Windows 8 Release

[Tribble]

I have played with the Metro UI (strangely it was loaded on an iPad and MACBook and worked really well). I know it is there to give a tablet feel, but I found it a bit tedious (but that could be me). It feels like using a switchboard to access forms to access apps - rather than just going to a command for the app itself (much like my phone before I loaded Go Launcher). It looks good - moves quickly (but that could have been the MAC Book).

When I asked Gideon why he had loaded it on the MAC Book - he said "cause I can".

[hamin_aus]

The thing that sells it for me is the thought of having XP performance, but all the technologies of 7 bundled with it.

If you actually believe this to be true I have several bridges which would be excellent investments for a discerning intellectual such as yourself...

[Bladerunner]

The thing that sells it for me is the thought of having XP performance, but all the technologies of 7 bundled with it.

If you actually believe this to be true I have several bridges which would be excellent investments for a discerning intellectual such as yourself...

I'll use it for myself and then decide on the performance. From what I've heard, from several people who have been using the consumer preview and whatnot, the performance is incredible.

[hamin_aus]

from several people who have been using the consumer preview and whatnot, the performance is incredible.

I have seen it in action and yes, it is fast.
But it is optimised for modern hardware. More so than even Windows 7.

I wonder how fast it would be on a P4 with 1GB RAM
If you want an acid test for XP performance you need to run it on an XP-era machine.
Apples with apples and all that!
And it's footprint is still bigger than XP's ever was. So meh.

The performance of Win7 vs Win8 is comparable in everyday tasks on modern PC's it's not like Win8 wins by miles.

[Bladerunner]

I wonder how fast it would be on a P4 with 1GB RAM

I see your point, but given that I am not running it on a P4, I don't mind.

I am looking forward to a bit of a boost since my PC's components are fast becoming outdated, however.

[D3PART3D]

Valve's Gabe Newell calls Windows 8 a 'catastrophe'

Rustypup was right!

[DarkStar]

I stand by what I originally said about Windows 8.

I'm really impressed at the UI. Its clean, neat and works quite well. And I'm impressed by how much effort Microsoft put into making the new UI accessible for mouse and keyboard users.

However, I don't see this taking off at all. It's just too much of a clutter for power and business users.

Axing the traditional start button and menu was the biggest mistake ever. And switching between Metro and Desktop all the time is actually quite jarring.

[StarPhoenix]

Valve's Gabe Newell calls Windows 8 a 'catastrophe'

Rustypup was right!

Games: the only reason I run Windows.
//That would be a pile of cash I would no longer have to pay for an operating system.

[rustypup]

I'm impressed by how much effort Microsoft put into making the new UI accessible for mouse and keyboard users.

you're impressed that they've managed to include support for the world's primary input methodologies in a PC operating system? this is "impressive"?



<edit>
i have a depressing suspicion this entire debacle exists so that they can have kinect support...

because retards got to have them some kinect...

"haha! i'm so future!"

[Cataclysm_ZA]

I've been using Windows 8 in a dual-boot setup since the first beta release and I've been through subsequent ones in both virtualised setups and as the default boot OS. The changes from the developer preview to the release preview are just astounding - performance is up, boot times are down, just about everything that I can find that was bad on Metro has been fixed or improved in Modern UI to the point where I'm no longer badmouthing the interface - its far, far more productive and useable than Windows 7.

I don't see Kinect support just yet, its too much of a sci-fi thing and it would be a massive gimmick until Microsoft can figure out exactly how to make it functional for the end-user. Modern UI doesn't lend itself well to ten-foot resolutions so I expect that to be left to Xbox for now. Kinect on a laptop or desktop may have use in eye-tracking, facial recognition and extra security features.

But in any case, I'm now on the 64-bit RTM version of Pro, received from a MAPS subscription. My hardware runs better, my games are more stable and ever so slightly faster, driver support is impressive and its pretty. Its a really, really pretty OS.

[D3PART3D]

interface - its far, far more productive and useable than Windows 7.

Lol

[hamin_aus]

Its a really, really pretty OS.

When did Windows users start caring how 'pretty' the OS was???? That is the last bastion of defense for the neck-bearded, skinny-jeaned Apple fanbois.

At the risk of accusing you of being a shill for Microsoft, I'm going to say Microsoft robably paid you money for that "opinion"

I still shudder to think how Metro UI is going to provide greater ease of use to traditional desktop users...
I haven't used the OS much myself, but on a PC I found it's pretty much just another version of Windows, but with an obtrusive and difficult-to-master UI

That being said... as soon as Windows 8 is supported by decent tablets I'll be getting an EEE Transformer 2 as it will certainly run like a boss on that!

[rustypup]

interface - its far, far more productive and useable than Windows 7.

Lol

double lol... i've been playing with the RCs since inception and the UI is still a solid kick to the gonads...

