New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Windows 8... - Page 9

post #121 of 197

Glad so many are enjoying windows 8, for me a vastly improved wmp, ie10, and xbox music are alone great reasons I love it, along with many other reasons. It kind of bothers me to this day all the moaning about vista. I have not had a bsod since running vista. It never gave me a problem

post #122 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by the search never ends View Post

Glad so many are enjoying windows 8, for me a vastly improved wmp, ie10, and xbox music are alone great reasons I love it, along with many other reasons. It kind of bothers me to this day all the moaning about vista. I have not had a bsod since running vista. It never gave me a problem

I neither really had any problems with Vista. I did build my PC just the day Vista came out and started hearing about all of the hate post about Vista year later. 

 

Though i will say that Windows 7 (now Windows 8) was a upgrade and probably one of the best OS's ever by Microsoft. Granted i had also build totally new PC 4 months ago for Windows 7 with all of the yummy stuff like 256GB SSD so that might have made my views even more positive towards Windows 7. With this PC build the start up speeds are just insane, it's faster to do cold boot than to wake the PC from sleep. :D Windows 8 managed to shave second or two from it making the start up almost instant. 


Edited by tissot - 11/30/12 at 4:46am
post #123 of 197
I'm loving it so far. The GUI is more visually pleasing to me as well. No more shiny buttons smily_headphones1.gif
post #124 of 197
Thread Starter 

I think the Vista hate was more how slow it was, since it took up so many resources (compared to XP or in general I don't know). Sure, it probably had horrid issue sin the beginning but I think they were sorted out later. Vista is fine for me but it needs some power to run at decent speeds.

post #125 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtaylor991 View Post

I think the Vista hate was more how slow it was, since it took up so many resources (compared to XP or in general I don't know). Sure, it probably had horrid issue sin the beginning but I think they were sorted out later. Vista is fine for me but it needs some power to run at decent speeds.

The resource usage was the cause of slowing, mostly on older machines, with a newer chip and 4 gigs of ram minimum, it wasn't really slow. On the other hand, vista, windows 7, windows 8, kept getting better at utilizing more ram.  The ability to use the chip to accelerate software also kept increasing.

 

Too many low end pc's weren't really equipped to handle vista. I'm now seeing many compare windows 8 to vista.  The only thing similar, is they both bring good improvements to the platform.  In my opinion, windows 7, while improving on vista, was not quite the improvement 8 is over 7.

post #126 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by the search never ends View Post

The resource usage was the cause of slowing, mostly on older machines, with a newer chip and 4 gigs of ram minimum, it wasn't really slow. On the other hand, vista, windows 7, windows 8, kept getting better at utilizing more ram.  The ability to use the chip to accelerate software also kept increasing.

 

Too many low end pc's weren't really equipped to handle vista. I'm now seeing many compare windows 8 to vista.  The only thing similar, is they both bring good improvements to the platform.  In my opinion, windows 7, while improving on vista, was not quite the improvement 8 is over 7.

 

I agree, especially since when Windows 7 was released, it was after Vista SP2, which is very close to what stock Windows 7 is. There was a lot of FUD and unsubstantiated opinions from people who simply jumped on the Vista bashing bandwagon, having little to no experience with the OS itself. Vista is significantly more secure than XP, has much better audio support, recognizes newer hardware standards, and is far from what it has been called. The two main issues of Vista were the higher resource usage, explained by how manufacturers were still shipping PCs geared for legacy XP and its recommended system requirements (at the time), as well as the BSODs that occurs during an initial period, which was once again entirely on manufacturers developing horrid drivers that caused significant lack of stability, many not adhering properly to WDM, doing bad kernel-mode drivers, etc. From SP1 onwards, Vista became pretty much usable on all scenarios.

post #127 of 197

I have been running Windows 8 for about 2 hours now. I don't think I ever hated an OS this much.

I hate the Metro Start menu. Hate is not a word I throw around a lot, but it's very well-used here. I hate it. It runs crap apps (or as grown-ups call it, programs) in the background taking up more CPU than should be even legal. As I type this, my laptop is at 80ºC because something called Windows Modules Installer Worker is taking up 36% of my CPU.

Next, the idea of having what used to be my hotmail account, then my windows live account and then my Microsoft account now being my freaking computer account goes much beyond privacy intrusion. I don't want my computer log-on associated with my mail browsing or my MSN chatting. I don't care if I sound grumpy or old-fashioned, I shouldn't be forced into this. How does this not infuriate people? The first thing I get when I come in is Messenger, or whatever it's called now, greeting me. If you're like me and have more than one MSN account, I imagine you'll have to create a Microsoft account, and consequently a computer account for each one. Imagine having to log out of your computer to switch e-mails.

