Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: ACE on May 07, 2013, 03:18:06 PM
-
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/330c8b8e-b66b-11e2-93ba-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2SaQWst2b
Saw this while surfing the internet. ;)
-
When I saw it I thought of my typography instructor that insisted Windows 8 was the ultimate in design for appeal to users of all ages and demographics.
-
Is the link still working? On my phone it is wanting me to sign up to something. On actual machines it worked fine when I was on it earlier.
-
It tries to push a popup, maybe that's what you are getting.
-
Maybe.
-
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/330c8b8e-b66b-11e2-93ba-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2SaQWst2b
Saw this while surfing the internet. ;)
And? As I said the user interface can be a bit annoying but it's personal preference. I had no troubles at all learning and living with it - but then again I've had to learn not only windows but OSX and several linux desktops, AmigaOS etc. during the years. The core of Windows8 will not change to anything, it will still be an improved version of Windows7.
I find it sad really how many people know nothing but windows.
PS: I read about the subject of this article a day or two ago already.
-
Not sure what people are so upset about. I got my new laptop just last week with Windows 8 Pro. Yes, the interface is different (about as different as Windows 95 was from Windows 3.1), but people made that transition. I am not sure why people are so stuck in the mud about this one. It took me about an hour to get used to navigating and how things work and of course I still look for the start button all the time, but no wonder after all these years of having it.
Personally, I just think MS should stick with it and move forward. In a year it will be the standard.
Some people (including me) just don't like change. This time I just butched up and little and took the plunge. So far my experience (other than getting used to the new interface) has been positive.
-
I think most of us reading and commenting these threads have no problems learning a new interface. But what about our parents and grandparents? Not to mention the vast masses of AH players who constantly ask why a sub $500 laptop with an Intel video chip isn't working like a perfect gaming machine just because it's new.
Computers and their operating systems would evolve much faster if all their users had the capability to adapt to the novelties. Just think about the floppy disk: The latest common variation, 1.44Mb, was widely used for twenty years. As late as about five years ago a tech editor recommended a floppy drive and bootable floppies for recovery purposes, not to mention the early SATA drives which needed floppy based drivers during Windows installation.
We aren't all in the same train, and some people even stay at the station...
-
I think most of us reading and commenting these threads have no problems learning a new interface. But what about our parents and grandparents? Not to mention the vast masses of AH players who constantly ask why a sub $500 laptop with an Intel video chip isn't working like a perfect gaming machine just because it's new.
Computers and their operating systems would evolve much faster if all their users had the capability to adapt to the novelties. Just think about the floppy disk: The latest common variation, 1.44Mb, was widely used for twenty years. As late as about five years ago a tech editor recommended a floppy drive and bootable floppies for recovery purposes, not to mention the early SATA drives which needed floppy based drivers during Windows installation.
We aren't all in the same train, and some people even stay at the station...
My uncle who has 5 thumbs for fingers was positively surprised when he saw Windows8 for the first time after I replaced his pirated and infected XP with the cheap Win8 offer. He has had a Windows phone for some time and Win8 had the same familiar tile interface like his phone. I suspect that the reaction will be the same for many windows phone owners. Of course those are not plentiful...
But the fact that there are now rumors on Apple changing iOS7 to a tile interface also mean that Win8/Mobile is not all bad.
-
The user interface is a pathetic excuse for a desktop design. It is not that great for a mobile design either, considering how much better and easier it could have been.
Accepting and/or defending mediocrity, as being appropriate, ends up being all you get. Personally, I will not accept mediocrity as a standard. It has nothing to do with being different. The user interface is a bad design.
Windows 8 still has many problems and shortcomings compared to Windows 7, no matter how many times anyone claims it is better. Stupid things. like not remembering/recording settings, as Windows 7, or even XP did, is simply ludicrous.
Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, said Windows 8 is akin to trying to merge the functionality of a toaster and a refrigerator together. Sure, it can be done, but how useful is it?
Intel retired CEO Paul Otellini said, Windows 8 is not ready. It has too many problems for any business to consider it as a viable solution.
For the desktop, it is a BAD design. Why anyone would defend it as being anything other than that, for the desktop, is quite beyond me. Even the designer of the interface has finally admitted it is not the best approach for the current desktop.
-
The user interface is a pathetic excuse for a desktop design. It is not that great for a mobile design either, considering how much better and easier it could have been.
Accepting and/or defending mediocrity, as being appropriate, ends up being all you get. Personally, I will not accept mediocrity as a standard. It has nothing to do with being different. The user interface is a bad design.
Windows 8 still has many problems and shortcomings compared to Windows 7, no matter how many times anyone claims it is better. Stupid things. like not remembering/recording settings, as Windows 7, or even XP did, is simply ludicrous.
Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, said Windows 8 is akin to trying to merge the functionality of a toaster and a refrigerator together. Sure, it can be done, but how useful is it?
Intel retired CEO Paul Otellini said, Windows 8 is not ready. It has too many problems for any business to consider it as a viable solution.
For the desktop, it is a BAD design. Why anyone would defend it as being anything other than that, for the desktop, is quite beyond me. Even the designer of the interface has finally admitted it is not the best approach for the current desktop.
Sure Win8 has some quirks and annoyances but it also has many improvements. Faster bootup, leaner running system, improved file copying etc. As with all new versions the problematic parts will be updated without a doubt. Windows blue has been rumored to bring the start menu back for example.
The main point is that Win8 is far from being unusable or bad. It works exceptionally well for gaming use - especially if you compare it to the alternatives OSX or linux :)
-
Sure Win8 has some quirks and annoyances but it also has many improvements. Faster bootup, leaner running system, improved file copying etc. As with all new versions the problematic parts will be updated without a doubt. Windows blue has been rumored to bring the start menu back for example.
The main point is that Win8 is far from being unusable or bad. It works exceptionally well for gaming use - especially if you compare it to the alternatives OSX or linux :)
Faster bootup
The Windows 8 box we have in our office boots much slower (80%) than my personal Windows 7 box does. Same hardware.
leaner running system
My personal Windows 7 box uses less resources than our Windows 8 box does, by about 15%. My system also runs games better (i.e. smoother, better frame rates....).
improved file copying
Explain this one as my home system copies faster than the Windows 8 system does. Looking at the system binaries, I can find no differences, in this area. My system is only slightly faster, and that is due to the reduced overhead of my system. The filesystem code is identical as well. Windows 8 added the "Any user" back into the security defaults, where Windows 7 had removed it. Easy to add that back though, if needed (sharing).