[Stuart]

difficult-to-master UI

Seriously? It's difficult?

[Hman]

difficult-to-master UI

Seriously? It's difficult?

Australia is getting to him......

[Cataclysm_ZA]

Its a really, really pretty OS.

When did Windows users start caring how 'pretty' the OS was???? That is the last bastion of defense for the neck-bearded, skinny-jeaned Apple fanbois.

Well when Vista was released I wasn't so wooed by the transparency. It basically looked and ran (on my machine) like a skinned version of XP and even though I used it and grew to love it later. It wasn't the prettiest thing I'd seen and neither was XP. 7 changed the game in a lot of ways and I digged the customisation options and the wide range of colours - I know Vista had those too, but it didn't look as pretty. Windows 8 is a pretty OS and the start screen is nice to look at; and because I see it so often during the day, I'm glad its not an eyesore.

At the risk of accusing you of being a shill for Microsoft, I'm going to say Microsoft robably paid you money for that "opinion"

Meh, if I was a shill for Microsoft I'd at least be getting more money than I am now as a writer. But I'm not one to plug a product or a service unless it really is that good, the people involved aren't paying me and I've used it for myself. Beyond that, any hardware recommendations I make are based on experience and educated guesses. No company could bribe me with enough money to make me change my mind.

I still shudder to think how Metro UI is going to provide greater ease of use to traditional desktop users...
I haven't used the OS much myself, but on a PC I found it's pretty much just another version of Windows, but with an obtrusive and difficult-to-master UI

I think a lot of people aren't giving 8 the chance it deserves. Many people have installed the OS onto their computers and have experimented with it but few people that I know have let it run for longer than two months. Habits are hard to break, especially one that we've been doing for years because we reach for that Start button automatically, no matter what OS we're on. Any habit worth having takes up to six weeks to become ingrained into your head and I've been running 8 on my PC for the last five months.

I got really into it when the Release Preview launched. The beta versions before that were too unfinished and rough around the edges to work properly and I almost gave up on them. I mostly booted into the RP in the months leading up to the RTM release into the developers and MSDN network and up until two weeks ago, I was running Windows 7 purely for the games. Since my reformat to Windows 8 Pro 64-bit, its been a relief to see that everything is fixed, my original gripes are gone and I can get my tiles back. And a boot time of 30s on a two year-old hard drive is just the icing on the cake, as is the lack of any issues with games that I had on by 32-bit install of Windows 7, particularly with Borderlands once you got out of Fyrestone.

[THE_STIG]

the interface - its far, far more productive and useable than Windows 7.

Epic lol, what are you smoking?

my games are more stable and ever so slightly faster, driver support is impressive and its pretty. Its a really, really pretty OS.

Are they not already stable on win 7? Does anybody really care how "pretty" it is, I dont think so. As jamin said pretty is reserved for the apple fanbois to use as an excuse to be apple fanbois

Well when Vista was released I wasn't so wooed by the transparency. It basically looked and ran (on my machine) like a skinned version of XP and even though I used it and grew to love it later. It wasn't the prettiest thing I'd seen and neither was XP. 7 changed the game in a lot of ways and I digged the customisation options and the wide range of colours - I know Vista had those too, but it didn't look as pretty. Windows 8 is a pretty OS and the start screen is nice to look at; and because I see it so often during the day, I'm glad its not an eyesore.

It ran like a skinned version of XP I am not so sure, what made it so bad was that it was way more resource heavy than XP. The opposite of skinned I would say

How did windows 7 change the game, it was just a modified version of vista that actually worked

[Cataclysm_ZA]

Epic lol, what are you smoking?

I've now had just over five months with 8 in a dual-boot and single-OS environment where I forced myself to learn it as part of a column series I was writing. And it is more productive, or at least lends itself to allowing one to be more productive. I can't say exactly how it's going to be more productive for you because you may use your PC for different jobs and with different software. For me the full-screen apps allow me to work without distractions, I can get all my news in short summaries through the live tiles without opening the browser or any bookmarks, sharing stuff I find on the internet is easier and I like the fact that I can replicate my desktop on any other machine running 8 that I want, provided I keep using Skydrive to sync documents. I know a lot of people will read this as a plug for the OS, but that's what I really found works better for me.

No more mucking about with Windows Live Mesh and Skydrive folders!

Are they not already stable on win 7? Does anybody really care how "pretty" it is, I dont think so. As jamin said pretty is reserved for the apple fanbois to use as an excuse to be apple fanbois

Isn't that really a sweeping statement, though? Just because a few forumites favour function over form doesn't mean it applies to everyone. I like an OS that's not an eyesore and Windows XP was one of them - and I always ended up removing the skins or customising the classic theme to a dark one, because they didn't work properly for all GUI elements or it hogged my system down, in the case of the Alienware XP software I got from a friend years ago.

