OT: Windows 8 is coming...

2»

Comments

  • Kevin-McKeeKevin-McKee Posts: 644
    edited December 1969

    Vaskania said:
    Sarsifus said:
    Vaskania said:
    I haven't touched it and I don't plan on it. If I wanted that desktop I'd buy a Windows phone.

    I actually HAVE a Windows phone, and I love it, but I agree with you: if I wanted a tablet OS, I'd buy a tablet. If I hold off upgrading long enough, I might be able to leapfrog Win8 (assuming it turns out to the train-wreck it appears to be shaping into) in favor of Win9.


    I'm hoping to be able to do the same. I just barely upgraded to Windows 7 in October. I was running Windows XP Pro 32bit quite happily, but when I did a complete ground-up rebuild for Battlefield 3 I figured it was time to move over (I was starting to feel a little left out of the loop LOL), and I also changed to 64bit in the process (and love the taste of more than 3gb ram).

    I loved WinXP. I was looking forward to Vista, but after playing around with it on a machine I bought my folks for Christmas a couple of years ago, I held out for Win7 before upgrading my own machines, and so I have no problem doing the same thing again with Win8. Right now, it's just a question of which essential Windows feature I use that Microsoft will refuse to continue Win7 support for (the way they did with WinXP and DirectX 10 -- tried to push the gamers onto Vista to get the new features).

  • JohnDelaquioxJohnDelaquiox Posts: 1,063
    edited December 1969

    I was using Xp pro X64 till like 2010 on most of my machines. I actually got DirectX 10 to work on it and it was running fine.

    I too only recently upgraded to windows 7 and I am pretty happy with it.

  • VaskaniaVaskania Posts: 5,108
    edited December 1969

    Sarsifus said:
    Vaskania said:
    Sarsifus said:
    Vaskania said:
    I haven't touched it and I don't plan on it. If I wanted that desktop I'd buy a Windows phone.

    I actually HAVE a Windows phone, and I love it, but I agree with you: if I wanted a tablet OS, I'd buy a tablet. If I hold off upgrading long enough, I might be able to leapfrog Win8 (assuming it turns out to the train-wreck it appears to be shaping into) in favor of Win9.


    I'm hoping to be able to do the same. I just barely upgraded to Windows 7 in October. I was running Windows XP Pro 32bit quite happily, but when I did a complete ground-up rebuild for Battlefield 3 I figured it was time to move over (I was starting to feel a little left out of the loop LOL), and I also changed to 64bit in the process (and love the taste of more than 3gb ram).

    I loved WinXP. I was looking forward to Vista, but after playing around with it on a machine I bought my folks for Christmas a couple of years ago, I held out for Win7 before upgrading my own machines, and so I have no problem doing the same thing again with Win8. Right now, it's just a question of which essential Windows feature I use that Microsoft will refuse to continue Win7 support for (the way they did with WinXP and DirectX 10 -- tried to push the gamers onto Vista to get the new features).


    I skipped Vista completely, never even tried it. My game of choice at the time was the original COD:MW, which used DX9, so I had no need for higher.

  • FixmypcmikeFixmypcmike Posts: 11,620
    edited December 1969

    kdimi said:
    I recently bought a Laptop and installed Ubuntu... unlike Windows, every driver was installed out-of-the-box, while on another Windows partition I installed I had to install several drivers separately. I'm using it for .NET development and all-day-things and so far I had not once the need to switch to Windows at all or missed anything that I would use Windows for.

    That's a change -- last time I tried to Linux a laptop built for XP I couldn't find a single Linux distro that I could get the drivers working on without a major hassle. I thought of a lot of my clients and shuddered at the thought of them trying Linux.

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 15,732
    edited June 2012

    ...meh, don't remind me.


    If history repeats itself, it will be a toad like Vista. and all the other "so called even numbered" releases.

    Post edited by kyoto kid on
  • PaulSWPaulSW Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Windows 8 is not a desktop system. I tested it and will not buy it. It is even more a disaster then Windows Vista was.

    For desktop users even simple things like turning off the computer is more complicated. This is nonsense and waste of time. I never had an OS before me and felt like I don't know what to do. After hours I randomly found out how to do things. And even as I knew what to do, it really was time consuming for everything simple on Win7.

    Windows XP still has more then 50% of Windows share, even as Win7 is much easier, nicer and really great, stable product. People telling me, they don't upgrade because it is to hard to get used to Win7. Now think how these please think about Win8. No, I will let this version pass and get Win9 when they reverted these changes (I hope so). Win8 is not a multitasking system. It is nice for tablets etc. but not for me and my 10 open programs.