My point being, Windows 7 could be made to do everything as well as Windows 8 does. It really is not that different. If an end user can make it happen, then it would be trivial for Microsoft to do so as well. Therein lies the problem. For all its hype, Windows 8 does not deliver anything more than Windows 7 could and takes away a number of things Windows 7 provides out of the box.
-
I don't want to have to login to Facebook and many other social networks just to be able to do anything with Win. (End Sarcasm). The interface for 8 is awful. You seem to be only seeing the positive things about it. Your looking at it from a Win/Win situation. If you are going to argue about it at least see both sides of it. I'm sure you will say you do. However, it doesn't seem to be that way.
-
I think most of us reading and commenting these threads have no problems learning a new interface. But what about our parents and grandparents? Not to mention the vast masses of AH players who constantly ask why a sub $500 laptop with an Intel video chip isn't working like a perfect gaming machine just because it's new.
No offense intended, but if we follow that logic we would all still be on DOS or Windows 3.1. Technology can't advance at the pace of the slowest adopter or it will never advance.
In general I think most people are letting their personal preferences and natural resistance to change bias their opinion. Does Windows 8 need more work? Of course...what Windows OS since 95 didn't need additional tweaking and improving. Is the interface different and hard to get used to? Absolutely, but the desktop is only a click away and otherwise the interface is very customizable. Is it the worst/most mediocre ever? Hardly. Anyone remember Vista or Millennium?
My personal experience with it so far has been that it is faster and more stable than Windows 7 machines I have compared it against.
I don't see how any of this is accepting or defending mediocrity. It is what it is. It will be improved upon as every other release of Windows has in the past. No, it isn't Windows 7 or even Windows XP (which was a pretty strong workstation OS), but it is far from junk or bad (regardless of what the pundits say).
DISCLAIMER: My experience with Windows 8 is limited because I just started working with it last week. Perhaps I haven't run into all this terrible badness and mediocrity that is being talked about...
-
Faster bootup
The Windows 8 box we have in our office boots much slower (80%) than my personal Windows 7 box does. Same hardware.
leaner running system
My personal Windows 7 box uses less resources than our Windows 8 box does, by about 15%. My system also runs games better (i.e. smoother, better frame rates....).
improved file copying
Explain this one as my home system copies faster than the Windows 8 system does. Looking at the system binaries, I can find no differences, in this area. My system is only slightly faster, and that is due to the reduced overhead of my system. The filesystem code is identical as well. Windows 8 added the "Any user" back into the security defaults, where Windows 7 had removed it. Easy to add that back though, if needed (sharing).
My point being, Windows 7 could be made to do everything as well as Windows 8 does. It really is not that different. If an end user can make it happen, then it would be trivial for Microsoft to do so as well. Therein lies the problem. For all its hype, Windows 8 does not deliver anything more than Windows 7 could and takes away a number of things Windows 7 provides out of the box.
You have admitted tweaking your Win7 setup extensively and now you compare it to vanilla Win8 :cheers:
It does not matter if an end user can make this or that happen, it's NOT happening to any vanilla Win7 user and will not happen without huge research and years of your kind of experience. You're totally comparing apples to oranges. The fact that Win8 performs in many ways as good as your extensively tweaked Win7 box speaks volumes on how good out of the box experience it provides!
You're losing your credibility there, nothing else.
About the file copy...
File copy experience
Microsoft has significantly enhanced the file copy experience in Windows 8, making it both faster and easier to use. If you’re familiar with file copying from previous Windows versions, you know that each file (and move) operation creates its own copy or move window, and that each subsequent operation slows everything down to a crawl.
This no longer happens in Windows 8. All file copies and moves now occur in a single window in which you can pause any copy or move processes if you’d like to give precedence to another operation. And file copies and moves occur much more quickly than before, even when you have multiple file operations going at once. File copy/move conflicts are also handled in a far more elegant fashion that before, with simpler remediation.
(http://winsupersite.com/content/content/144727/file-copy.jpg)
This along native ability to mount .iso and .vhd images show significant improvements over Win7.
-
once again, Ripley swallows the media b.s. hook, line and sinker. win8 may get improved to something besides being another overly hyped operating system with the next release but as of right now, there is nothing about it for any desktop computer user with an inkling of understanding to switch from win7.
-
You have admitted tweaking your Win7 setup extensively and now you compare it to vanilla Win8 :cheers:
It does not matter if an end user can make this or that happen, it's NOT happening to any vanilla Win7 user and will not happen without huge research and years of your kind of experience. You're totally comparing apples to oranges. The fact that Win8 performs in many ways as good as your extensively tweaked Win7 box speaks volumes on how good out of the box experience it provides!
You're losing your credibility there, nothing else.
About the file copy...
(http://winsupersite.com/content/content/144727/file-copy.jpg)
This along native ability to mount .iso and .vhd images show significant improvements over Win7.
So when you say Windows 8 is faster and better, than what are you comparing it to? Those are relative comparisons. I assumed it was Windows 7.
My point was that Windows 8 is not anything special if you can take a previous version of the operating system and have it be faster and leaner than Windows 8, without resorting to losing features.
You claim mounting an .iso/.vhd is a significant improvement, yet Windows 8 cannot play a DVD. Your previous response to that made that no big deal. Why is it is "significant improvement"? What does it actually accomplish for most people?
Files copies at the speed of the hard drive are as fast as they will get. Changing the dialog box to group it really does not do anything for the performance once you hit the hard drive speed limit.
-
So when you say Windows 8 is faster and better, than what are you comparing it to? Those are relative comparisons. I assumed it was Windows 7.
My point was that Windows 8 is not anything special if you can take a previous version of the operating system and have it be faster and leaner than Windows 8, without resorting to losing features.
You claim mounting an .iso/.vhd is a significant improvement, yet Windows 8 cannot play a DVD. Your previous response to that made that no big deal. Why is it is "significant improvement"? What does it actually accomplish for most people?