If you liked the way Windows 7 looks compared to Vista or XP, then you're one of those people who like a pretty OS.

How did windows 7 change the game, it was just a modified version of vista that actually worked

Vista worked like a charm on systems that I worked on/built up that were properly specced with more than 2GB of RAM, a modern dual-core CPU and a SATA hard drive that was reasonably new, where there weren't legacy products that would have been a schlepp to support even on Windows XP. And arguably, Vista should only have come out in 64-bit versions because 32-bit OSes were already old hat. If everyone had just accepted that Vista was part of a new era in computers that also ushered in the need for better hardware performance/specs and simplified peripheral support that didn't use outdated, antiquated software, then they wouldn't have complained so much.

But the peeps that cry that Windows 8/Modern UI is useless and everyone should stay on 7 are likely the same ones who said Vista should be avoided and everyone should stick to XP, or that everyone should stick to Windows 98 because XP was crap (which was true for the first eight months or so, and then SP1 fixed mostly everything). I should know, because I was one of them at one point until I tried Vista for myself. Everyone has their reasons for sticking/moving on, but sometimes a little bit of change is a good thing.

Its not always a good thing for everyone, but there's a fair amount of people that I feel could benefit from Windows 8. Its still got a few rough edges that I hope will be sorted out as time passes, though it pretty much gets a thumbs-up from me.

And I'll be getting a Windows Phone to complement it as well, so that's another bonus.

[hamin_aus]

Vista worked like a charm on systems that I worked on/built up that were properly specced with more than 2GB of RAM, a modern dual-core CPU and a SATA hard drive that was reasonably new, where there weren't legacy products that would have been a schlepp to support even on Windows XP.

Peoples main gripes with Vista were not its hardware support.Network file copying was atrocious, even after SP1. The GUI while much slicker than XP was something you paid a heavy price for. Home/office users on modern (at the time) hardware who didn't have dedicated gfx cards still suffered and often had to turn features off for a decent experience. The UAC settings were something everyone hated and still hates in 7 for the most part. At least they toned it down a bit in 7... I could go on but there are several anti Vista threads here already

And arguably, Vista should only have come out in 64-bit versions because 32-bit OSes were already old hat.

Support for x64 from most application developers was still virtually non-existent at on Vista's debut.

If everyone had just accepted that Vista was part of a new era in computers that also ushered in the need for better hardware performance/specs and simplified peripheral support that didn't use outdated, antiquated software, then they wouldn't have complained so much.

Hahahahaha!
And if wishes were horses beggars would ride..
You clearly have no idea how the PC market works. Just like Microsoft.
You don't tell the people who buy your product what they will and wont do. You find out what they want to do and make accommodations for that.
Unfortunately Apple have mastered this and that is part of the reason they are so successful. Their lowest common denominator approach and walled garden make them very attractive to to the majority of PC users who dont care about being on the cutting edge and just want new stuff to work like the old stuff, just faster.

IBut the peeps that cry that Windows 8/Modern UI is useless and everyone should stay on 7 are likely the same ones who said Vista should be avoided and everyone should stick to XP, or that everyone should stick to Windows 98 because XP was crap (which was true for the first eight months or so, and then SP1 fixed mostly everything). I should know, because I was one of them at one point until I tried Vista for myself. Everyone has their reasons for sticking/moving on, but sometimes a little bit of change is a good thing.

The fact that Windows 98 was improved by 98SE, XP was only usable after SP2 and Vista only became tolerable after SP1 lends credence to my point that MS are largely clueless at predicting what their user-base wants.

With Win8 they saw a lucrative market in mobile devices, but developing a dedicated mobile OS was too much work, so they just bundled it all into the new Windows OS with barely a thought as to how their bread-and-butter customers would recieve it.
The "they'll get used to it" approach has caused them grief since 1999 but they inexplicably stick by it. Along the way they'll brainwash a few sycophants into falling in line. But most of us will complain and avoid the new OS until they are forced to give us what we want.

it pretty much gets a thumbs-up from me.

It gets a thumbs up from me too... up where is another story. I'll stick to Win7 on my PC for as long as I can afford to. I'm not interested in using 8 as a desktop OS in it's current incarnation. Not one bit.

[StarBound]

Apart from the UI what is different under the hood? Looks like Win8 uses the same code as Win7 where drivers are concerned.

[THE_STIG]

Vista worked like a charm on systems that I worked on

lol wut. Anyway it was more the awful network file sharing, stupid UAC and that you had to have a half decent dedicated gfx card to get the UI to run properly that caused all the hate. And since vista is just about extinct whereas XP is still being used by quite a few shows that vista was rubbish, so stop trying to defend it . But XP users should move on now

And I'll be getting a Windows Phone to complement it as well, so that's another bonus

Microsoft fanboy much?

