Will do, thank you!

You're focusing on one fact -- relative adoption rate to previous releases -- that is, at best, a proxy for "better". Not facts (plural). I prefer to look at the software itself to directly determine "better" or not.

* UI appearance? Worse. [Slightly better in small areas than 8, but still, across the board, worse than 7.]
* UX? Worse. [Slightly better in small areas than 8, but still, across the board, worse than 7.]
* Privacy issues added that were non-existent or trivial in previous versions? Worse.
* "Guts" pretty much the same. Neutral.
* Bundled programs that were there no longer present; or, if present, are hampered (see: Solitaire for one example)? Worse.
* Stronger-than-ever activation scheme? Worse.
* Continued removal/limitation of customization options? Worse.
* Forced updates? I can see arguments for the concept as a whole, but not as implemented. Neutral.
* Movement toward walled-garden, "app store" mentality? Worse. (Factual: OS has an "app store" vs "side load" vs "developer mode" setting!)
* Cash price? Okay, sure, better.

I could go on. But I was trying -- quite hard -- to find places where it is better. I came up with one and two quarters positive in a sea of negatives.

Fortunately, I don't see Windows 10/App Store encroaching on GOG, per se. I do, however, see it encroaching on "open, general-purpose computing" that is a prerequisite for GOG. Windows 10 is more of the same war on general-purpose, user-controlled computing that Apple started, Google escalated, and Microsoft is continuing to reinforce. They are allies on the anti-consumer front, who hole petty, largely inconsequential, [illusory?] squabbles in the war room.

As to explain away the differences in relative adoption rate? "Free" and "Microsoft quite forcefully upgrading people" more than account for it.

As for DRM discussion, I will cease here. But the OP starter of the thread did start the thread right with it there -- by incorrectly stating that the Windows App Store had benign DRM.

Have to admit I`m really not that far into this topic, and am far better informed on environmetal and political issues, thanks for your information. To keep it short I decided that my position on Win10 is: "No, Thanks." So I really don`t care about the online store

Yes, much better to read an article that doesn't even link the EULA, or quote it. Take a look or [url=http://www.alphr.com/microsoft/microsoft-windows-10/1001360/microsoft-can-disable-your-pirated-games-and-illegal-hardware]here for a bit more informed article, that at least links to the EULA mentioned. Which btw is not the Windows EULA, but the Microsoft Services one.

I'm not mixing the arguments :)

Win10 adoption is fast enough on its own that by itself it shows enough people choosing and / or accepting Win10. I'm sure MS is quite happy with those numbers - not faking it. *

However, since hedwards clearly has strong opinions on the value of modern Windows and Microsoft in general, not just particularly Win10, I also argued with the absolute market dominance of Windows OSes put together to try and get him to at least consider and maybe accept he is the outlier with his view on how bad MS / Windows is.

Separate arguments, and no inconsistency - they actually align quite well.

* Regardless of "stalling" which IMO the data is too limited to prove - particularly as this time of year between school start and Christmas is typically slow for tech purchases - so I suggest give it a couple more months and let's see where things go.

It has a definition. DRM is clearly defined by intentions of those who push for it. And anti-circumvention garbage which results from it clearly demonstrates its nature. Canonical intention of DRM proponents was voiced by one Sony exec:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal#Background That's it.

Which is?

So intent defines DRM?

Intent created DRM. Definition itself can be formalized, like was said many times already. I.e. anything that artificially takes away control from the user after purchasing. Once it's defined, intent itself already doesn't matter (it can be malice, or stupidity - no difference). Because regardless of intent, DRM itself is posing a problem for the user.

So the definition is changed to fit the crime. Ok...

IF there was a formal definition of DRM, intent would be irrelevant. So the copy of F.E.A.R. that GOG sells, which installs (or installed, haven't checked lately) Securom files and registry entries would be installing DRM (the aforementioned Securom). If on the other hand there is no formal definition of DRM, intent is what matters, so the aforementioned entries would not count as DRM, because they exist for a benign reason (for the user to be able to play without someone or something posing a problem).

So no, definition is, by definition, something specific, even if it can change with time. Definition is not something that can be formalized, it's something that is formalized.

P.S. Are you aware of an OS that anyone can download and install, and use with no restrictions, but if they bother to license it they get a few extra things? Care to guess what OS that is?
Good for you, and your company.

Common knowledge and legal knowledge are two very different things. Once a license (retail for example) has been sold, it cannot be revoked. Yet you claim that by upgrading, said license is revoked. Do ask a lawyer, preferably one of those computer grabbing ones you mentioned below.

Yes. Thus why Win10 upgrade is not available for Enterprise or Volume License users.

Get me in contact with one of them, and I will take your bet. My computer against yours.

Definition is based on the nature of DRM, which was driven by malicious intent.
That's exactly what I said above. You missed it. Original intent matters to understand why DRM came into existence and what problems its proponents can create.

And what is that definition? Please post it here.

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/is_windows_10_the_biggest_threat_to_steam_gog/post173

anything that artificially takes away control from the user after purchasing.

The parent that pulls the plug on the child's NES! You heard it here first folks, parents are DRM!

Edit: What about cutscenes? The user isn't in control during a cutscene, while they should be. So are non-interactive cutscenes DRM as well?

Edit 2: There used to be a lovely "Keyboard Lock" option on older computer chassis. Locking the keyboard meant the user couldn't use it, so they couldn't control their machine. Was "Keyboard Lock" DRM as well?

Windows 10 can be a threat to the stupidity that is Steam perhaps; assuming developers put the games up there and take advantage of the store properly so that nearly most new releases are Windows Store releases. But that isn't the case currently. People would rather be forked with Steam than to use the built-in Windows Store, and developers would rather deal with Valve than with Microsoft.

As for GOG, well I dunno about that, but it seems they're picking up the pace. I think what Windows 10 needs is more Xbox social integration and Steam's dead.