Windows 10 Upgrade

[aebrown]

I know there will be some haters out there,

Whoa, there! People may have different opinions about how quickly the Church should move to Windows 10, but so far the discussion has been respectful and I don't see why anyone should be labeled as a "hater". Let's all be kind in the ways we deal with people who have differing opinions.

but I have been a Windows Insider and have had it for some time. It is a very stable OS. Why wouldn't we want to upgrade to Windows 10 since it is free? I don't have an issue with any of the church sites yet on the Edge browser, but another browser could easily be installed. Has MLS been tested with Windows 10?

What about the FHC, has FamilySearch and other apps been tested?

I'm sure that the Church will move to Windows 10 eventually. But as someone who has worked through several cycles of OS version upgrades by the Church, I can testify that the Church is quite deliberate in these huge changes. The move to Windows 7, for example, came long after the initial release of Win7.

Changing the operating system for thousands of FHCs and tens of thousands of clerk computers is not something the Church will ever do lightly or quickly. It's far more important to the Church to keep all these computers working and provide good support than to be extremely prompt in upgrading to the latest version of the OS.

Upgrading the OS has the potential to cause all sorts of problems with printer drivers, scanner drivers, third-party apps, etc. I know that some FamilySearch testing for Windows 10 is underway, but there are many things to test. Let's all be patient as this testing takes place. Personally (and this is only my own guess) I would be very surprised if any move to Windows 10 happened in 2015.

[russellhltn]

And I've heard the old saying "Wait for SP1". Or, at least wait a few months for the worst of the bugs to come to light.

[jdlessley]

Take a look at the Windows lifecycle. Note also the time it took the Church to go from Windows XP to Windows 7. Windows Vista was not even considered due to all the issues that version had.

There is no rush to move to either Windows 8.1 or Windows 10 since the Church has not been on Windows 7 very long and the end of service is for another four and a half years. There is plenty of time to watch and test. I doubt that the move will take as long as it did from XP to 7 since there are not significant minimum hardware requirement differences from 7 to 10 as there was from XP to 7.

There was considerable cost to go from XP to 7. Some of that was in hardware upgrades, some in software, and some in labor. As with any business, an upgrade as extensive as there was from XP to 7 must be amortized over a planned period of time to spread out and reduce the burden the upgrade imposes on an annual budget. Jumping from one operating system upgrade to another shortly after the previous has just been completed is fiscally irresponsible. There hasn't been enough time to realize the cost benefit of the upgrade to Windows 7.

[jkentner]

@ aebrown: the "hater" comment didn't come across quite like I meant, I probably should have been more explanatory! I meant there are some out there that are resistant to change, just because it is change, versus looking at it the benefits. As far as the comment "keep all these computers working and provide good support", I can speak for our stake, and 99.9% of this work is done by us Stake Technology Specialists, not SLC. Given that I think SLC should at least entertain the comments of the STS community.
@russelhtn: "wait for SP1" is really an "old saying". With Windows 10, there was a lot more community involvement over a longer period of time. It isn't the old MS where you didn't involve the community and push the upgrade out, then realize issues. There has been a ton of testing by the Insider community.
@jdlessley: IMHO I think being fiscally responsible would be to actually look at this FREE upgrade. We have machines that still are not upgraded form Windows XP (clerk and FHC). It takes a long time for the change to filter down. The hardware replacement schedule is 5 years, so most of the new machines will still have some lifespan left when Windows 7 becomes EOL. I think there should be some open discussion about this. I agree there is plenty to test, and I think there are plenty of folks willing to test. We are going through this same process at my work. Again I truly hope there is an open mind about this, and all of these concerns/options are considered.

[russellhltn]

I'm not aware of any "must have" features in Win 10. It is a different interface. One that more people will get used to in time. But I don't think it's dramatically better.

Depending on the road map for MLS, I wouldn't be surprised but what the next jump would be to Chrome(book). If MLS disappears, then the need for Windows disappears as well. (Yes, it seems you can do basic word processing in Chromebook.)

[russellhltn]

@russelhtn: "wait for SP1" is really an "old saying".

Not that old. "Windows 8.1" 'nuff said.

We have machines that still are not upgraded form Windows XP (clerk and FHC).

Then someone at the local level is falling down on the job. There was a push a few months back to get all WinXP clerk machines purged out. As for the FHC, perhaps the director hasn't been filing their monthly reports. Or perhaps they haven't discarded the old machines as directed. I'm currently installing the second generation of Win7 machines in our center.

Or, perhaps you're talking about an Unofficial FHC (something the local leaders cooked up and not listed in the CDOL). In that case, your ward/stake is on their own. Officially those machines don't exist. They will not be replaced by CHQ.

I think there should be some open discussion about this.

We, as a community, can discuss it all we want. We're not the decision-makers.