Vanilla Win8 is faster in many operations (not all) and has more features than vanilla Win7. This is an undisputable fact, verified by several independent benchmarkers online. Also I severely doubt your claim on Win7 booting as fast as a properly configured Win8 with secure boot.
Whatever features are lost in Win8 are another discussion. I haven't found missing features so far in Win8 that I would have missed, except the start menu. After I discovered the right click menu I stoped missing the start menu, too.
-
once again, Ripley swallows the media b.s. hook, line and sinker. win8 may get improved to something besides being another overly hyped operating system with the next release but as of right now, there is nothing about it for any desktop computer user with an inkling of understanding to switch from win7.
Once again you're generalizing and probably speaking with no experience on the subject. I have used Win8 since the beta and have had no problems with it. Quite the contrary my user experience has been very positive right from the beta.
Nobody is advising anyone to switch away from Win7, I'm saying that if a new computer comes with Win8 or someone plans to buy Win8 there's no reason for all the drama you guys are spewing.
-
Vanilla Win8 is faster in many operations (not all) and has more features than vanilla Win7. This is an undisputable fact.
Whatever features are lost in Win8 are another discussion. I haven't found missing features so far in Win8 that I would have missed, except the start menu. After I discovered the right click menu I stoped missing the start menu, too.
I have yet to find anything Windows 8 is faster at. Care to give me an example? I will be happy to test it. Just keep in mind, I am going to use my system to test with. You claim it is not apples to apples. What I have tweaked in my system does absolutely nothing to alter the functionality of the operating system. You are not privy to the exact details, which makes you unqualified to make a determination as to how my system compares to a stock Windows 7 system or to a Windows 8 system.
For the record, all I did was exactly what Microsoft did to Windows 8.
I have never said Windows 8 does not have more features than Windows 7. For example, Windows 8 allows Microsoft to control what you have installed on your computer. Windows 7 does not. Windows 8 does drop some features as well.
As an example, do you like the default "Control Panel" layout of Windows 8? If you do than you will not miss the fact you cannot have Windows 8 remember the setting you chose for it. That same thing plays out all over the place in Windows 8.
EDIT: I really do not care if you doubt how fast my system boots. It does not make it untrue. When I first installed Windows 8, I was so disappointed at how slow it booted compared to my old Windows XP box. My Windows 7 box is slightly slower than my old XP box, but palatable at 8-9 seconds (measured from the time the BIOS init is done to the time I get the login prompt).
-
I have yet to find anything Windows 8 is faster at. Care to give me an example? I will be happy to test it. Just keep in mind, I am going to use my system to test with. You claim it is not apples to apples. What I have tweaked in my system does absolutely nothing to alter the functionality of the operating system. You are not privy to the exact details, which makes you unqualified to make a determination as to how my system compares to a stock Windows 7 system or to a Windows 8 system.
For the record, all I did was exactly what Microsoft did to Windows 8.
So essentially you're saying any consumer can now go and buy the ready tweaked version of windows out of the box. How are you not seeing how you're your own counter argument?
Here is a Win8 speed comparison to Win7: http://usabilitygeek.com/windows-8-vs-windows-7-speed-and-performance-testing/
At the end we concluded that Windows 8 is faster than Windows 7 in some aspects such as startup time, shut down time, wake up from sleep, multimedia performance, web browsers performance, transferring large file and Microsoft excel performance but it is slower in 3D graphic performance and high resolution gaming performance. Battery life improved enough to be noticeable. Moreover Windows 8 is significantly more secure than Windows 7 and it is basically designed to take advantage of touch screens while Windows 7 is only for desktops.
The gaming performance is driver related, some benchmarks have got opposite results there.
I have never said Windows 8 does not have more features than Windows 7. For example, Windows 8 allows Microsoft to control what you have installed on your computer. Windows 7 does not. Windows 8 does drop some features as well.
As an example, do you like the default "Control Panel" layout of Windows 8? If you do than you will not miss the fact you cannot have Windows 8 remember the setting you chose for it. That same thing plays out all over the place in Windows 8.
I don't care for the layout of the control panel. First of all I very rarely have to use it and second the desktop search makes finding things extremely easy in Win8. As what goes for 'control what you have installed' it only affects Metro applications in the same way as Apple controls whatever can exist in Apple store and can pull malicious apps if need be. Microsoft has the full ability to remove any file from your computer as it is, if they chose to include that kind of a 'feature' to some patch for example :)
EDIT: I really do not care if you doubt how fast my system boots. It does not make it untrue. When I first installed Windows 8, I was so disappointed at how slow it booted compared to my old Windows XP box. My Windows 7 box is slightly slower than my old XP box, but palatable at 8-9 seconds.
And yet for anyone using a regular non-tweaked Win7 it takes 20-50 seconds to boot to desktop. Others do not have the privilege of having your tweaked version, they have to get it in the form of Win8.
I have to wonder - would you accept Win8 better if they called it Win7.1 instead? Because that's pretty much what it is - a tweaked version of Win7.
-
Once again you're generalizing and probably speaking with no experience on the subject. I have used Win8 since the beta and have had no problems with it. Quite the contrary my user experience has been very positive right from the beta.
no, i'm not generalizing in any manner, you happen to swallow (with some amount of pride) every piece of propaganda b.s. you read. i tested win8 in alpha and beta, nothing about it was even satisfactory. maybe it's because i was looking for problems, something i do daily in my career, and i wasn't disappointed in my search. it wasn't as bad a vista or me, but there is/was nothing positive enough to compel me to use it until i'm forced to.
-
no, i'm not generalizing in any manner, you happen to swallow (with some amount of pride) every piece of propaganda b.s. you read. i tested win8 in alpha and beta, nothing about it was even satisfactory. maybe it's because i was looking for problems, something i do daily in my career, and i wasn't disappointed in my search. it wasn't as bad a vista or me, but there is/was nothing positive enough to compel me to use it until i'm forced to.
So I'm sure you'll now list the show-stopper problems that you found in Win8 and which make it bad for any general consumer. Or is your argumentation on the level 'I found problems and Win8 is bad' but it just kinda stops there...