  • LoaarLoaar Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    PaulSW said:
    Windows 8 is not a desktop system.

    This is an important point.

    Windows 8 isn't a desktop system. Its designed to be a cross device system, similar to the way MAC OS/iOS is heading. Microsoft don't need it to be the best OS on the market, they just need enough people to see the benefit of having one OS and control scheme for all their devices.


    If, and its a big if, they can get enough people on board, it will be a success. Microsoft doesn't care about the people who understand their computers well enough to dual boot wine or ubuntu, nor are they making w8 for people who will only ever use their desktop.


    Its an OS squarely aimed at the mass market, at people who just want things to work, and work on all their gadgets, much the same way Apple has been operating. They want people to buy a w8 phone or tablet that operates in largely the same way their Xbox does, then upgrade their home computer to w8 to take advantage of the ecosystem it provides.


    Its very much about the complete package, and about locking people into their ecosystem, their app store, their hardware/hardware partnerships. Preferably before Apple or Google beat them to it.

  • DestinysGardenDestinysGarden Posts: 1,158
    edited June 2012

    Fabulous....
    Because we all needed yet another dumbed down interface designed to be "intuitive" and encourage new users that completely ignores the needs of the long term and experienced users.
    Just great.


    You do make good points there Loaar. From that point of view it all makes sense.
    I think anyone who uses their computer to actually get some work done will stick with Win7.

    Post edited by DestinysGarden on
  • PaulSWPaulSW Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Isn't it interesting to see how MS begs their users to go to Apple which has iOS for mobile/tablets and MacOS for desktops. This is the right way, these two operating systems work nicely together but have the right tools for every situation. Windows 8 is a cow that don't want to be a cow anymore but be a bird that flies. Let's see what comes out of this experiment. ;-)

  • Norse GraphicsNorse Graphics Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    It seems that MS is destined to crash and burn.

    On my workstation, which I got in 2008, it's 64-bit Windows Vista. On my laptop, which I got later (replacing my LG laptop with WinXP 32-bit), I have Windows Vista (32-bit, but with much better performance). I loved XP when I first tried it out after migrating from Win98SE. At the time I considered the XP to be the end-all OS, and I still have this view. But for certain tasks, like GAMING, I needed to 'upgrade'. And though Vista bombed, I got it late enough to have gotten most things fixed.

    For my next OS, three are 3 choices; Win7, OSX or Linux.

    I use Windows-only programs in certain respects, though I can migrate to Apple with most of what I have got. So, this rules out Linux,as most programs can't run on it natively (I really dislike the need to use an emulator!).

    So there's two realistic choices; MS or Apple. From my experiences, I have always kept things simple; eg., I killed Aero and set the UI to 'classic' (to remove distraction and max. performance).

    Apple is a lot more expensive, so I'd fall into the Win7 cathegory, and do the same thing I did with Vista, remove the unecessary stuff and make it a super-sleek OS that runs smoothly without distractions.

    What comes after Win8 is anybodys guess, but my major priority, which MS seems to forget; I don't like clutter and distractions!!

    Keep it simple. Don't introduce learning curve, and make the transition smooth. Win8 is something I'd rather stay long away from, thank you...

  • inception8inception8 Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    I've been running and checking out Windows 8 in VMware Workstation and I find that the interface is a piece of crap.

    Seriously, in my opinion, during the installation I should be able to have a choice as to whether or not Windows is going to be installed on a desktop, laptop or a tablet. It adjusts itself accordingly to the user experience for any one of those devices. Not here this is what we give you and that's it.

    Yeah.

    Windows 7 is the new XP.

    Hate 8.

  • SockrateaseSockratease Posts: 791
    edited December 1969

    Just remember - W8 is pronounced "WAIT"

  • pumecopumeco Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    > Old machine is a Celeron 2.6 with only 1.2 GB of RAM, 128MB graphics card, and Vista 32-Bit.
    > New machine is a Quad-Core 3.4GHz AMD Black, 12GB or RAM, two GTX460 1GB graphics cards, and 64-Bit Windows 7.


    Windows 7 is absolute crap compared to Windows Vista and Windows XP, and the new Windows 8 is even worse. The screen redraw performance on Windows 7 went dramatically downhill, it can't even redraw a simple text list properly without flickering sometimes. There is a notable framerate drop ever since Windows 7, and as far as I'm concerned, Microsoft conned me into buying this OS by making out it's a real performer.