[jkentner]

@russellhltn: It is debatable about if Win 10 is better than Win 7, you are correct. "Not that old. "Windows 8.1" 'nuff said"-Seriuosly, do you subscribe to that for IOS, OSX, Android, and ChromeOS also? Chromebooks would also be a debatable conversation considering Google's track record for privacy. I would hope SLC is considering privacy/security alongside cost. As far as still having XP, our sites are all 'official' centers. As far as I know the directors turn in their reports because they consistently ask for verifications. Maybe Familysearch was supposed to send upgrade disks and never did. As far as the clerk machines on XP that is likely a facilities issue. It maybe harsh to say that facilities is "falling down". There are a lot of competing expenses for the buildings, and also they do not have many resources. Like everyone else, their budgets have also been cut. I realize this is the community and we can discuss these things, but I would hope that someone from SLC would be monitoring some of the discussing to gather feedback.

[russellhltn]

"Not that old. "Windows 8.1" 'nuff said"-Seriuosly, do you subscribe to that for IOS, OSX, Android, and ChromeOS also?

We were talking Windows. MS hasn't broken their track record. So unless Windows 10 can change that, it's still valid.

As far as still having XP, our sites are all 'official' centers. As far as I know the directors turn in their reports because they consistently ask for verification. Maybe Familysearch was supposed to send upgrade disks and never did.

Not disks. Machines. If your director is putting in the forums and your machines are running the required software (which sends inventory and usage statics to CHQ), they should have been replaced by now. (Assuming that they haven't been already replaced but someone kept the old machines operating.) Bottom line, this is not normal. I'd suggest the director or the STS give Family History Center support a call and find out what's wrong.

As far as the clerk machines on XP that is likely a facilities issue. It maybe harsh to say that facilities is "falling down". There are a lot of competing expenses for the buildings, and also they do not have many resources. Like everyone else, their budgets have also been cut.

"The budget" has many pockets. Computers are on a 5 year plan. Granted, someone (like the STS) is supposed to be keeping inventory and notify the FMG in the 4th year so they can budget for the replacements. But the most recent push came from the top and had a budget associated with it. So that's not an excuse for this last round. If you still have WinXP clerk computers, get the STS to give CHQ a call and get that fixed.

[jkentner]

We were talking Windows. MS hasn't broken their track record. So unless Windows 10 can change that, it's still valid.

Again, talking about a "track record", I recognize this as your opinion. You also brought ChromeOS into the conversation. There are plenty of others that have not experienced the issues you allude to in your opinion. I get frustrated at individuals that state these things as fact causing those less experienced reading the forum to make the assumption that a product is bad because you had a bad experience and you are in a position of authority on the forum. You have likely had a bad experience with MS products that have given you this bias. My point is, you are singling out Windows when your thought pattern should apply to other operating systems also.

Not disks. Machines. If your director is putting in the forums and your machines are running the required software (which sends inventory and usage statics to CHQ), they should have been replaced by now. (Assuming that they haven't been already replaced but someone kept the old machines operating.) Bottom line, this is not normal. I'd suggest the director or the STS give Family History Center support a call and find out what's wrong.

Bottom line is we have called familysearch, they indicated they do not replace "machines" if they are dual core and have at least 2GB of RAM, they send out an upgrade disk.

Granted, someone (like the STS) is supposed to be keeping inventory and notify the FMG in the 4th year so they can budget for the replacements.

"4.3.1 FM groups keep an inventory of all computer equipment included in new building construction or provided later by FM groups.", https://www.lds.org/help/support/meetin ... y?lang=eng , according to this it IS NOT the STS responsibility, it is FM's to keep the inventory.

[russellhltn]

We were talking Windows. MS hasn't broken their track record. So unless Windows 10 can change that, it's still valid.

Again, talking about a "track record", I recognize this as your opinion.

It's not an isolated opinion, or even a new one.

I brought ChromeOS into the conversation to say that perhaps "they" will decide to move away from Windows. If MLS is discontinued for local use, then all that's needed is a web box that can do OpenOffice/LibreOffice. You don't need Windows for that. Both ChromeOS and Android have been growing in that area. ChromeOS in particular has some offerings by "Tier 1" level suppliers.

we have called familysearch, they indicated they do not replace "machines" if they are dual core and have at least 2GB of RAM, they send out an upgrade disk.

OK, so why do you still have XP machines in the FHC?

Granted, someone (like the STS) is supposed to be keeping inventory and notify the FMG in the 4th year so they can budget for the replacements.

"4.3.1 FM groups keep an inventory of all computer equipment included in new building construction or provided later by FM groups.", https://www.lds.org/help/support/meetin ... y?lang=eng , according to this it IS NOT the STS responsibility, it is FM's to keep the inventory.

From Meetinghouse Technology Roles and Responsibilities: STAKE TECHNOLOGY SPECIALIST (STS)

"4.7 Coordinates with FM through PFR to ensure meetinghouses have approved and working technology equipment

"4.10 Maintains inventory of meetinghouse technology hardware and software including date of acquisition, warranty, and licensing information"

Sorry, while it's not solely the STS's fault, there's some to go around. Earlier versions made it clear he was to provide input on the 4th year to get it budgeted. It would certainly be in the stake's self-interest to make sure it's on FM's radar.

Regardless, if your stake still has XP machines, it's a local issue, not a result of CHQ policy.