And where is everything? Has anyone even figured out how to get to the Control Panel? The only way I've discovered is to use the Search function, which is less than a workaround. This seems made for grandmas, it has like 12 tiles on the Start Menu with things like travel or IE, but don't you dare think of something more technical like looking at the registry. I knew how to use 7 wonderfully, I knew where all the options were. This OS just hides so many options that it's ridiculous. Did they seriously not test this? I know you can dismiss anything with a "people will get used to it", but I honestly don't want to get used to this. I'm not opposing change, I embrace it, that's why I read up on 8 and bought it. I really regret my decision. Even Windows 95 was lightyears ahead of 8 when it comes to intuition.

And since you don't have an old-fashioned Start Menu like you used to, it's not like you can just say "oh I'll just stick with desktop" because, if you were like me, everything revolved around the Start Menu. Try doing anything at all, finding a program, opening Windows freaking Explorer from the desktop! It's very simple: if it's not pinned to the taskbar or on the desktop, you have to use the Start Menu. So you think "I'll use those options" whichs ends up in you having 40 icons on your desktop or your taskbar.

To anyone out there considering buying this, I urge you try it first. On a friend's computer who already has it, just understand if you really wanted to be treated like a toddler by your computer.

post #128 of 197

A very good post I found online while in despair over my lost Windows 7:

"Progress halts when an agreeable arrangement occurs. Drinking glasses have been the same as they are now for a very long time. We use Kettles for boiling water, wrenches, screwdrivers, eyeglasses, the steering wheel, the volume knob, each of these has been pretty consistent for decades or centuries.
There's a reason for this – progress is NO LONGER DESIRABLE when an "interface" or utility object arrives at its ideal form.

What is counterproductive though is designing a new user interface merely to distinguish your product from the competition and forcing hundreds of millions or billions of hours in lost productivity and retraining in order to teach users how to do the EXACT SAME TASKS they already knew how to do.

Look at it this way, instead of trying justify the terrible UI that is embodied in Win8, let's ask ourselves – what new tasks does it allow users to accomplish?
Can you Facebook "better" or write a word processed document "better" merely because the UI has changed? No, that'd be absurd to claim.
Can you program more efficiently with the new interfaces? Likely not, and in fact this automagic mind-reading UI disease that is ballooning into an epidemic is causing massive backlash among the developers.

Let's be honest & just call out this new UI for what it is – an attempt to create a one size fits all solution so that the team/s that created it can claim that it runs on tablets, phones, desktops, and laptops with equal ease. But the problem with the one size fits all solution is that it is always going to be far from ideal for most of these devices, and it shows in Windows 8."

post #129 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post

A very good post I found online while in despair over my lost Windows 7:

"Progress halts when an agreeable arrangement occurs. Drinking glasses have been the same as they are now for a very long time. We use Kettles for boiling water, wrenches, screwdrivers, eyeglasses, the steering wheel, the volume knob, each of these has been pretty consistent for decades or centuries.
There's a reason for this – progress is NO LONGER DESIRABLE when an "interface" or utility object arrives at its ideal form.

What is counterproductive though is designing a new user interface merely to distinguish your product from the competition and forcing hundreds of millions or billions of hours in lost productivity and retraining in order to teach users how to do the EXACT SAME TASKS they already knew how to do.

Look at it this way, instead of trying justify the terrible UI that is embodied in Win8, let's ask ourselves – what new tasks does it allow users to accomplish?
Can you Facebook "better" or write a word processed document "better" merely because the UI has changed? No, that'd be absurd to claim.
Can you program more efficiently with the new interfaces? Likely not, and in fact this automagic mind-reading UI disease that is ballooning into an epidemic is causing massive backlash among the developers.

Let's be honest & just call out this new UI for what it is – an attempt to create a one size fits all solution so that the team/s that created it can claim that it runs on tablets, phones, desktops, and laptops with equal ease. But the problem with the one size fits all solution is that it is always going to be far from ideal for most of these devices, and it shows in Windows 8."

I've just bought a new laptop, strictly for work. After a few hours I took the hard drive out and threw in an SSD with windows 7 on it. Having a giant start menu isn't really for me.

post #130 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tangster View Post

I've just bought a new laptop, strictly for work. After a few hours I took the hard drive out and threw in an SSD with windows 7 on it. Having a giant start menu isn't really for me.