    It performs like sh*t.


    My advice, AVOID at least until those incompetent a$$es get the redraw technology sorted. It's still using the same crap as Windows 7 as far as I can tell, certainly feels like it, nowhere near as fluid as XP or Vista. And as for the whole interface thing and the desire for a tablet-like OS. what can I say other that thank Apple and the millions of people that get sucked into buying their products.


    But yeah, in case you hadn't guessed by now, I won't be buying, but here's a little tip for anyone that does:


    With this new OS Microsoft are almost sinking to Apple levels and it's getting to the point where you have to tie a machine to your identity. Read very carefully when you first run the OS, because on first glance it looks as if you need to supply an email address, but if you look at the options again, you don't. They haven't quite reached Apple's level of manipulating it's customers, but it's 99.9% there now.


    The only hope we have now, as consumers, to combat all this touch-device crap is to use an OS that cannot be manipulated by these companies. You need to start looking at Linux. For now, it's not as polished as the main players, but it's the only option you have for a digital future where you're not used as a constant marketing tool by commercial datamining asses like Apple, Google, and Microsoft.

  • inception8inception8 Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    pumeco said:
    > Old machine is a Celeron 2.6 with only 1.2 GB of RAM, 128MB graphics card, and Vista 32-Bit.
    > New machine is a Quad-Core 3.4GHz AMD Black, 12GB or RAM, two GTX460 1GB graphics cards, and 64-Bit Windows 7.


    Windows 7 is absolute crap compared to Windows Vista and Windows XP, and the new Windows 8 is even worse. The screen redraw performance on Windows 7 went dramatically downhill, it can't even redraw a simple text list properly without flickering sometimes. There is a notable framerate drop ever since Windows 7, and as far as I'm concerned, Microsoft conned me into buying this OS by making out it's a real performer.

    It performs like sh*t.

    LOL. You have a fairly modern system there and Windows 7 is choking? Sorry I find that hard to believe. What you may be interpreting as a Windows fault may not necessarily be a Windows fault rather somewhere in there maybe a slight hardware fault. A bottleneck or drivers even.

    Praising Vista is... blasphemous. /shudder.

  • VaskaniaVaskania Posts: 5,108
    edited December 1969

    pumeco said:
    > Old machine is a Celeron 2.6 with only 1.2 GB of RAM, 128MB graphics card, and Vista 32-Bit.
    > New machine is a Quad-Core 3.4GHz AMD Black, 12GB or RAM, two GTX460 1GB graphics cards, and 64-Bit Windows 7.


    Windows 7 is absolute crap compared to Windows Vista and Windows XP, and the new Windows 8 is even worse. The screen redraw performance on Windows 7 went dramatically downhill, it can't even redraw a simple text list properly without flickering sometimes. There is a notable framerate drop ever since Windows 7, and as far as I'm concerned, Microsoft conned me into buying this OS by making out it's a real performer.


    It performs like sh*t


    You should not be choking or performing like crap with those specs, unless its the AMD cpu. ;)
    I'm running an I7-2600K w/ OC throttle enabled, 8GB Corsair Vengeance lowpro, and also have SLI'd 2x GTX 460s (mine are from the EVGA superclocked line) running in W7 64bit and it handles everything I throw at it.. from games to graphics to audio to video. You might have an actual hardware issue going on, or some crapware on your machine that shouldn't be there.

  • Kendall SearsKendall Sears Posts: 1,882
    edited December 1969

    Vaskania said:
    pumeco said:
    > Old machine is a Celeron 2.6 with only 1.2 GB of RAM, 128MB graphics card, and Vista 32-Bit.
    > New machine is a Quad-Core 3.4GHz AMD Black, 12GB or RAM, two GTX460 1GB graphics cards, and 64-Bit Windows 7.


    Windows 7 is absolute crap compared to Windows Vista and Windows XP, and the new Windows 8 is even worse. The screen redraw performance on Windows 7 went dramatically downhill, it can't even redraw a simple text list properly without flickering sometimes. There is a notable framerate drop ever since Windows 7, and as far as I'm concerned, Microsoft conned me into buying this OS by making out it's a real performer.