-
So I'm sure you'll now list the show-stopper problems that you found in Win8 and which make it bad for any general consumer. Or is your argumentation on the level 'I found problems and Win8 is bad' but it just kinda stops there...
why would i waste my time trying to show you something when you have your eyes closed and lack a deep enough understanding to comprehend what i would point out? we been round this table before Ripley, the scenery hasn't changed and until you open your eyes, it won't...
-
why would i waste my time trying to show you something when you have your eyes closed and lack a deep enough understanding to comprehend what i would point out? we been round this table before Ripley, the scenery hasn't changed and until you open your eyes, it won't...
Hahaha I knew you couldn't provide even a single one. Case closed.
-
Hahaha I knew you couldn't provide even a single one. Case closed.
uh huh...how short your memory is. the case is only closed in your mind, but then that was the case before anyone said anything contradictory...
-
uh huh...how short your memory is. the case is only closed in your mind, but then that was the case before anyone said anything contradictory...
And yet the single example is missing.
I'll make it easyer for you. Don't think you're adressing the answer to me, but to the general public. Surely there are people there smart enough to understand your show-stopper reasoning.
Waiting...
-
mrripley, i am by far not the most technical person here. but you forget the annoying factor is what is making win8 dead wood right now. like it or not, it's was a far fetched idea that most people hate. win8 is being blamed for lower computer sells in the oem market. in custom build systems they are a bit up as they will give you the option of win7 or win8.
semp
-
mrripley, i am by far not the most technical person here. but you forget the annoying factor is what is making win8 dead wood right now. like it or not, it's was a far fetched idea that most people hate. win8 is being blamed for lower computer sells in the oem market. in custom build systems they are a bit up as they will give you the option of win7 or win8.
semp
It is blamed for that but with no proof over it. The market is in recession and desktops are losing ground to mobile devices rapidly. The same consumers who would have bought a boxed OEM el-cheapo machines are now buying tablets. Win8 has sold over 100 million copies in the first 6 months which coincidentally matches the amount of Windows7 licenses sold in the first 6 months. So was Windows7 a horrible mistake due to low sales?
-
So essentially you're saying any consumer can now go and buy the ready tweaked version of windows out of the box. How are you not seeing how you're your own counter argument?
Here is a Win8 speed comparison to Win7: http://usabilitygeek.com/windows-8-vs-windows-7-speed-and-performance-testing/
The gaming performance is driver related, some benchmarks have got opposite results there.
I don't care for the layout of the control panel. First of all I very rarely have to use it and second the desktop search makes finding things extremely easy in Win8. As what goes for 'control what you have installed' it only affects Metro applications in the same way as Apple controls whatever can exist in Apple store and can pull malicious apps if need be. Microsoft has the full ability to remove any file from your computer as it is, if they chose to include that kind of a 'feature' to some patch for example :)
And yet for anyone using a regular non-tweaked Win7 it takes 20-50 seconds to boot to desktop. Others do not have the privilege of having your tweaked version, they have to get it in the form of Win8.
I have to wonder - would you accept Win8 better if they called it Win7.1 instead? Because that's pretty much what it is - a tweaked version of Win7.
I cannot help that you do not get the point I was trying to make, and I am passed the point of trying to get you to understand it.
By the way, the same video card drivers run on both Windows 7 and Windows 8.
Microsoft has pretty much stated they are going to get rid of Windows 8. That is was a mistake. The user interface was not appropriate for a desk top. End of story.
What Microsoft has claimed, is what I have been saying all along.
-
I cannot help that you do not get the point I was trying to make, and I am passed the point of trying to get you to understand it.
Microsoft has pretty much stated they are going to get rid of Windows 8. That is was a mistake. The user interface was not appropriate for a desk top. End of story.
What Microsoft has claimed, is what I have been saying all along.
I cannot help but wonder how you can't see that if Windows8 performs as fast OUT OF THE BOX as the older generation that you have spent all your knowledge tweaking, it can't be called worse but better.
Microsoft has pretty much stated that they'll change the user interface slightly and have no intentions of getting rid of Windows 8. The new release scheme will mean a new OS version every year from now on and this was planned right before Win8 was even released.
You of all people should know that it's a point and click tweak to windows 8 to return the missing start menu...
-
Has anyone here properly tested it? I mean booting vanilla installs on the same box from identical HDs and running some kind of suite of tests?
-
Has anyone here properly tested it? I mean booting vanilla installs on the same box from identical HDs and running some kind of suite of tests?
About 100+1 tech sites on the web have benchmarked it and published the results already.
-
The designer of the Windows 8 user interface said the user interface was a mistake and does not work well for a desktop, without a touch screen. They will be changing the user interface to something else.
It cannot get worse. I hope.
By the time that change is done, maybe they will have addressed many of the issues with Windows 8.
From my perspective, Windows 8 is pretty slow, out of the box. I am not going to mess with it though. It is not worth the time with that idiotic user interface they installed.
-
win8 does seem to boot pretty fast, up until when the annoying "log in" screen shows up then you lose all the advantage. after you log in then it's the dreaded "where's my %^^%%$#@ desktop" function.
semp
-
win8 does seem to boot pretty fast, up until when the annoying "log in" screen shows up then you lose all the advantage. after you log in then it's the dreaded "where's my %^^%%$#@ desktop" function.
semp
You can disable the login just as in any windows version. You can make Win8 boot directly to desktop if you wish. None of those are problems of any sort.
-
I think its about time MS did the right thing and wrote a decent OS from the bottom up. Its not like there isnt the talent out there to do it, or that they dont have the cash to do it. This continued patching of decades old code, which wasnt that great to start with is really tiresome. And unproductive. I remember the first time I installed Win7 and had a poke around hopefully (yeah I know, but I'm an optimist!) only to see the dog's dinner that is the control panel(s). Not only the same pig, but with the same same lipstick for the most part. Made me feel like the woman who goes back to her wifebeating husband for the nth time thinking "this time ... this time ..."
-
I think its about time MS did the right thing and wrote a decent OS from the bottom up. Its not like there isnt the talent out there to do it, or that they dont have the cash to do it. This continued patching of decades old code, which wasnt that great to start with is really tiresome. And unproductive. I remember the first time I installed Win7 and had a poke around hopefully (yeah I know, but I'm an optimist!) only to see the dog's dinner that is the control panel(s). Not only the same pig, but with the same same lipstick for the most part. Made me feel like the woman who goes back to her wifebeating husband for the nth time thinking "this time ... this time ..."
