Ništa naročito ne treba, Prazan (RAW format) disk, UEFI samo namešteno u BIOS-u (disable CSM) i windows sve urade sami, particije itd.
Nije tacno. Memorija koju zauzima OS a ne aplikacije su bacene pare. 10ka jede puno i kad pojede sve pocne da drlja tj. koristi pagefile. 8.1 i manje jede i manje drlja i brzi je. 10ka samo kome treba (za igrice i sl.) i ko ima bar 8GB i SSD.Ako imaš 8GB ili više, zaboravi na "Pojedenu memoriju" Samo izgleda da jede puno ali većina je u Stand by-u i oslobodi se kada zatreba. Uopšte nije isto kao u predhodnim windowsima. Što je više u memoriji umesto na disku to brže radi, ako imaš manje od 8GB, vreme je za upgrade. Memorija koja zvrji prazna su samo bačene pare.
Moze li meni link za windows 10 bez bloatware,otpima mod ili neki drugi.
Imam home verziju x64 i sa zadnjim apdejtom vidi da jede vise rama.
Ili da se vratim na windows 8?
I desava se da se mis zaglupi,vidim da nemam ps/2 keyboard drajver ali je tastatura usb,iobot driver booster mi prijavljuje gresku 24 na ps/2.
Key za Win košta 1€ na ebay, za Office 2-3, da li je realno da se neko i dalje zamajava sa krekovima, kms-ovima, i sl. i rizikuje majnere, ransomware i ostalu gamad.Koji bensedin koristite,ja sam do sad koristio KMS_VL_ALL,ili preporucujete KMSpico,AAct.
Rizikuje kad ne zna za Digital License Generator gde dobija licencu free.
Hm gde naci 1709 a da je siguran? Mislim da ga na MS sajtu vise nema.
Moze li meni link za windows 10 bez bloatware,otpima mod ili neki drugi.
http://fg.ds.b1.download.windowsupdate.com/d/Upgr/2017/10/16299.15.170928-1534.rs3_release_clientconsumer_ret_x86fre_en-us_1ad866a4a9b80e05103c60aaa62ef57613b9b917.esd
http://fg.ds.b1.download.windowsupdate.com/d/Upgr/2017/10/16299.15.170928-1534.rs3_release_clientconsumer_ret_x64fre_en-us_f6df8c19358335bc05e638b45bb6c6f8078480a4.esd
http://fg.ds.b1.download.windowsupdate.com/c/Upgr/2017/10/16299.15.170928-1534.rs3_release_clientconsumer_ret_x86fre_sr-latn-rs_2ba0df2679b700255c3c34a12174fb6748f8bc8d.esd
http://fg.ds.b1.download.windowsupdate.com/c/Upgr/2017/10/16299.15.170928-1534.rs3_release_clientconsumer_ret_x64fre_sr-latn-rs_606028c1a9351f50754b624f3a8344a6bd08b407.esd
Dear Microsoft,
I hope you remember me. I used to work for you. I was an SDE in Dublin working on Office for Mac and an SDET in Redmond working on products like Silverlight, Windows Live Mesh, and Azure Service Bus. During those years I learnt a lot about software engineering in general and software quality in particular and did some of my best work, all thanks to you. I still care deeply for you and your products which is why I'm very concerned and saddened by what I'm seeing recently. And it all started in 2014.
Getting rid of the SDET role
Back then I was still working for you and you decided to get rid of the SDET role which made the SDE role fully responsible for both implementing and testing their products. At that point I had some exposure to engineering teams without any dedicated QA so I knew that this can work. I did have my doubts though that it would work for a software company as large as Microsoft with products as complex as Windows. However, I do want to commend you for taking that step. You cannot innovate without trying new, sometimes radical, ideas and this of course doesn't just apply to products and features but processes and roles as well. But here is the catch: Whenever you do this you must be prepared to impartially evaluate the outcome. I know this is often much easier said than done, but if you don't do it and complacency, pride, or office politics get in the way of an open and honest analysis, you may keep walking down a path you've chosen even though you should have taken a turn miles ago.
