• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Gave windows 8 a proper try, still sucks

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
dagamer34 said:
Microsoft isn't like Apple. Windows 7 will be supported until 2020, so you can keep using it until then. Heck, 40% of the world still uses Windows XP today and that OS is 11 years old. If you NEVER want to upgrade, no one is making you. That's why I find these posts silly.
Click to expand...

Well, it's supported until then, but to what extent? There still hasn't been anything official regarding if DX11.1 will be ported to Windows 7 or not

And sooner or later, one will be "forced" to move onto the latest version. XP has had a long life, but now we see more and more games being Vista/Win7 only due to XP not supporting DX11.

If Windows 9/10 is even more tablet-approached and has DX12, gamers will have no choice once games start using that(granted, it will take long until that happens)
 
Spjut said:
Well, it's supported until then, but to what extent? There still hasn't been anything official regarding if DX11.1 will be ported to Windows 7 or not

And sooner or later, one will be "forced" to move onto the latest version. XP has had a long life, but now we see more and more games being Vista/Win7 only due to XP not supporting DX11.

If Windows 9/10 is even more tablet-approached and has DX12, gamers will have no choice once games start using that(granted, it will take long until that happens)
Click to expand...

Microsoft supporting an OS 3 versions back is different from game developers doing the same. If game developers had their way, they'd only support the latest OS and ditch everything else to lower development testing costs.

XP has been around for 11 years and only now are we seeing games that don't support it. I think that's long enough. If we assume that Microsoft is going to continue to stick with a 3 year strategy, that means we'll get a new OS in 2015 and 2018, 2 more chances for you to move off of Windows 7.
 
If i could remove the "metro" menu and use classic shell, it would be fine. I know there will be several 3rd party W7 style start menu's ready after W8 is released, but not sure if anyone is working on a "metro" remover of sorts.

What weirds me out about W8 is going between metro, desktop and full screen limited apps to windowed apps is really an eyeball shock. Its also weird how playing a music file in my desktop folder defaults to a sudden full screen metro app.....yeah, i can't do it. I'm all for changing UI's if its efficient and flows well...like Gnome shell for Linux, i love that UI..but W8 feels left handed after its been chopped off, there is no getting used to it for me.
 
dagamer34 said:
Microsoft supporting an OS 3 versions back is different from game developers doing the same. If game developers had their way, they'd only support the latest OS and ditch everything else to lower development testing costs.

XP has been around for 11 years and only now are we seeing games that don't support it. I think that's long enough. If we assume that Microsoft is going to continue to stick with a 3 year strategy, that means we'll get a new OS in 2015 and 2018, 2 more chances for you to move off of Windows 7.
Click to expand...

Sure we can move on from Windows 7 by then, but what I am afraid of, and what I think others are afraid of too, is that all the future versions of Windows will be even more tablet-focused than Windows 8 is. That Windows 8 is simply an early taste of what's to come next.

I don't want to move off of Windows 7 to Windows 9/10 if they are taking the same approach as Windows 8. If Windows 9/10 however was more like Win7/XP, I'd have no problems moving on from it. I'd probably do that already if Win8 weren't so tablet-focused.
 
The only appeal I saw concerning windows 8 was the price. I thought it was too buggy using flash. Since I watch a lot of streaming video, I am not interested in a product that does not work. I just dont want a tablet OS. I could just buy a talet with the linux OS. My daughter had a tablet that worked pretty well made by ASUS. The only thing is a tablet seemed slow. However, it was handy the way we could skype a phone call to talk with my son from mobile locations. However, I still feel a need for a desktop or HTPC.
 
If you have windows 7 why get windows 8 and use third party tools to make it work like windows 7? Just use Windows 7! Better yet lower the price of Windows 7!!!
 
Spjut said:
Sure we can move on from Windows 7 by then, but what I am afraid of, and what I think others are afraid of too, is that all the future versions of Windows will be even more tablet-focused than Windows 8 is. That Windows 8 is simply an early taste of what's to come next.

I don't want to move off of Windows 7 to Windows 9/10 if they are taking the same approach as Windows 8. If Windows 9/10 however was more like Win7/XP, I'd have no problems moving on from it. I'd probably do that already if Win8 weren't so tablet-focused.
Click to expand...

If windows 9/10 are more of the same crap ill seriously have to go with linux instead. Ive already checked and most of the games i play are in wines platinum or gold categories so they work well immediately or with a few tweaks. I can live without BF3... Not ready to jump on that bandwagon yet though, we shall see come windows 9 🙂

Only worrying thing is they don't seem to have DX10/11 figured out on wine yet.
 
piasabird said:
If you have windows 7 why get windows 8 and use third party tools to make it work like windows 7? Just use Windows 7! Better yet lower the price of Windows 7!!!
Click to expand...

probably for the faster boots..etc. It is pretty very snappy feeling OS, though i wonder if it suffers from the dreaded Windows age degradation. I havn't even installed anything for a while on my W7 and can still notice some things here and there really dragging.
 