The problem is a two sided sword. MS could easily write up a new OS from scratch (like Apple did). That would however mean losing some if not all backwards compatibility (like Apple did). Windows versions piggy-back code that's in some cases from the DOS ages all to maintain backwards compatibility. This method of working also introduces vulnerabilities in the old code which have not been found. IIRC It's not that long ago that a 16 year old bug was exploited and it still worked in Win7 :)
-
No offense intended, but if we follow that logic we would all still be on DOS or Windows 3.1. Technology can't advance at the pace of the slowest adopter or it will never advance.
In general I think most people are letting their personal preferences and natural resistance to change bias their opinion. Does Windows 8 need more work? Of course...what Windows OS since 95 didn't need additional tweaking and improving. Is the interface different and hard to get used to? Absolutely, but the desktop is only a click away and otherwise the interface is very customizable. Is it the worst/most mediocre ever? Hardly. Anyone remember Vista or Millennium?
My personal experience with it so far has been that it is faster and more stable than Windows 7 machines I have compared it against.
I don't see how any of this is accepting or defending mediocrity. It is what it is. It will be improved upon as every other release of Windows has in the past. No, it isn't Windows 7 or even Windows XP (which was a pretty strong workstation OS), but it is far from junk or bad (regardless of what the pundits say).
DISCLAIMER: My experience with Windows 8 is limited because I just started working with it last week. Perhaps I haven't run into all this terrible badness and mediocrity that is being talked about...
I'm not against technical development, on the contrary. What I am criticizing is the dumping of working tradition in favour of a mobile appearance. Anyone could quite easily find ways to do their regular stuff with any Windows version between 95 and 7 with some experience of any of them. In the localized Finnish version of Win8 even the desktop tile has the word "desktop" on it instead of the common Finnish translation of it. Tweaking? Sure yes. I work for people who need tweaking like renaming icons to such as "Internet", "e-mail" and "typewriter". Updating flash player or java is beyond their limits because of the language and because of they really don't know if it's safe to update anything including Windows. The plethora of preinstalled programs in any computer available in supermarkets carries the same problems: Tech hype in a foreign language without any clue what the programs are supposed to do. Just the other day I did a major tweak by adjusting the screen resolution to be the native one. Today a client called for help, her Win8 computer had an all black background with blue text. While I was driving I couldn't help her any better than to find the themes which she changed from high contrast black to high contrast white. Somehow she could not find any "normal" themes. Our mileages vary and too drastic "improvements" might even hinder the desired development.
-
the difference is that MS can easily afford to continue supporting their old OSes for quite a few years during the transition, which Apple couldnt. It was a brave move for sure, and although it was annoying having to junk my ADB wacom tablet I got over it ;)
edit: and before everyone jumps in I'm sure Ripley is aware that Apple didnt create any flavour of *nix, but they did do a very nice job of making a decent UI for it :)
-
The problem is a two sided sword. MS could easily write up a new OS from scratch (like Apple did). That would however mean losing some if not all backwards compatibility (like Apple did). Windows versions piggy-back code that's in some cases from the DOS ages all to maintain backwards compatibility. This method of working also introduces vulnerabilities in the old code which have not been found. IIRC It's not that long ago that a 16 year old bug was exploited and it still worked in Win7 :)
Actually, they cannot write an operating system from scratch. They have never had to do that. Even DOS was not written from the ground up. They started with a lot of code from others work.
They do not have the talent, nor the management skills to do it anymore. It would take a huge shakeup in the infrastructure, of the corporation, to be able to even think about starting from scratch.
Yes, any number of vulnerabilities have been caused by trying to maintain backward compatibility.
If they were to start over today, they would probably start with Linux and bastardize it.
-
They do not have the talent, nor the management skills to do it anymore. It would take a huge shakeup in the infrastructure, of the corporation, to be able to even think about starting from scratch.
as very much an outsider this is the impression I get. It would take about the best minds out there to achieve it (BSD ...) and given that *nix does everything that we currently need of an OS (apart from really good UI) there doesnt seem much point. Could it just be corporate pride thats stopping MS doing what Apple did so many years ago? (ie. the obvious ...)
-
as very much an outsider this is the impression I get. It would take about the best minds out there to achieve it (BSD ...) and given that *nix does everything that we currently need of an OS (apart from really good UI) there doesnt seem much point. Could it just be corporate pride thats stopping MS doing what Apple did so many years ago? (ie. the obvious ...)
Imagine the mess it would create if MS nixed (pun intended) the current code and everyone would find their existing software uncompatible... It would create a lot of work for developers also, think of AH2 rewrite...
There are already alternatives for anyone who wants to jump ship. Even on gaming side things are really picking up on linux - Steam support, L4D2 beta and other games from Valve, I'm hoping they opened a can of worms.
-
I dont have to imagine ... Ive already been there (Carbon/Cocoa) :D I guess as long as people are prepared to put up with/pay for junk and there is no strong competition MS will keep going with it.
There was a brief period in the late 90s when game developers were happy to write reasonably portable coad and personally I loved being able to game on Linux for obvious reasons. I say they were happy to ... they spent almost nothing and relied on committed but doing-it-for-almost-nothing developers and most importantly NVidia who bothered writing decent Linux drivers. They must have had some spare $$s and a bit of a skunkworks culture going on there. The gaming culture is different these days - back then we gamers had to geek it up to some degree just to get acceptable performance out of our hardware, so installing Linux wasnt such a big thing. These days most gamers use appliances - xboxes, phones etc and expect their PC gaming to be the same.
-
NVidia's Linux drivers are not officially supported and developed. They are done by two NVidia software engineers who just want to do them.
-
Ok I will sy it... MRripley knows it all and we are just complete morons who don't know crap. Sorry Skuzzy but I gu ess you fit in that realm also.
LawnDart
-
Ok I will sy it... MRripley knows it all and we are just complete morons who don't know crap. Sorry Skuzzy but I gu ess you fit in that realm also.
LawnDart
About time everybody realized this. He's been telling us all this for a long time now.
All hail the number one Microsoft fan boi MrRipley.
-
that's about right... Anyone who wants to disprove me you're welcome to do so .. with links. Clowns who 'have a feeling but have nothing to show for it' can forget it. Not giving names.. Gyrene.