The current state of software QA at Microsoft
Granted, I don't have the same insight into what's going on anymore. But based on my experience as a former employee, a current customer, and a software engineer, I'm afraid I've come to the conclusion that what you're doing isn't working. And I've talked to quite a few other (former) Microsofties, customers, and partners who agree. But this, of course, is only circumstantial. But there are also cold hard facts to back it up.
Measuring software quality
So, how can we measure software quality? This is an incredibly difficult question about which entire books have been written. But in this context there's one that's particularly meaningful: The number of recalls and severe regressions. Ideally, you should never miss a defect warranting a recall and severe regressions should be a rare exception. However, using Windows, probably the most widely used Microsoft product, as an example, your track record of just the past few months isn't great. Issues included (and this is by no means a complete list):
Breaking a brand new and really cool security feature just when hitting GA: (Microsoft Admits Windows 10 Security Feature Broken By Update)
Breaking a feature that had worked fine for over 20 years: (Windows' latest patches crash Event Viewer)
Accidentally downgrading and invalidating licenses: (Microsoft Accidentally Downgrades Windows 10 Pro To Home)
Deleting user data: (Microsoft Warns Windows 10 Update Deletes Personal Data)
The last one is particularly mind boggling. I've never worked on Windows but all teams I've been a part of would have considered this a priority 0, severity 0, hard ship-blocker issue, especially since it was apparently reported by Windows Insiders before GA. I can think of a range of possible explanations for this, but given the overall circumstances a likely cause, or at least major contributing factor, was probably a lack of ownership. Yes, the SDEs should have owned it in the engineering team model, but in that very model nobody specializes in QA and is explicitly responsible for QA. Which brings me to my next point.
QA roles at other companies
Back in 2014 I had my concerns but was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. Maybe you were on to something here, way ahead of the curve. You had been in the past on numerous occasions and it's one of the things I love about you. But, realistically, if that had been the case, it would have caught on by now. And it hasn't. Google has a Test Engineer role and Amazon has both a Quality Assurance Engineer (QAE) and a Software Development Engineer in Test (SDET) role. Most other major technology companies have similar roles.
On a more personal note, I have interviewed with a few companies that were interested in my background because they wanted to professionalize and intensify their software QA effort, creating or expanding dedicated QA teams. I hope we are on the same page when I state this: Software QA is a specialization within software engineering that takes years to master. Now, you might argue that every SDE could also acquire this knowledge over time but there are two issues. First, this goes against the principle of division of labour without which we wouldn't be where we are today technologically. Second, and worse yet, there are many great software engineers who excel when it comes to the design and implementation, but who simply don't have enough of an interested in QA beyond what's normally expected of an SDE.
How did we get here?
I actually lost my T before we split in 2014, having been "promoted" from SDET to SDE. I don't recall what the official reason for this change was (which isn't to say that there wasn't one) but I do recall two explanations offered by other (former) Microsofties I discussed this with.
Ineffectiveness of the SDET role
One was that the SDET role simply had ceased to add value to the development process. Personally, I take issue with this. This may have been true in some groups but I can say with certainty that this wasn't true for the groups I was a member of. But even if that had been the case in parts of the company, why would one jump directly to axing the entire role rather than trying to redefine it?
The SDET role being unsuited for agile processes
The other argument is more interesting and superficially plausible. You wanted to move to an agile development model and the SDET role was simply incompatible. But again, even if this were the case, why not try to evolve the role with the changing processes? This is, in fact, what has happened in the industry at large. ISTQB recently introduced an Agile Tester Extension certification and is currently working on an advanced level Agile Technical Tester certification. There are even conferences focusing on this like the Agile Testing Days in Potsdam.
So what now?
From my point of view, what needs to happen is very clear: You need to reintroduce a software QA role. And the sooner the better. It doesn't have to be the old SDET role. It's certainly possible it wasn't working for all groups anymore. It's also plausible that it would have needed to change to be more suitable for an agile environment. And there are probably other considerations I'm not even aware of. But I honestly believe that at this point not having any role that explicitly and primarily own software quality and, in this regard, acts as a customer advocate has been proven to not work.
Sincerely yours,
D.C.
P.S. In case you agree, give me a call once you decide to "hit refresh" on the software QA role. I'd love to be a part of redefining it.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Napomena: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari