Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Operating Systems' started by Maximilian, Sep 5, 2012.
That sounds more correct, unfortunately.
My point is, so does 7 and 8 isn't faster in any significant way. It's "under the hood" improvements are minor, the UI change isn't, and sadly it didn't change for the better. I essentially have the option of Windows 3.11 on steroids or Windows 7 Safe Mode look. Since the IU is what I'm interacting with most, it's more important to me than saving a second or two on boot up.
It's a mobile OS ported to desktops. And just as console ports aren't as good on PCs as a game designed from the ground up with PC in mind, neither are operating systems. Even Apple with a 13% market share is smart enough to give their users a proper desktop OS with OSX while maintaining a mobile OS in iOS. Microsoft could have at the very least, not butcher the desktop mode, but that would have made too much sense I suppose.
Sure its faster,I already posted a link to prove it since you doubt all the Win8 users that say so ,don't know what you want .
You can argue Win7 is a fast as Win8 in certain situations,however there is no doubt Win8 does have a few performance advantages,lets see how well it does down the road with more mature drivers and updates from Microsoft etc...after all Win7 has had three years advantage.
I am a Windows 8 user also, I'm saying its not faster in any significant way. Insignificant enough that i can't tell the difference in startup/shut down times with apparently is the biggest speed improvement. What I want is a better OS.
I want metro gone as a laptop user and aero and start menu back. Other then that I like win 8 it's quick, clean, and runs smooth on an upgrade from win 7.
I was thinking about doing a clean install, but I completely deleted all the old windows 7 files and see no need to do a clean install since I'm having zero issues with programs or functionality.
Used windows 7 64 bit made new installations, then loaded up windows 8 64 bit without any previous testing, took a few to get used to metro, once that logic was explored, I just enjoy windows 8.
Its faster than windows 7, its easier to use and even though I dont spend much time in Metro going there is fast and having a visual view of all the programs installed and what one I want pinned to use in desktop mode is a good one.
New features for social interacting, skydrive and other options is good also but its faster by far to use for me. No delay and just works.
Plus any startup time discrepancy is likely attributed to UEFI vs BIOS. Windows 7 can be installed using UEFI as well.
So you get increase bootup and shut down speed, improved battery life on Tablets/Notebooks etc..Microsoft Store with 1000s of software including free stuff like games etc..,Windows Live sync,,XBOX intergration,new multi monitor features,IE10 (I don't use its but its new for Win8)Integrated Cloud Storage / Sync,improved Task Manager ,you also get improved security ie ,
I could list more but it has NEW features,another link to prove it http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/whats-new-in-windows-8/
I could throw in DX11.1 on Win8 which is a minor DX update,however here is the info ,
from your quoted text..
"We only wish the same could be said of the new interface."
All the UI changes would be fine as additions to the W7 UI, but not as replacements.
No OS is perfect you will always get those that like dislike the layout etc,happens on every OS,however still holds true Win8 has quite a few new features.
Full review below,
You can keep saying it boots up faster and I can keep saying the speed difference is marginal enought that I don't notice it, and neither one of us will convince the other. IE 10 will be available for Windows 7, i don't own an xbox. I already have access to thousands of free games on my iphone and ipad, I play exactly 0 of them. I'll concern my self with DX 11.1 when games actually use it.
Funny thing is a lot of Win8 users from all over the web including many different forums say it boots faster,I've notice it too,even official website benchmarks that I linked,also other websites prove it,don't know what more you want
Most users upgraded for a reason, forget about boot speed,all the features I listed earlier including native USB 3.0 support and pricing is worth it alone IMHO.
I want a desktop UI that doesn't suck. That was pretty clear from my very first post in the thread. Most users upgraded becuase they could. I suppose that's a reason. The features you list are either available in Windows 7, going to be available in windows 7 or are meaningless... Like "native" support for USB 3... As opposed to what? Installing a driver?
Those features are unique to Win8,as to desktop UI,funny got mine (desktop UI)working great,I don't even need Metro for 99% of my usage,end of the day nobody is forcing you to buy or use Win8,making pointless post is not helping.
Yes, a crappy desktop UI is unique to Windows 8. I agree. Mine works as intended too, and that's the problem. No where did I claim I'm being forced to buy windows 8. I'm talking about how I think it's a poor implementation of a desktop OS, not how I'm being forced to buy it. Anything else you're confused about? If you think my posts are pointless, then stop replying to them. I'm certainly not going to stop posting becuase you think I should.
pointlessness is in the eye of the beholder.
I, and others, keep saying there's no reason that the new ui features needed to replace the W7 UI..and you and others keep responding that W8 is wonderful.
That isn't the point. The point is, there's no reason for W8 not to still have the W7 features that have been removed.
Same thing with Aero. No reason to get rid of it, except someone at MS decided flat big rectangles in primary colors are the greatest thing since the wheel and they are going to MAKE everyone conform to their vision.
Try being bit more constructive rather then another Win8 sucks post,how many do we need?