-
NVidia's Linux drivers are not officially supported and developed. They are done by two NVidia software engineers who just want to do them.
Which is why Linus Torvalds gave Nvidia the middle finger publicly. After that Nvidia released major updates to their drivers. Coincidence?
-
You never post any proof or links aswell..
-
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100713593
Microsoft is preparing to reverse course over key elements of its Windows 8 operating system, marking one of the most prominent admissions of failure for a new mass-market consumer product since Coca-Cola's New Coke fiasco nearly 30 years ago.
"Key aspects" of how the software is used will be changed when Microsoft releases an updated version of the operating system this year, Tammy Reller, head of marketing and finance for the Windows business, said in an interview with the Financial Times. Referring to difficulties many users have had with mastering the software, she added: "The learning curve is definitely real."
Analysts warned that changing course would be a significant admission of failure for Steve Ballmer, chief executive, who called the October launch of Windows 8 a "bet-the-company" moment as Microsoft sought to respond to the success of Apple's iPad.
"It's a horrible thing for this to happen to your flagship product – he'll take a hit for that," said Mark Anderson, an independent tech analyst. "But he's also responsible for a renaissance inside the company. There's a level of risk and creativity going on that would never have happened two years ago."
Richard Doherty, analyst at tech research firm Envisioneering, said: "This is like New Coke, going on for seven months – only Coke listened better." Coca-Cola dropped its New Coke formula in response to a consumer backlash less than three months after launch.
Windows 8 was an ambitious attempt to update the personal computer for the tablet era by moving to a new touchscreen interface based on colorful tiles, hiding the "desktop" launch screen familiar to white collar workers and consumers around the world.
The combination PC and tablet software was widely panned by reviewers and has been blamed by some analysts for worsening the slump in sales that has rocked the PC industry. Even before its launch, Tim Cook, chief executive of Apple, said Windows 8 would be like combining a toaster and a fridge – something that, while technically possible, was "probably not going to be pleasing to the user".
Ms Reller refused to reveal details of the changes Microsoft would make to Windows 8. However, the clamor from reviewers has become overwhelming for a return to a more familiar PC interface. Ms Reller said PC users had faced difficulties adapting to the new software.
Pressure has been building for Windows 8 PCs to launch the familiar desktop view when turned on – and to bring back the "start" button featured in the lower left corner of the screen in previous releases.
Microsoft has also admitted to a range of other slips with the launch of Windows 8, including failing to do enough to train retail staff and educate potential customers about the new software, as well as not focusing all of its financial incentives behind the touchscreen PCs that show off Windows 8 to best advantage. "It's very clear we could and should have done more," Ms Reller said.
Despite the slips, she said that Microsoft continued to view the software as suitable for both PCs and tablets and that "customer satisfaction with Windows 8 with touch is strong".
-
You never post any proof or links aswell..
Are you blind?
-
See Rule #4
-
Microsoft have no intentions of getting rid of Windows 8. .
Link
-
You never post any proof or links aswell..
he keeps getting burned by his own links.
semp
-
he keeps getting burned by his own links.
semp
You keep getting burned by your own remarks.
On reply #20 I linked a benchmark verifying my claims about the speed benefits of Windows8.
Obviously there is no link confirming anything from a future release since Microsoft hasn't released any information on 'blue' but rumors and speculations reveal that the ability to boot directly to the desktop and return of the start menu may be possible. Windows blue aka Windows 8.1 will contain minor user interface changes and other updates. No plans to 'get rid of Windows 8'. I mean seriously folks, WHAT exactly would they replace it with? Do you think they'll just whip up a totally new OS from scratch? Windows 8 is a tweaked Windows 7 and Win7 is a tweaked Windows Vista etc.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/7/4306328/windows-8-1-release-date-pricing-windows-blue
It starts slowly to sound like you guys think that if MS will remove the 'modern' UI, that will mean that Windows 8 ceases to exist? LOL! The user interface is just one tiny component in the OS.
-
The UI in my opinion is way more than one little piece of the OS. Come on I'm terrible with computers compared to you and I can figure this out and see right from wrong. I think you argue for the sake of arguing or to increase post count. I'd go with number 1.
-
You keep getting burned by your own remarks.
On reply #20 I linked a benchmark verifying my claims about the speed benefits of Windows8.
Obviously there is no link confirming anything from a future release since Microsoft hasn't released any information on 'blue' but rumors and speculations reveal that the ability to boot directly to the desktop and return of the start menu may be possible. Windows blue aka Windows 8.1 will contain minor user interface changes and other updates. No plans to 'get rid of Windows 8'. I mean seriously folks, WHAT exactly would they replace it with? Do you think they'll just whip up a totally new OS from scratch? Windows 8 is a tweaked Windows 7 and Win7 is a tweaked Windows Vista etc.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/7/4306328/windows-8-1-release-date-pricing-windows-blue
It starts slowly to sound like you guys think that if MS will remove the 'modern' UI, that will mean that Windows 8 ceases to exist? LOL! The user interface is just one tiny component in the OS.
Actually you are off there. Microsoft had two desktop operating system development teams and one mobile operating system team. After the release of Windows 7, the teams were combined.
Windows NT, Windows 2000, and Windows Vista were from one team. Windows 95/98, Windows XP, and Windows 7 was from another team. They were completely different development branches.
Windows 8 is from the combined teams.
You need to quit being so obtuse. When people talk about Microsoft "killing" Windows 8, they are making reference to the pathetic user interface, which has defined Windows 8. The cheap shots you keep trying to take are getting tiresome and do not provide anything useful.
-
So essentially you're saying any consumer can now go and buy the ready tweaked version of windows out of the box. How are you not seeing how you're your own counter argument?
Here is a Win8 speed comparison to Win7: http://usabilitygeek.com/windows-8-vs-windows-7-speed-and-performance-testing/
The gaming performance is driver related, some benchmarks have got opposite results there.
I don't care for the layout of the control panel. First of all I very rarely have to use it and second the desktop search makes finding things extremely easy in Win8. As what goes for 'control what you have installed' it only affects Metro applications in the same way as Apple controls whatever can exist in Apple store and can pull malicious apps if need be. Microsoft has the full ability to remove any file from your computer as it is, if they chose to include that kind of a 'feature' to some patch for example :)
And yet for anyone using a regular non-tweaked Win7 it takes 20-50 seconds to boot to desktop. Others do not have the privilege of having your tweaked version, they have to get it in the form of Win8.