    It performs like sh*t


    You should not be choking or performing like crap with those specs, unless its the AMD cpu. ;)
    I'm running an I7-2600K w/ OC throttle enabled, 8GB Corsair Vengeance lowpro, and also have SLI'd 2x GTX 460s (mine are from the EVGA superclocked line) running in W7 64bit and it handles everything I throw at it.. from games to graphics to audio to video. You might have an actual hardware issue going on, or some crapware on your machine that shouldn't be there.

    That's just begging... Must resist. Must resist. MUST RESIST!


    ;-)


    Kendall

  • VaskaniaVaskania Posts: 5,108
    edited December 1969

    Ok, Kendall.. what am I missing here? LOL

  • Kendall SearsKendall Sears Posts: 1,882
    edited June 2012

    Vaskania said:
    Ok, Kendall.. what am I missing here? LOL

    You're going to make me type it aren't you... OK then, mods, I was asked :-)


    Windows is the crapware that shouldn't be on the machine.


    :-) (of course)


    Kendall

    Post edited by Kendall Sears on
  • VaskaniaVaskania Posts: 5,108
    edited December 1969

    LOL

    Granted, it can be a pile of poo. I'd be more inclined to use Linux with a gui if all of my games and graphics programs were Linux compatible out of the box.

  • pumecopumeco Posts: 0
    edited June 2012

    Nope, it's definitely Windows 7 that is crap, there's stuff all over the web about it, Vista is officially faster than 7.
    The usability of Windows get's worse and worse upon every release.


    It's not as awkward as the Mac OS yet, but it's not far off. All Mircrosoft are interested in - just like Apple and Google - is creating an environment where they have control over everything. That is the reason they couldn't give a crap about removing the Start button and replacing it with what is technically one big ad-space for them.


    That new design is Microsoft's version of what Apple and Google are doing, all three of these companies are in panic mode right now, each doing their best to snare the gullible public into their system. Should be obvious to anyone that the idea is that once everyone has been sucked into buying apps from them, before long, you will not have a choice because there'll be no shops left to sell and compete on prices, you will pay whatever they tell you to pay. They will have you all by the short and curlies as they say - which is exactly where they want you and is exactly what you're helping every time you pay for "virtual" music instead of supporting a business and buying a real CD.


    If you have Apple hardware, Apple will get a cut of every software purchase for it's system (that's my prediction and it's a monopoly that ought to be illegal). Just like iTunes has done with music, the same will happen with software and it is going to put millions of businesses out of business (and even more people out of jobs). It's the same with Microsoft and Google, they each want their cut of the market. Best way to deal with this crap is simply do not buy these devices (iPads and Chromebooks etc), or in fact anything that actively promotes this type of monopoly.


    Something radical has to change, otherwise we'll all be paying through the eyes and nose for it in the not too distant future. What is going on is extremely dangerous, not just because of the monopoly aspect of it, but because it means these companies are in a position where they effectively have more power than the government. If you want to publish a book for example, you will be locked into their rules of what you can and can't publish, but with a real book (which is always far better), there is no such restriction.


    I could rant for ages about all this stuff, but you get the idea:


    Next time you buy a movie, you should support a business other than monopolies like Apple, and treat yourself to a physical copy on Blu-ray. You'll feel better about it: you have a physical copy, Apple can't dictate what you do with it, you can still convert it to the monopoly device of your choice, and you will have supported a business and and it's workers because you bought it from them instead of Apple or whatever. Same with Music, next time you buy an album, go into a record shop and enjoy looking at the covers in a physical environment, then buy one instead of channeling all entertainment purchase you make to the same company all the time.


    Sorry, was I still ranting? ...

    Post edited by pumeco on
  • pumecopumeco Posts: 0
    edited June 2012

    Just don't read the comments if you're one who supports the Apple monopoly:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhxtNFac-WY


    Meanwhile, those who aren't so absorbed into the Apple thing, have noticed that Vinyl is making a comeback.
    In fact Amazon now boast over 300.000 titles and growing.


    Now be honest, how many of you are so absorbed into iTunes that you thought Vinyl was dead?
    have you asked yourself, maybe the brainwashing is working on you?


    Remember Vinyl anyone?
    It's what gives you that warm, solid, analogue sound which digital cannot compete with.


    It's still here and growing all the time:
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vinyl-Albums-Music/b/ref=amb_link_164095247_26?ie=UTF8&node=520022


    It's what the "cool" people have been buying for decades and will continue to buy while the rest channel their money into virtual media they will never own.


    Still wanna buy virtual?


    Hopefully not, because balking at Windows 8 is nothing compared to what is coming if you keep supporting these devices.