You can disable the live tiles. Basically windows 8 can be set to look just like 7, but hey, different strokes.

post #131 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post

I have been running Windows 8 for about 2 hours now. I don't think I ever hated an OS this much.
I hate the Metro Start menu. Hate is not a word I throw around a lot, but it's very well-used here. I hate it. It runs crap apps (or as grown-ups call it, programs) in the background taking up more CPU than should be even legal. As I type this, my laptop is at 80ºC because something called Windows Modules Installer Worker is taking up 36% of my CPU.
Next, the idea of having what used to be my hotmail account, then my windows live account and then my Microsoft account now being my freaking computer account goes much beyond privacy intrusion. I don't want my computer log-on associated with my mail browsing or my MSN chatting. I don't care if I sound grumpy or old-fashioned, I shouldn't be forced into this. How does this not infuriate people? The first thing I get when I come in is Messenger, or whatever it's called now, greeting me. If you're like me and have more than one MSN account, I imagine you'll have to create a Microsoft account, and consequently a computer account for each one. Imagine having to log out of your computer to switch e-mails.
And where is everything? Has anyone even figured out how to get to the Control Panel? The only way I've discovered is to use the Search function, which is less than a workaround. This seems made for grandmas, it has like 12 tiles on the Start Menu with things like travel or IE, but don't you dare think of something more technical like looking at the registry. I knew how to use 7 wonderfully, I knew where all the options were. This OS just hides so many options that it's ridiculous. Did they seriously not test this? I know you can dismiss anything with a "people will get used to it", but I honestly don't want to get used to this. I'm not opposing change, I embrace it, that's why I read up on 8 and bought it. I really regret my decision. Even Windows 95 was lightyears ahead of 8 when it comes to intuition.
And since you don't have an old-fashioned Start Menu like you used to, it's not like you can just say "oh I'll just stick with desktop" because, if you were like me, everything revolved around the Start Menu. Try doing anything at all, finding a program, opening Windows freaking Explorer from the desktop! It's very simple: if it's not pinned to the taskbar or on the desktop, you have to use the Start Menu. So you think "I'll use those options" which ends up in you having 40 icons on your desktop or your task bar.
To anyone out there considering buying this, I urge you try it first. On a friend's computer who already has it, just understand if you really wanted to be treated like a toddler by your computer.

well, you don't have to connect the pc to your Microsoft account, on install you can just not give the credentials, and use a local account, just like in win 7. Dunno tough why it was eating so much processor power tough. The Metro email app can take ass much email accounts as you like just go to its settings and add account, works with gmail, and few others too. tough you probably want to install just smth like Thunderbird, there isn't much features in that metro email, just like every other metro app is useless for power user. So to get rid of it, just get classic shell, a customizable standard looking start menu. Besides Microsoft is killing hotmail, no one is using it anymore, and looks like they are merging it to skype.

And well you can use the same microsoft account on multiple computers, and then your settings will be automatically synced between the PC:s, like your wallpaper. And the sync for different elements can be turned of in the settings(metro app). Also the slide up "lockscreen" can be turned of so you don't have to swipe up every time.

There are few nice improvements on desktop side, Task Manager is really nice, file transferring is way better than it was in win 7, you don't need something like teracopy anymore. And it can mount disk image files to virtual drives without any 3rd party programs, no need to extract those .iso files anymore.

There are thing i don't like in win 8, like the on-screen keyboard, believe or not, it was better with windows 7 on a tablet. I have windows 8 on both my series 7 slate and my desktop PC.
Edited by Whippler - 12/4/12 at 10:50pm
post #132 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post

A very good post I found online while in despair over my lost Windows 7:

"Progress halts when an agreeable arrangement occurs. Drinking glasses have been the same as they are now for a very long time. We use Kettles for boiling water, wrenches, screwdrivers, eyeglasses, the steering wheel, the volume knob, each of these has been pretty consistent for decades or centuries.
There's a reason for this – progress is NO LONGER DESIRABLE when an "interface" or utility object arrives at its ideal form.

What is counterproductive though is designing a new user interface merely to distinguish your product from the competition and forcing hundreds of millions or billions of hours in lost productivity and retraining in order to teach users how to do the EXACT SAME TASKS they already knew how to do.

Look at it this way, instead of trying justify the terrible UI that is embodied in Win8, let's ask ourselves – what new tasks does it allow users to accomplish?
Can you Facebook "better" or write a word processed document "better" merely because the UI has changed? No, that'd be absurd to claim.
Can you program more efficiently with the new interfaces? Likely not, and in fact this automagic mind-reading UI disease that is ballooning into an epidemic is causing massive backlash among the developers.