I have to wonder - would you accept Win8 better if they called it Win7.1 instead? Because that's pretty much what it is - a tweaked version of Win7.
And yet you are probably running windows 8 on a SSD and windows 7 on a normal HDD that is so fragmented the read head might fly off! (hyperbole). My windows 7 on HDD boots in under 20 seconds with a i5 2500k at 5.2 ghz.
If you are not willing to tweak some settings you are doing PC gaming wrong sir.
-
5.2 GHz? Damn I'm still at 2.9. What temps do you get with that?
-
Actually you are off there. Microsoft had two desktop operating system development teams and one mobile operating system team. After the release of Windows 7, the teams were combined.
Windows NT, Windows 2000, and Windows Vista were from one team. Windows 95/98, Windows XP, and Windows 7 was from another team. They were completely different development branches.
Windows 8 is from the combined teams.
You need to quit being so obtuse. When people talk about Microsoft "killing" Windows 8, they are making reference to the pathetic user interface, which has defined Windows 8. The cheap shots you keep trying to take are getting tiresome and do not provide anything useful.
I'm sorry they're not cheap shots. It's not my problem if people can't tell the difference between a user interface and the rest of the OS. The UI is only a mild annoyance and could be worked with. After the first couple of days I was completely fine with it even though initially it seemed irritating.
Many people here, you included, have made wild claims of Win8 being 'unusable' and 'problematic' and 'technologically flawed' and I've argued that it's none of that. It's a tweaked Windows 7 with a different user interface and it's a perfectly usable product.
-
And yet you are probably running windows 8 on a SSD and windows 7 on a normal HDD that is so fragmented the read head might fly off! (hyperbole). My windows 7 on HDD boots in under 20 seconds with a i5 2500k at 5.2 ghz.
If you are not willing to tweak some settings you are doing PC gaming wrong sir.
I ran the Windows 8 beta on a 5200rpm drive that was ripped off from an old laptop. It booted to desktop a little faster using that than the main Win7 installation in the same computer which was on a 7200rpm desktop drive. Windows drives do not get fragmented due to the scheduled defrags that happen automatically (unless you disable them naturally). Occasionally when I run antivirus sweeps on my computers I also defrag them using the auslogics defrag. Most of the time the drives are little to none fragmented. Of course since I use the gaming machines only for games and nothing else they don't get all sorts of crap written to them all the time.
When Windows8 is installed in fast boot configuration with UEFI GOP it speeds up the boot process significantly more.
-
I'm sorry they're not cheap shots. It's not my problem if people can't tell the difference between a user interface and the rest of the OS. The UI is only a mild annoyance and could be worked with. After the first couple of days I was completely fine with it even though initially it seemed irritating.
Many people here, you included, have made wild claims of Win8 being 'unusable' and 'problematic' and 'technologically flawed' and I've argued that it's none of that. It's a tweaked Windows 7 with a different user interface and it's a perfectly usable product.
I have not made any "wild claims".
If you cannot post without taking those cheap shots at the community, which are absolutely useless, then you need to stop posting. Everyone has an opinion about Windows 8. Yours is no better than mine, and vice-versa.
One fact you have refused to accept is that the Windows 8 user interface, for the desktop, is very inefficient and was a mistake. Microsoft has admitted it. Apple agrees. Yet you still laud it as being a perfectly fine interface. You are in the minority with that opinion. Accept it and move along as it is not doing anyone any favors by belaboring it.
You talked of my credibility being at issue earlier. Your posting style is wrecking your credibility. No one posting with the amount of arrogance you display will be taken seriously. If that is your goal, then you have laid a firm foundation for it. However, it is not a foundation that will stand long on this bulletin board. That is just some friendly advice.
-
I have not made any "wild claims".
If you cannot post without taking those cheap shots at the community, which are absolutely useless, then you need to stop posting. Everyone has an opinion about Windows 8. Yours is no better than mine, and vice-versa.
One fact you have refused to accept is that the Windows 8 user interface, for the desktop, is very inefficient and was a mistake. Microsoft has admitted it. Apple agrees. Yet you still laud it as being a perfectly fine interface. You are in the minority with that opinion. Accept it and move along as it is not doing anyone any favors by belaboring it.
You talked of my credibility being at issue earlier. Your posting style is wrecking your credibility. No one posting with the amount of arrogance you display will be taken seriously. If that is your goal, then you have laid a firm foundation for it. However, it is not a foundation that will stand long on this bulletin board. That is just some friendly advice.
There are currently millions of users who daily and successfully use Windows8 as their main operating system. They're not horrified or in dispair. They're working, playing games, creating etc. every day using it. Your claims about it's slowness for example are without any proof - I at least posted benchmarks from an independent reviewer which proved my point to be true. I mean if you can show me hard fact - benchmarks proving Win8 truly boots as slow as Win7 and works as slow as Win7 I'm not going to argue with that. So far I'm the only one posting benchmarks - am I also the only one READING them?
Now I don't see how I could be the bad guy when all the facts are there for anyone to see. I don't deny that the big public has been annoyed with the user interface, I was originally annoyed with it too. But all the drama and bad press that has been released have created this situation. Also MS handled the UI change very badly by not including any tips or walkthrough in the initial installations.
I have done nothing else but oppose the view that Windows 8 would be bad and unusable. Clearly it's not. I've been using it successfully along with literally millions of other people. This subject can be now buried as far as I'm concerned.
-
I do not do "benchmarks". Synthetic benchmarks can be construed to provide whatever anyone wants to provide. I have written commercial benchmarks. I have a good feel for what they can and cannot tell you. I think real world use is a better measure.
I have no problem with you, or anyone else, making the choice to not believe me. Once anyone gets into that mode, there is little that can be done to sway them. Post a video? That could be altered. Post some data? That could be altered. So why bother? Post a link to a WEB site which depends on ad revenue to stay in business? Sure.
Those who know me, know I would never compromise fact in order to win a chest thumping contest.
