@scottalanmiller said:
I've got a recent ASUS ROG that I got in December and love it.
Have you had to get any service on it? Which model do you have? I was looking at this one: http://www.amazon.com/G752VT-DH72-Gaming-Discrete-GeForce-Titanium/dp/B01578ZN0Q?psc=1&SubscriptionId=AKIAJM4NKIQGABP2PIRA&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=B01578ZN0Q&tag=thewire06-20&ascsubtag=WC25026.
@Minion-Queen said:
Well MangoLassi is the official day time drink. We need an official after hours one!
Wonder if Manog's and Dr. Pepper mix at all?
Would that make a Mango Pepper or a Dr Lassi?
So I need to purchase a new work laptop for myself, and my budget is very generous (in my mind) since it is anything less than the $2,500 MBP we order for everyone else.
My wish list:
No smaller than 15" display
Numberpad
Not excessively hot
i7
16 GB of RAM
At least a 256 GB SSD
Decent video card
Weight, bulk, and battery life are all negotiable. I'd like to have as little of the former two and as much of the latter as possible, but they're secondary criteria.
Any suggestions? I've looked at the newest ASUS RoG laptop (some very bad customer service reviews), MSI's newest gaming rig in the sub $2k range (loud fans), and the newest Alienware.
I'd like to avoid the outliers like Sager, Origin, etc.
Dr. Pepper is the official drink of everything #justsayin
@BBigford said:
Between work, school, and studying, I rarely have time to read anything but tech related stuff. But when I do get time, I'd really like to continue reading the Ender's Game series. I read the first one (Ender's Game), and got side tracked on the second (Speaker for the Dead). Then maybe I can read the Shadow Saga (Ender's Shadow.... based on another character).
Speaker for the Dead, Xenocide, and Children of the Mind are radically different from Ender's Game in the type of the story told (at a surface level). Add in the fact that SftD starts off very slowly, and it makes the transition very difficult at times. I tried reading it about 3 times before I finally got through it. I liked the three books, but for very different reasons than I'd enjoyed Ender's Game. It is worth pushing through them, but the flavor is very different.
@RamblingBiped said:
Disclaimer: My wife is a librarian...
Have you or her ever read the Alcatraz series by Brandon Sanderson? The first book is Alcatraz versus the Evil Librarians.
@coliver said:
Has anyone read any of the Discworld series? I've heard good things but haven't read it yet.
Yes, but you have to have a British sort of humour to really enjoy it. There are a few grouped books, but it isn't really a series in the classical sense. It is more akin to Modesitt's Recluse Saga than Jordan's Wheel of Time in the relationships between books. My personal favourite is The Nightwatch, but there are many good, funny stories.
@Kelly said:
@travisdh1 said:
Hell's Foundations Quiver by David Weber. Waiting for a new book for the Safehold or Harrington series. (Yes, I've actually read all 32 books in the Honorverse multiple times. Honorverse wiki
What? There is a new book in the Hell series? BRB...
Drat, I thought it was a multiverse book, not another Safehold book.
@Dashrender said:
I did this one, installed my own cert into Outlook 2013 - my boss hated it - the little certificate icon made her think all of my emails were marked high priority.
"It is actually a finger extended in the traditional Native American greeting that contains all the respect you deserve."
If anyone is looking for a new Fantasy author, Brandon Sanderson is my favorite, by a significant margin. He has multiple series that he is concurrently writing that all have unique characters, stories, and magic systems. And the larger universe is all tied together in some way that he has yet to explain.
@travisdh1 said:
Hell's Foundations Quiver by David Weber. Waiting for a new book for the Safehold or Harrington series. (Yes, I've actually read all 32 books in the Honorverse multiple times. Honorverse wiki
What? There is a new book in the Hell series? BRB...
Yes. Because of ITAR and some other DoD requirements we can't rely on O365 encryption and remain compliant.
So we have been using certificates here to encrypt local emails. We've just been using OpenSSL to generate them along with our Root and Intermediate certs. The management overhead on this has been really high since when a new employee starts they have to send out a signed email so that everyone can add their key and then everyone replies back with a signed email so that the new employee has their key.
Now that my head is approaching the surface of the water I'm starting to look for ways to improve efficiencies, and this is an obvious need.
Our email service is provided through Office 365 and our clients include Outlook 2013 and 2016 for PC, MacMail, Outlook 2011 (going away), and Outlook 2016 on Mac.
Aside from the easily searchable TechNet articles and whatnot, have any of you done this and have any feedback or caveats to share?
@Dashrender said:
@Kelly said:
That is correct.
I'm sorry, what is correct?
"Windows 7 will continue to be supported for security, reliability, and compatibility through January 14, 2020 on previous generation silicon. Windows 8.1 will receive the same support through January 10, 2023. This includes most of the devices available for purchase today by consumers or enterprises."