Dominato3r said:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/01/04/refresh-and-reset-your-pc.aspx
:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

a feature yes, Which i suppose is the answer to my question, the fact that it exists says its an age degrading OS unlike every other modern OS. but sadly that does not prevent Windows from degrading. I blame MS's archaic need to remain legacy compatable.

A predefined "good state" should exist for things like corruption from hardware or poorly coded apps/virus..etc. Not because the OS uses the registry and lets developers do as they please to it. Which wouldn't be bad if it wasn't so necessary to rely on 3rd party apps to do ...well anything in Windows worth doing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
hhhd1 said:
People who directly upgrade from xp to 8 will be pissed.
Click to expand...

Anyone who went from XP (sorry, but this OS is a joke compared to today's choices) to a 21st century OS would have to re-learn quite a lot. That's the price of progress. I'm not saying the current batch of operating systems are perfect, but even most Linux variants are a better choice than XP.

And, FWIW, I liked the Preview and plan on giving the final release of Win8 a fair try. The new interface (whatever they're calling it now) does not anger, threaten, or frighten me.
 
Last edited:
jhansman said:
Anyone who went from XP (sorry, but this OS is a joke compared to today's choices) to a 21st century OS would have to re-learn quite a lot. That's the price of progress. I'm not saying the current batch of operating systems are perfect, but even most Linux variants are a better choice than XP.

And, FWIW, I liked the Preview and plan on giving the final release of Win8 a fair try. The new interface (whatever they're calling it now) does not anger, threaten, or frighten me.
Click to expand...

I do not agree with saying "That's the price of progress.", you are insinuating that windows 8 compared to xp is 'progress' , when it actually has a less usable interface.

Windows xp has a good network/ntfs/security-center/start-menu, I use it on a daily basis inside vmware, and used it until 4 months ago in a home pc, never felt that it was old, .. never felt about it the way i felt about windows 98/ME compared to xp.

There is still a huge percentage of users still using XP, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems

And those WILL BE FORCED to upgrade in ~2 years or less, and the normal choice is windows 8, since they want to make sure that their new os will last for as long as possible.

What many enterprises do is: (specially when on a budget)
Upgrade to the newest, and wait until its absolutely necessary to upgrade again, keep upgrade as far as possible from each other.

MS appears to have nothing new to offer, so they are taking some things back.
 
If there is one terrible thing about XP it is the networking. Vista was a HUGE improvement over XP is networking. The damn troubleshooter actually works in it.
 
I think Microsoft is doing the right thing with Windows 8. Do I like the new start screen and lack of start menu? No I don't, that doesn't mean they aren't doing the right thing for the future of the OS. 🙂

I recommend using Start8, it's awesome and allows the benefits of Windows 8 with the familiarity of Windows 7

As stated above it can be downloaded for free here:
http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/
 
no need for windows soon. linux, in the form of android, is near its takeover goals. they have games now, so watch out microsoft.
 
DarkVision said:
a feature yes, Which i suppose is the answer to my question, the fact that it exists says its an age degrading OS unlike every other modern OS. but sadly that does not prevent Windows from degrading. I blame MS's archaic need to remain legacy compatable.

A predefined "good state" should exist for things like corruption from hardware or poorly coded apps/virus..etc. Not because the OS uses the registry and lets developers do as they please to it. Which wouldn't be bad if it wasn't so necessary to rely on 3rd party apps to do ...well anything in Windows worth doing.
Click to expand...

Lets be fair here. Android has this feature and so does iOS. I think it's a needed feature to be honest. It'll reduce the amount of troubleshooting and helping you'll have to do for family and friends, which is always a plus.
 
Muffinsrevenger said:
Not really, but the whole "ohgodsmetro" reaction is pretty stupid
What they have made is essentially something that behaves like the old start menu, only it has more options

I mean, winkey+three first letters in the program you want to use still finds everything more or less instantly, and if you for some reason you have some sort of strange allergic reaction to the look of the damn thing then this still only expose you for about .5 seconds at most

Iv'e got into the habit of using the calender app, thats about it so far, apart from leaving my machine at the metro interface when going afk since it looks way more stylish then the regular desktop, but it has in no way shape or form got in the way of everyday use


I understand peoples negative reactions to the design choices being made, they are quite brave and i'm fairly sure i would not have done the same if i was responsible for a product so critical to my company, but the sheer amount of "nhargh mettro r terrible y0" reactions i see across the web have gone past the point of being stupid ages ago

Chill out, sit down, breathe and think, then go on to think about what part of your everyday usage is actually impacted negatively by having the option of accessing simple apps on your desktop, and compare that to the benefit of performance gains and all the other thousands of little upgrades windows 8 has compared to 7

Raging about how hard it is to remove and replace it is pretty pointless, just stick to 7 if you really don't even feel like adapting
Click to expand...