Let's be honest & just call out this new UI for what it is – an attempt to create a one size fits all solution so that the team/s that created it can claim that it runs on tablets, phones, desktops, and laptops with equal ease. But the problem with the one size fits all solution is that it is always going to be far from ideal for most of these devices, and it shows in Windows 8."


I think more than re-inventing the UI, its about Microsoft trying to stay relevant in a world where fewer and fewer people are buying PCs. Its a last ditch attempt to get some of the tablet users on board, and hopefully sustain Window's presence in home/personal use. Otherwise, Windows will be relegated to offices and for those who develop for phones and tablets or tasks that need serious horsepower, much like Linux is used mostly by enthusiasts and for research/development. 

 

The thing though, is that an OS is only a small part of the equation nowadays, because of standards that enable small applications to work on different platforms and OSs. You don't need 10 different ways to run Twitter, or Facebook, because these apps are becoming OS agnostic. The world has changed, and for better or worse, they're more interested in devices that let them consume rather than produce.

 

The only approach left to sell the OS is to tie down the hardware with the software, but thats what MS has been doing for a while. The thing is, no one wants that hardware anymore.

 

I think Microsoft needs to think hard about this. They need a serious breakthrough, *both* in hardware *and* software. 

Its like the slugger who's waiting to throw that one good punch to end the bout, but it may or may not happen. 


Edited by proton007 - 12/5/12 at 12:54am
post #133 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whippler View Post

well, you don't have to connect the pc to your Microsoft account, on install you can just not give the credentials, and use a local account, just like in win 7. Dunno tough why it was eating so much processor power tough. The Metro email app can take ass much email accounts as you like just go to its settings and add account, works with gmail, and few others too. tough you probably want to install just smth like Thunderbird, there isn't much features in that metro email, just like every other metro app is useless for power user. So to get rid of it, just get classic shell, a customizable standard looking start menu. Besides Microsoft is killing hotmail, no one is using it anymore, and looks like they are merging it to skype.
And well you can use the same microsoft account on multiple computers, and then your settings will be automatically synced between the PC:s, like your wallpaper. And the sync for different elements can be turned of in the settings(metro app). Also the slide up "lockscreen" can be turned of so you don't have to swipe up every time.
There are few nice improvements on desktop side, Task Manager is really nice, file transferring is way better than it was in win 7, you don't need something like teracopy anymore. And it can mount disk image files to virtual drives without any 3rd party programs, no need to extract those .iso files anymore.
There are thing i don't like in win 8, like the on-screen keyboard, believe or not, it was better with windows 7 on a tablet. I have windows 8 on both my series 7 slate and my desktop PC.

 


The Hulk in me has calmed down. I got Classic Shell and it's been very helpful. It allows me to bypass the Start screen altogether, which I'll probably use. The fact that so many users need to use a this-party program to use the OS for the most basic of tasks should tell Microsoft someting.

 

The thing about the Microsoft account was that I already inserted my credentials instead of using a local account, and reverting isn't probably a 3-step process. I really have no need to sync different computers, I only use a gaming desktop with XP and a work+everything else laptop.

 

I've always used thunderbird, it works flawlessly, before that I used Windows Live Mail, which was maybe the best e-mail client ever until it just stopped syncing my account even after fresh re-installs. Thunderbird doesn't allow you to do things like delete an e-mail in your hotmail inbox after deleting it on Thunderbird, or I can mark something as spam, but I still get e-mails from that address. Basically it shows you your e-mail, but it doesn't let you control it. For this Windows Live Mail is better, and I was hoping to use it, although I don't think I'll use the Metro app.

Messenger doesn't let me add more accounts, the only option I have is to connect my Microsoft-and-hotmail account with my facebook account. I'll have to check more into that.

 
Haven't tried file transfer yet, but I like the new Task Manager. Another great loss was the desktop miniapps, I know most just used things like calendars and clocks, but the CPU Meter and Network Meter were lifesavers, if I hadn't installed them I'd never know when my CPU was 10 degrees away from shutting down my computer.

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by proton007 View Post

I think more than re-inventing the UI, its about Microsoft trying to stay relevant in a world where fewer and fewer people are buying PCs. Its a last ditch attempt to get some of the tablet users on board, and hopefully sustain Window's presence in home/personal use. Otherwise, Windows will be relegated to offices and for those who develop for phones and tablets or tasks that need serious horsepower, much like Linux is used mostly by enthusiasts and for research/development. 