We are already in the phase for Windows 7 where all Microsoft is required to supply are security updates. So they'll drop the reliability and compatibility options for new things, but that doesn't mean that a new security update wouldn't work on Skylake - at best, as Scott is saying is that maybe - maybe if you have a problem with a security patch and you're on a system with Skylake, MS won't give you support.
But the chances are that it will work just fine.
As for supported versus not supported - when was the last time anyone here called MS for support on a desktop client? Other than asking for a download from a KB I found myself - I've never called them for support.
You asked a question and I was responding to it with my "You are correct." I hope you are right. I'm just reading their statements, and proceeding accordingly. I am going to proceed on the assumption that any hardware running SkyLake 6th gen or newer needs to be running Windows 10. You might be able to still get patches, from a business perspective it isn't worth the risk in my mind.
@Dashrender said:
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Kelly said:
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor
So what though?
Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.
It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.
Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?
I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.
I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.
I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?
It sounds like you have some misunderstanding about their article. They will not be releasing OS patches for older operating systems in hardware that runs specific processors or newer. The processor isn't what is being patched. It is the delineating factor in whether or not they will be patching the OS.
What do you mean?
Are you saying that Windows 7 running on Skylake will not be able to install the security patches that are released after July of 2017? That would be madness.
But that is exactly what this letter is implying.@IRJ said:
So what? As of July 17, 2017, if your organization is still running Windows 7 or 8.1 on a 6th generation or newer Intel processor, you will no longer receive regular security patches and support.
If I'm running Windows 7 or 8.1 on 6th gen or newer as of that date, I won't get any more security update - Yeah I just don't believe it.
That is correct. Here is the original blog post from Terry Myerson (https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2016/01/15/windows-10-embracing-silicon-innovation/ near the bottom):
"Windows 7 will continue to be supported for security, reliability, and compatibility through January 14, 2020 on previous generation silicon. Windows 8.1 will receive the same support through January 10, 2023. This includes most of the devices available for purchase today by consumers or enterprises."
"Going forward, as new silicon generations are introduced, they will require the latest Windows platform at that time for support. This enables us to focus on deep integration between Windows and the silicon, while maintaining maximum reliability and compatibility with previous generations of platform and silicon. For example, Windows 10 will be the only supported Windows platform on Intel’s upcoming “Kaby Lake” silicon, Qualcomm’s upcoming “8996” silicon, and AMD’s upcoming “Bristol Ridge” silicon."
@scottalanmiller said:
Maybe I am missing something but it doesn't seem odd at all to me. It sounds like they are not doing extra development to support new installs of old OSes on new hardware. I prefer that they do not, in fact, as it would be wasted development effort for systems that should not exist. I don't want the cost of Windows to go up to support people who want their no longer current systems to be being actively updated for new hardware.
They're doing the work for old hardware. Speaking with a level of ignorance here, but it doesn't seem that hard to do best effort for the newest hardware unless there are some revolutionary changes to hardware and architecture coming.
@IRJ said:
@Kelly said:
@IRJ said:
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Kelly said:
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor
So what though?
Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.
It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.
Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?
I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.
I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.
I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?
It sounds like you have some misunderstanding about their article. They will not be releasing OS patches for older operating systems in hardware that runs specific processors or newer. The processor isn't what is being patched. It is the delineating factor in whether or not they will be patching the OS.
I wonder why that should be the delineating factor, though.
It does seem odd. I don't know if there is a technical reason or they just decided arbitrarily. Regardless we have the joy and, dare I say, pleasure, of dealing with the consequences...
It seems like a push to get users to upgrade faster IMO. Another way of putting it is, "We're Microsoft and we do what we want. Screw you and you have no choice, but to grovel at our feet and meet our demands."
If that is the case, it seems very shortsighted of them. Their marketshare is getting encroached on from all sides.
@IRJ said:
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Kelly said:
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor
So what though?
Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.
It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.
Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?
I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.
I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.
I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?
It sounds like you have some misunderstanding about their article. They will not be releasing OS patches for older operating systems in hardware that runs specific processors or newer. The processor isn't what is being patched. It is the delineating factor in whether or not they will be patching the OS.
I wonder why that should be the delineating factor, though.
It does seem odd. I don't know if there is a technical reason or they just decided arbitrarily. Regardless we have the joy and, dare I say, pleasure, of dealing with the consequences...
@Dashrender said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
How many simultaneous users do you need for the legacy systems?
This is still in question.
The issue is that there there three teams of people with random times that they could be needing to use the old system. What I'm hoping to avoid is needing three computers just for that one department. But that may be unavoidable.
Do their day to day systems have sufficient horsepower to be able to run VirtualBox VMs? It isn't as seamless as XP Mode, but would be cheaper assuming you have what you need.
@Dashrender said:
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Kelly said:
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor
So what though?
Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.
It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.
Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?
I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.
I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.
I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?
It sounds like you have some misunderstanding about their article. They will not be releasing OS patches for older operating systems in hardware that runs specific processors or newer. The processor isn't what is being patched. It is the delineating factor in whether or not they will be patching the OS.