This morning on the local computer radio talk show, Windows Hate was discussed. It was proposed that MS is speeding up the turn around between OS releases (eg, they are probably not going to let Win 7 hang around for ten years like XP anymore) and thus pressure is on to reduce costs limiting how many separate OSes will be supported in the field. So I think that is part of what is being observed.
From all the adds Im now receiving, sure looks like Win Hate is being shoved down consumer throats as the computers advertised by the big houses and hardware manufacturers screens are sporting "it".
Aero is just eye candy it does nothing more then that,consumes more battery power on laptops etc...Win8 can be made to look like Win7 desktop,however I will say Microsoft should of left an OPTION to keep Aero/Start button for desktop users, that would of made more them happy IMHO.
Btw I got my desktop like Win7 and that's without any mods on Win8.
It seems like some people just want to complain so they make threads on a forum. I suppose thats ok but when you have people making counterpoints and the op goes back to the same complaints that aren't pointing out anything we didn't know about for a while, it gets old.
How many times can we hear "metro ui sucks" before nbody really cares because they are using desktop mode?
About as many as there are posts that say it's better becuase it boots marginally faster.
I don't have to worry about my battery life on my desktop. I have my profiles on my laptop so that aero is enabled when plugged in and disabled on battery. I can have my cake and eat it too in Windows 7.
How about, let it run it's course?
I can recall multiple articles in the past that took Microsoft to task for 'not leading' and simply giving people what they wanted. Two specific cases being the UI and X86/X64.
I can recall old articled admonishing them for not pushing hard enough for 64 bit computing. The first argument was they took to long, and when the did XP they didn't push it enough and no one really cared until Vista and 7. 64bit is the clear way to go, yet there's still a 32bit Win8.
Another one is the UI. This article was during the XP tenure, but it basically got after them about not doing anything about the UI since '95 and that it was time to move the UI forward. You can make the arguement that the UI experience didn't really change between 1995 and 2012 until Win8 came out.
It's a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't I guess. I know people get accustomed to things, but things never move forward if you don't try. Love it or hate it, touch is in. It's not to say the kb and mouse are out, but touch is definitely in. Getting into that game is reason enough for Win8 from a business POV (if you're MS that is). Is the traditional desktop going away? No, but a lot of desktops WILL be obsoleted due to tablets. How many people out there now use their tablet for email and internet instead of a desktop? I'm sure it's a considerable number.
On thing metro in Win8 does is it puts the OS in front of everyone - for better or for worse. The plus side is you don't have to spend any time in it if you don't want to - other than the 2.5 seconds it takes to load the start screen and click the desktop tile.
Did metro NEED to replace the start button? That's a fair question. However, those who think that answer is an emphatic no, need to accept the fact there are others that think like the change and others who may not like the start screen as it is, but feel something WAS needed to replace the all programs list in the start menu. Me, i fall into the last camp. I don't think necessarily metro is the answer, but I don't think the old version was either. I always found all programs clunky and no overly organized and it frequently made it a PITA to find things. I can find things easier in the Start Screen, but i'm not sold on it at this point. I am interested, though, to see what can/will be done with it in the hands of developers.
You forget we are talking about Win8 which is designed for Tablet/Notebooks as well as Desktop users, Win7 is primary a desktop OS,anyway you can read more info here on why Aero was dropped,http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/05/microsoft-drops-aero-glass-ui-in-windows-8/ ,
Right I'm off to game on my Win8,got some Geth/Cannibals to kill in ME3 MP.
It's not in dispute. They said that themselves with the release of 7 (or possibly just after vista). Vista 2007, 7 2009, 8, 2012. Been roughly 2.5 years between each.
As far as limiting support, it's not a new practice amongst software companies at all. Autodesk, for example, puts out an entire new product line every year in march/april. For the last 8-10 years, their policy has been to only support 3 versions. This past march/april, their 2013 line came out. After that, they only supported 2013, 12, and 11 products. 2010 and prior are not.
XP may have gotten a Methusalethan (sp?) lifespan seeing as it's not due to hit EOL until 2014, but it doesn't mean they'll shorten 7 to force upgrades - especially if they find 80% of big business is still using it. And that's what got the EOL of XP extended - big business.
I still don't think you understand my point even though I've said it multiple times...
I'm not forgetting what Windows 8 is designed for at all, that is, in-fact, my chief rub with Windows 8. The desktop-friendly UI has been neglected in favor of the touch-friendly UI. This is great for a touch screen (I actually liked Windows 8 when I played around with the surface for a while, much more so than any Windows 7 tablet even) but dislike it on my desktop where I use a keyboard and mouse, even in the classic mode because it simply looks stale compared to W7.
You also seemed to ignore what I said before and keep bringing up battery life, so I'll say it again. My desktop is plugged in, battery life is not a concern. My power profiles on my laptop are set such that Aero/transparency is enabled when plugged in and automatically disabled when running on battery. If you want to stop having these circular arguments, I suggest you actually read my counter points to the points you're trying to make.
Right I'm off to game on my Win7. I have some Templar's to assassinate.
See what I did there?