Hey, its a forum for discussing operating systems. I come here to read what people have to say about operating systems.

If you want to say your piece, fine. It isn't your job to try and regulate what other people say and if there's a thousand threads then there's a thousand people who want to say something.
 
Honestly, I don't get the hate.

All that's really missing is the All Programs list. Everything else is still readily accessible.

I used the CP and had issues with it and most of them seem to have been addressed. The only one not address is a clock live tile showing you the time. That's the only thing that gets me. They put a lot of effort in to a lot of other tiles, but ignored it. I've seen 2 promos for windows 8 phones from different companies and BOTH have a live tile clock. But that's really nitpicking.

I'll admit to not having installed everything, but i've installed about 10 things and everything appears on the start screen. The problem with that is that I wind up removing 80% of the tiles that it makes because I don't want links to all the mini add-ons and help files programs add to the old start menu on the start screen. It's not hard to take them off the screen. But, I shouldn't really have to either. I expect it'll be address in a SP. Is it a knock on 8, sure. But not enough to relegate it to suck status and dump it. I also think developers need to address it as well. I've seen programs with 1 or 2 executables in them add 20 things to the start menu (help files, pdf's, web links, etc).

What i've noticed is, it's faster, smoother, and has better driver support than any other version of windows i've come across before.

I'm not a fan of apps, but nothing says I have to use them either. I realized why they're there, though. The ultimate plan is to have the same OS on multiple devices. Obviously, what works on a tablet doesn't work on a desktop or a phone and all other combinations of that. Still, there are apps on your phone or you tablet you'd probably like to have on your desktop. Not all, but some. With the same OS on all devices, you have the same apps/programs on all devices. In that vein, there's more overt tablet/phone stuff on the desktop because that stuff didn't exist before and needed more of the work.

Sure, it'd be nice to turn it off completely, but I have to admit, i'm getting to like a heads up screen telling me stock quotes, weather, etc. I can also click the desktop button, sorry, tile, there and be immediately at my desktop. It takes a fraction of second. It's also the norm for me that i'll spend a whopping 5 seconds a day on the start screen and most of my time on the desktop. I don't miss the start button, though I thought I would. Most stuff is easily accessible by right clicking the start screen icon on the lower left of the desktop. The only thing missing seems to be the all programs list which I rarely use in 7 anyhow.

I remember the launch of Windows 95 and I heard lots of the same complaints then. What was wrong with the 3.11 interface? I knew where everything was and it worked just great. Why do they feel the need to change? Why do I need this start button? What was wrong with the 3.11 screen? My <insert hardware here> doesn't work on 95 because there are no drivers.

Frankly, there was more of a difference between 3.1/3.11 and 95 than there is from 7 to 8.
 
Dominato3r said:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/01/04/refresh-and-reset-your-pc.aspx
:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I quote:
Refresh your PC – Keep all personal data, Metro style apps, and important settings from the PC, and reinstall Windows.
Click to expand...

lol. What an idiotic features. If I read the "sub-text" correctly you will still loose all standard Windows desktop apps. Makes sense because lots of install/uninstall of those usually leads to Windows degradation.

Also if you choose the Reset option (or do a manual reinstall) you loose your metro apps. Now people claiming that it's cool to have the same OS on all devices i only agree if they also automatically sync to each other so I don't have to install an app on my PC, tablet and phone. Again the subtext here is clear, what metro apps you have is simply device-dependent.

Considering this having the same OS on all devices becomes pretty useless. Whether I install skype 3 times on the same OS or once in Windows, iOS (iPad, not that I have one but a possible scenario)) and in Android doesn't really make a big difference to me.
 
Windows 8/Metro to me just seems like another attempt in a long line of business moves to copy other companies (most notably Apple), which is what MS has been doing since Windows. With the exception of the early adopters, it's really Microsoft's job to convince the masses (users and developers) that they need to switch.

That said, I did purchase a new laptop back in July and am eligible for the $14.99 upgrade price. I'll probably get it at that price just to see what it's all about but I plan on sticking with Win 7 until I have some compelling reason/s to switch or just really like Windows 8, which so far from everything I've read and seen, looks like a pass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top