MS must be wise to the "let's wait until SP1" thing.

I'm not sure what the median time to adopt a new OS is in industry, but at my current employer, I'd guess eighteen months to two years.

When I started with them in 2001, they were mostly on NT4. They skipped Windows 2000, and went to XP. They skipped Vista, and went to 7. I have seen no 8 or 8.1 machines. Based on this trend, I expect they'll move to Windows 10 sometime after the beginning of 2017.

"Make retail users beta testers"? The largest difference between 10 and the other upgrades I've seen is that 10 is a free upgrade, offered through Windows Update. Previous upgrades have not been free, so there was probably more self-selection among people obtaining the upgrade. (Actually, free upgrades were common, They were usually offered to buyers of new PCs in the months immediately before a new OS release. That was to reduce the number of buyers who deferred purchases until the new OS was available. Still, the buyer had to do something to get the upgrade; no Windows Update.) I don't know whether there are any statistics on what fraction of upgraders ended up with unbootable OS corruptions, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same or higher than with Win 10. If 50 million upgrades to 10 have been performed, and 0.1% of them went seriously wrong, that's still 50,000 PCs that would need service. All in a 3 week period. I don't know the real number, of course. If it was a 1% failure rate, that'd be a half million PCs. And most of those people would believe that Microsoft is evil incarnate. All of the people who upgraded smoothly don't count.

 

It didn't take too long, 10525 is currently distributed to insiders fast ring.