Your statements about how many are happy with Windows 8 is an opinion. You are one of the few people I know who like Windows 8 on the desktop. I have friends inside of Microsoft who hate it, for the desktop.
Microsoft would not be admitting it has to change the interface, if what you claim is true. Hopefully we will get the desktop that should have been in the first place. Once that really works well for mobile and desktop. That is my opinion.
-
I do not do "benchmarks". Synthetic benchmarks can be construed to provide whatever anyone wants to provide. I have written commercial benchmarks. I have a good feel for what they can and cannot tell you. I think real world use is a better measure.
I have no problem with you, or anyone else, making the choice to not believe me. Once anyone gets into that mode, there is little that can be done to sway them. Post a video? That could be altered. Post some data? That could be altered. So why bother? Post a link to a WEB site which depends on ad revenue to stay in business? Sure.
Those who know me, know I would never compromise fact in order to win a chest thumping contest.
Your statements about how many are happy with Windows 8 is an opinion. You are one of the few people I know who like Windows 8 on the desktop. I have friends inside of Microsoft who hate it, for the desktop.
Microsoft would not be admitting it has to change the interface, if what you claim is true. Hopefully we will get the desktop that should have been in the first place. Once that really works well for mobile and desktop. That is my opinion.
I never said I "like" the modern UI either. I'm just saying it can be lived with and it's not the disaster many are painting it to be. I too prefer the old UI, in fact I would prefer the XP way of doing things the most. IMO Vista and Win7 were already steps in the wrong direction. That doesn't stop me from using them successfully however.
I have configured my Xubuntu desktop to look and feel almost completely like XP (with minor improvements though).
-
5.2 GHz? Damn I'm still at 2.9. What temps do you get with that?
I got a after market cooler. Also stock clock for I5 2500K is 3.2 ghz not sure why you are only at 2.9
In intelburn test i get 82*C max. BF3 I get 59*C on air.
-
I have a different CPU than you. Is there a need for that much over clock lol.
-
Folding and or future proofing.
-
All the drama and bad press release created this situation? No, Microsoft created this situation. They have a miserable UI that doesn't work well with desktops. People don't have time to tweak it and find work arounds that make it work like win7. They might as well get win7 to start with. No wonder desktop sales are down since 8 hit the shelves.
-
All the drama and bad press release created this situation? No, Microsoft created this situation. They have a miserable UI that doesn't work well with desktops. People don't have time to tweak it and find work arounds that make it work like win7. They might as well get win7 to start with. No wonder desktop sales are down since 8 hit the shelves.
No, all the drama and bad press have lead to people having reservations before even trying Win8. When I tried the beta I had no expectations whatsoever and I found Win8 perfectly usable even though I was slightly annoyed on how much the UI changed and having to relearn things. Also the lack of instructions was surprising - but Google fixed that easily.
-
A friend of mine tryed the win8 on his laptop - he liked it, but honestly, i could get used to an other friend's IOS sooner than to that.
If you like it, fine, use it, have fun, but 5 pages of argument over over this, a personal preference... come on lads.
-
A friend of mine tryed the win8 on his laptop - he liked it, but honestly, i could get used to an other friend's IOS sooner than to that.
If you like it, fine, use it, have fun, but 5 pages of argument over over this, a personal preference... come on lads.
It all boils down to what I call 'the computer equivalent of Aspergers syndrome'. Some people just lose their marbles if the menu isn't exactly where it used to be and the blue e mark the internet :D
-
How it comes? I could get fammiliar to the IOS Lion soon enough, even though thats completely different from what im using - the win7. Thats because i have found the IOS's interface to be more logical than the win8.
The next step might be you coming at me with me being a technical analphabet...
out :rolleyes:
-
How it comes? I could get fammiliar to the IOS Lion soon enough, even though thats completely different from what im using - the win7. Thats because i have found the IOS's interface to be more logical than the win8.
The next step might be you coming at me with me being a technical analphabet...
out :rolleyes:
You're confusing OSX and iOS. iOS is the mobile OS found in iPads and iPhones, OSX is what's in macs.
I had bigger trouble getting familiar with osx than with Win8. OSX is easy on the surface for windows users but once you start installing stuff or setting user privileges etc. it doesn't follow the familiar methods. What I like about OSX is how much similar to linux it is on CLI level.
-
It could also be that the apparent minority who like win8 are the ones with your version of "computer aspergers" - your minds are wired in such a way to like it. "Normal" minds find it illogical and annoying. Bad press and "drama" followed its release-after end users had to make it work. It didn't precede the release. Now, micfrosoft needs to change it to satisfy the majority of its customer base. I'm glad you can make it work for you. I'm also glad I have win7 on my desktop.
-
It all boils down to what I call 'the computer equivalent of Aspergers syndrome'. Some people just lose their marbles if the menu isn't exactly where it used to be and the blue e mark the internet :D
It really has little to do with change, itself. It is more about inept change.
What Microsoft did was akin to an automobile manufacturer moving the steering wheel from the front seat, to the back seat. Sure, you could get used to it, but it does not improve the driving experience at all.
-
It could also be that the apparent minority who like win8 are the ones with your version of "computer aspergers" - your minds are wired in such a way to like it. "Normal" minds find it illogical and annoying. Bad press and "drama" followed its release-after end users had to make it work. It didn't precede the release. Now, micfrosoft needs to change it to satisfy the majority of its customer base. I'm glad you can make it work for you. I'm also glad I have win7 on my desktop.
Asperger syndrome patients freak out exactly when normal routines are broken. So not much possible.
Even though at first it felt stupid to hover on the corner to be able to shut down the computer, after using Win8 for close to a year I once tried to close a Win7 desktop by hovering in the lower right corner. So everything is just a matter of getting used to. People hated Windows XP:s new interface with passion too.
-
We ought to get together over a beer and argue over the really important stuff: which is best, single malt Scotch, Bourbon, vodka or something else? Is Belgian beer/ale better than German beer? These are the questions the answers to which can solve all the world's problems. :banana:
-
We ought to get together over a beer and argue over the really important stuff: which is best, single malt Scotch, Bourbon, vodka or something else? Is Belgian beer/ale better than German beer? These are the questions the answers to which can solve all the world's problems. :banana:
I'm definately islay single malt guy - unless I can mix the vodka. :)