 

The thing though, is that an OS is only a small part of the equation nowadays, because of standards that enable small applications to work on different platforms and OSs. You don't need 10 different ways to run Twitter, or Facebook, because these apps are becoming OS agnostic. The world has changed, and for better or worse, they're more interested in devices that let them consume rather than produce.

 

The only approach left to sell the OS is to tie down the hardware with the software, but thats what MS has been doing for a while. The thing is, no one wants that hardware anymore.

 

I think Microsoft needs to think hard about this. They need a serious breakthrough, *both* in hardware *and* software. 

Its like the slugger who's waiting to throw that one good punch to end the bout, but it may or may not happen. 

 

I get the feeling this was used to appeal more to the common user (no depreciative meaning) who checks his/her e-mail, writes a facebook status about sushi, sends a message to a friend and looks at pictures of cats. It wasn't made for serious users who like to control their computers. That's a feeling I have a lot, it's that while in 7 I knew pretty much which processes were running, here it's like my desktop is a sandbox with lots of stuff going on in the background. Sometimes when I close a Metro app (which only seems to work with Alt+F4) it still runs on Task Manager. I really can't see someone who owns a fan controller ever using Windows 8 as it is.

 

I get the idea of having an OS that can run on anything, it makes sense. Simplicity appeals to most people, and something that fits more devices is simpler. But if it's done at the expense of productivity or usability, then it becomes a demand. If you're not improving anything by changing, then you're probably not changing for the better. Here's a really bad analogy: I used to play Magic: The Gathering nearly everyday. I read the Kamigawa block books about twice, and tried to make a deck that included characters and artifacts which were related on the story, which ended up a deck with lots of Legendaries and rares. It had a concept behind it. Of course my friend's rat deck, which had only a few rares and no concept (other than rats) demolished mine. It didn't have a story or an idea, but it was practical.

 

I don't understand the part of tying the OS. Most computers come bundled with Windows, but you can uninstall that OS and install another one, that's what I did. I thought Apple was the one tying its OS with hardware. I really hope MS understand that as cool-sounding as one-OS-fits-all sounds, if in the end a huge part of their customer base can barely adapt they need to change things. If the Metro UI was optional, or if you still had 7's Start Menu then people might volutarily adapt. There would be less people using Metro, but the ones that did liked it. Instead it forces us to adapt or go into the grey market of third-party apps. I don't know if something like a start menu could come included in a Service Pack, aren't they usually just small changes?

post #134 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post
I don't understand the part of tying the OS. Most computers come bundled with Windows, but you can uninstall that OS and install another one, that's what I did. I thought Apple was the one tying its OS with hardware. I really hope MS understand that as cool-sounding as one-OS-fits-all sounds, if in the end a huge part of their customer base can barely adapt they need to change things.

 

Most Macs can also be wiped and booted with Linux.

My point was, PCs have always been sold with Windows, just like Macs always come with Mac OS. Thing is, people are buying less and less PCs, just like fewer people buy iMacs when compared to Macbooks or iPads.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post


I get the idea of having an OS that can run on anything, it makes sense. Simplicity appeals to most people, and something that fits more devices is simpler. But if it's done at the expense of productivity or usability, then it becomes a demand. If you're not improving anything by changing, then you're probably not changing for the better.

 

Nowadays your apps can run on any OS, if they're coded in HTML5 etc. Why would anyone want the OS to run on multiple platforms? The OS itself has lost its relevance, apart from the UI. Even the task management is done in similar ways by most OSs out there.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post


I get the feeling this was used to appeal more to the common user (no depreciative meaning) who checks his/her e-mail, writes a facebook status about sushi, sends a message to a friend and looks at pictures of cats. It wasn't made for serious users who like to control their computers.

 

 

Exactly my point. Serious users are a minority. Although MS earns a lot from corporate users, its not a growth strategy because businesses don't upgrade software as often. Talking about non-serious tasks, do you feel Win 8 does all this better than Android, or iOS ? I already have a phone for those apps, and most will have a tablet as well. Why would I want another half-tablet, half notebook?


Edited by proton007 - 12/5/12 at 5:28am
post #135 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post

 
Haven't tried file transfer yet, but I like the new Task Manager. Another great loss was the desktop miniapps, I know most just used things like calendars and clocks, but the CPU Meter and Network Meter were lifesavers, if I hadn't installed them I'd never know when my CPU was 10 degrees away from shutting down my computer.

For desktop info, i suggest Rainmeter for you, it a damn nice and really customizable desktop program. http://rainmeter.net/cms/
I have myself logitech G13 gamepad, with lcd, witch shows me temps and stuff.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home