    Post edited by pumeco on
  • Kevin-McKeeKevin-McKee Posts: 644
    edited December 1969

    Vaskania said:
    pumeco said:
    > Old machine is a Celeron 2.6 with only 1.2 GB of RAM, 128MB graphics card, and Vista 32-Bit.
    > New machine is a Quad-Core 3.4GHz AMD Black, 12GB or RAM, two GTX460 1GB graphics cards, and 64-Bit Windows 7.


    Windows 7 is absolute crap compared to Windows Vista and Windows XP, and the new Windows 8 is even worse. The screen redraw performance on Windows 7 went dramatically downhill, it can't even redraw a simple text list properly without flickering sometimes. There is a notable framerate drop ever since Windows 7, and as far as I'm concerned, Microsoft conned me into buying this OS by making out it's a real performer.


    It performs like sh*t


    You should not be choking or performing like crap with those specs, unless its the AMD cpu. ;)
    I'm running an I7-2600K w/ OC throttle enabled, 8GB Corsair Vengeance lowpro, and also have SLI'd 2x GTX 460s (mine are from the EVGA superclocked line) running in W7 64bit and it handles everything I throw at it.. from games to graphics to audio to video. You might have an actual hardware issue going on, or some crapware on your machine that shouldn't be there.

    I'm running Win7 64-bit on a Dell netbook (1.7GHz 2GB RAM) with an AMD processor, and it runs like a dream. Something else is going on.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 19,343
    edited December 1969

    This seems to be drifting off into broader and wilder areas - let's keep this on the Windows 8 topic, please.

  • pumecopumeco Posts: 0
    edited June 2012

    @Richard
    Sorry about that, and quite right, I was in rant mode just then!


    @ThoseWhoSuspectTheHardware
    I should have been a bit more detailed what I meant about the performance. Yes, Windows 7 does give me more access to the RAM, but that is down to it being 64-Bit, and yes, I do get better performance from this system for most things, but there are also things that are crippled due to Microsoft's careless decision making. My browser performance has gone downhill for a start, view Google images and fill the screen with images, then scroll fast. Using Chrome It sticks like I'm using a crappy under-powered netbook or something, like it's fighting for memory.


    I know for sure it's not my hardware because I never had these problems when Vista 32-Bit was installed on it.


    The screen redraw has definitely gone downhill and it is because of the GDI. The older 1.0 was superb, the newer 1.1 is absolute crap for the most part because software hasn't caught up, and neither has even their own OS because redraw performance is totally disgusting in some parts of the OS . They did tests, and it's so bad they even discovered that installing Vista graphics drivers on 7 worked better than 7 graphics drivers on 7. The reason is because both XP and Vista drivers used GDI 1.0.


    It's not that the technology is worse, it's just that Microsoft are so arrogant they feel it's fine to force you to use the new system when almost everything we have was designed for the old one. They haven't even added an option for us to switch to 1.0 mode until software catches up. They are arrogant a$$es and need some form of watchdog over them so that they can't just pull crap like this on people whenever they feel like it.


    Also, after noticing my drive-to-drive transfers were notably slower, I found out it is because Microsoft have optimised the disk technology for SSD now, and again, like the arrogant a$$es they are, they have not made it so that it detects standard hard drives to work in that mode instead. In other words, they're assuming we can all afford to replace our 1TB drives with SSD, and tough if you cannot afford it. If you have SSD you're ok, but if you're using a standard drive I'm afraid your performance is less than Vista, just like your 2D graphics performance is. They won't tell you this, but they'll happily fob you off with a performance downgrade (which is what Windows 7 is).


    Here's just one of many articles on the web about the redraw performance of 7, they admitted it's something to do with a trade-off due to a new way of handling memory, and obviously this is something they didn't want to shout about when they were busy bullsh*tting everyone into believing it was a great performer. Like I said, I was conned into buying this OS, and so was anyone else who paid money for it.


    Windows 7 is a performance crap-heap, and so is Windows 8 for the same reason:
    http://www.passmark.com/support/performancetest/2d_windows7_performance.htm


    If that official Passmark link doesn't convince you, simply type Poor 2D Performance in Windows 7 into Google and have fun!

    Post edited by pumeco on
  • adzanadzan Posts: 209
    edited December 1969

    I've just realised where I've seen the Windows 8 start screen before -

    It's a fast food EPOS cash register screen !!


    Wow! :blank:

Sign In or Register to comment.
Rocket Fuel