Isn't that really a sweeping statement, though? Just because a few forumites favour function over form doesn't mean it applies to everyone. I like an OS that's not an eyesore and Windows XP was one of them - and I always ended up removing the skins or customising the classic theme to a dark one, because they didn't work properly for all GUI elements or it hogged my system down, in the case of the Alienware XP software I got from a friend years ago.

If you liked the way Windows 7 looks compared to Vista or XP, then you're one of those people who like a pretty OS.

Really, a few you say. Why then was XP found on so many PC's if it was such an eyesore. So I think most ms users prefer function over form. And no I dont care what windows 7 looks like, as long as it works.

[Stuart]

And since vista is just about extinct whereas XP is still being used by quite a few shows that vista was rubbish, so stop trying to defend it .

Or possibly that those who upgraded from XP to a superior operating system again upgraded from Vista to a superior operating system.

Edit: And those who complained about Vista's UAC (which could, by the way, be turned off) obviously had very little experience with MacOS or even Linux.

[Cataclysm_ZA]

Apart from the UI what is different under the hood? Looks like Win8 uses the same code as Win7 where drivers are concerned.

There's a lot of changes underneath that users aren't aware of, but off the top of my head (that I can remember):

1) Shared kernel between the desktop/tablet versions and Windows Phone 8 for better app compatibility
2) Revised list of default services on boot up and a quicker boot time
3) Faster reboots because data is cached to the fastest sectors of hard drives. I get, on average, a 25s boot time excluding the five seconds my BIOS takes over
4) Hardware acceleration is everywhere inside the OS, driven by the GPU
5) New CPU scheduler that also apparently fixes the scheduler issues with AMD's Bulldozer chips (needs more in-depth testing now that the OS is in RTM)
6) the chkdsk command prompt and NTFS in general has had an update (I use chkdsk all the time to attempt to repair corrupt files and installs for friends, and this new one is lovely)
7) New memory management subsystem that automatically closes unused apps to free up RAM before accessing the page file (I've never pushed my RAM that far since my install, but I haven't seen a lot of page file usage either, currently sitting at 702MB)
8 ) A lot of optimisations for power efficiency which benefits laptops as well as desktops
9) Copying files within the OS is now much faster and better handled thanks to a more flexible file copy system, which allows for pauses and also maximises throughput. I don't use Total Commander for regular copying anymore, only for queuing up lots of files to be copied.
10) Finally, there's a whole bunch of new stuff for mobile networks and allowing devices to stay connected to the internet while in a low-power state.

And I'll be getting a Windows Phone to complement it as well, so that's another bonus

Microsoft fanboy much?

No, just the other options don't work for me. Nokia's Symbian has been given a finite life and developers are jumping ship, so that won't work if I'd like to access services in 2015, for example. iOS seems like a good option until I look at the price tag, coupled with the fact that I'd have to be running OS X to get the most out of iCloud. Android suits my mobile needs the best thanks to the apps and general layout and behaviour, but won't give me proper integration with my desktop or the Skydrive service which I regularly use. A Lumia 610 with WP 7.8 would suffice and work exactly like I wanted, with a WP8 device being an even better fit into the rest of the technology that I use.

Really, a few you say. Why then was XP found on so many PC's if it was such an eyesore. So I think most ms users prefer function over form. And no I dont care what windows 7 looks like, as long as it works.

In the same manner that Intel made a deal with the OEMs to continue selling the Netburst-based processors even though they were comparatively terrible to the excellent Athlon 64 X2 chips, so I believe a lot of WIndows XP's success is down to Microsoft forcing OEMs to sell it without alternatives. It also doesn't help that DirectX was a major component of the OS (and was proprietary) and had a firm grip on the market because it was more clearly documented and therefore easier to program for than OpenGL. If Microsoft and Intel hadn't been such playground bullies back then, the market would be very different today and I would be running Linux on my desktop permanently.

[Ron2K]

After reading some recent posts, I feel it necessary to pull rank. While a good discussion on the merits (or lack thereof) of Windows 8 is appreciated, some people's posts are starting to head into flamewar territory. By all means, you're welcome to disagree with each other, but keep it to refuting each other's points; posts containing "lol, fanboy much", "lol wut", "what are you smoking" and that sort of thing are unwelcome here, and will likely result in warnings/bans as we feel necessary.

I expect high standards of discussion on this forum; users unable to raise their standards should rather find an alternative forum (such as MyBroadband) where their lower standards would be more welcome.

[hamin_aus]

Well said Ron, and if I may add - well done to Cataclysm_ZA for keeping his cool.
I think we have established that he knows what is worthy of a response and is quite adept at side-stepping ad hominem attacks

A welcome addition to the forums - even if his leanings are a bit too pro-Microsoft, even for me