rohitbaran
Distinguished
- Mar 21, 2010
- 1,938
- 0
- 20,160
- Status
SteelCity1981
Distinguished
- Sep 16, 2010
- 1,129
- 0
- 19,310
So basicly if you have Windows 8 you will either make it like Windows 7 again or roll back to Windows 7.
eklipz330
Distinguished
- Jul 7, 2008
- 3,034
- 19
- 20,795
[citation][nom]jdwii[/nom]Windows 8 will be a huge failure people are going to hate it more then vista i know i do.[/citation]
doubt it. vista was hated because it was unoptimized and broken. windows 8 seems to be far more optimized, but these days, every computer sold has the horsepower AND THEN SOME to run any fancy looking UI and many many background processes.
its funny because vista after the first service pack was completely fixed. but it was still optimized like shit, and the OS asked for too much from the system. that's the reason everyone hate vista.
just the fact that they got rid of the start button makes me hate windows 8. they made it easier for the morons, but it takes longer for those that know what they are doing
doubt it. vista was hated because it was unoptimized and broken. windows 8 seems to be far more optimized, but these days, every computer sold has the horsepower AND THEN SOME to run any fancy looking UI and many many background processes.
its funny because vista after the first service pack was completely fixed. but it was still optimized like shit, and the OS asked for too much from the system. that's the reason everyone hate vista.
just the fact that they got rid of the start button makes me hate windows 8. they made it easier for the morons, but it takes longer for those that know what they are doing
captaincharisma
Glorious
- Oct 13, 2004
- 10,959
- 76
- 45,290
windows vista failed because the morons tried to install it on 10 year old PC's. Vista was stable even without service packs. i can't believe MS is taking out all the eye candy that windows 7 perfected. i bet metro will even have a windows 3.1 theme because that is what it is going to end up looking like graphics wise
livebriand
Distinguished
- Apr 18, 2011
- 1,004
- 0
- 19,290
That UI looks like shit. I don't mind them getting rid of some of the shadows, and the tiny little lines around some elements (look very closely at the edges of an explorer window, for instance) though. Windows 7 FTW. I won't be upgrading when 8 comes out, that's for sure.
ohim
Distinguished
- Feb 10, 2009
- 1,195
- 0
- 19,360
Wtf is that office style looking bar in explorer ? there goes 1/4 of the screen just for having that useless shit there , and the graphic of the windows is just terrible ... soon 3.1 style buttons ? Thinking seriously in building a PC that can have a MacOS installed on it (since buying an actual mac is too expensive for it`s hardware)
What I don't get is why Microsoft is seeing ALL THIS universal hatred for Windows 8 and basically not doing a thing about it. I've literally yet to see a raving preview or ANY good comments about W8. Even Vista had its fair share of anticipators willing to defend it. From what I've seen, NO ONE thinks anything they're introducing in W8 is a good idea, at all.
They're basically like "this is Windows 8 and that's that, lalalala we can't hear all your complaints!". Does this company react to public consensus at all anymore? Even more so than Vista, everyone is predicting this will be an utter failure. Like, it's not even a comparison to the so-so Vista pre-release hatred. W8 is garbage and everyone is willing to come out and say it except the company that's supposed to be reacting to all this criticism. As far as I'm concerned this could mean very bad news for MS. I don't even see how this will steal much market share from the already-existing Android and iOS tablet OSes so what market does MS even plan to profit from? No PC user in their right mind will upgrade to W8. It will be forced into new OEM systems and that will be it. The system builder and business market will completely skip this OS with very few exceptions.
Looks like its Xbox division might be their last bastion of profit if they actually go through with launching W8. What a train wreck.
They're basically like "this is Windows 8 and that's that, lalalala we can't hear all your complaints!". Does this company react to public consensus at all anymore? Even more so than Vista, everyone is predicting this will be an utter failure. Like, it's not even a comparison to the so-so Vista pre-release hatred. W8 is garbage and everyone is willing to come out and say it except the company that's supposed to be reacting to all this criticism. As far as I'm concerned this could mean very bad news for MS. I don't even see how this will steal much market share from the already-existing Android and iOS tablet OSes so what market does MS even plan to profit from? No PC user in their right mind will upgrade to W8. It will be forced into new OEM systems and that will be it. The system builder and business market will completely skip this OS with very few exceptions.
Looks like its Xbox division might be their last bastion of profit if they actually go through with launching W8. What a train wreck.
Going to go against the flow here and say: Win 8 is good. The metro interface is ok, I don't hate or like it, but everything else is so much faster, especially searching. And from what I've seen multi-monitor is looking pretty good now too. Biggest problem I had though is AMD dropping driver support for 4XXX cards.
[citation][nom]codenamed[/nom]WHAT MICROSOFT SAYS-"The new Windows 8 user experience is no less than a bet on the future of computing, and stakes a claim to Windows’ role in that future,"TRANSLATION-"The new Windows Dumb user nightmare is no less that a promise of worse things that can happen to computing, and stakes a claim to Windows’ role in that future. YOU-ARE-SCREWED!"[/citation]
That about sums it up doesn't it? It's not a bet on what they think the future of PCs will be, it's them trying to adapt to Apple and Google's already-existing methods of over simplification to cater to the mainstream. It's going to be another "me too" OS just like Windows Phone 7, and that's going to bite them in the ass when they realize how important the older, more versatile versions of Windows were to the PC market. With Windows Phone 7, the only place they could go was up......I mean look at what came before it. WinMo 6 was the absolutely bottom of the barrel for phone OSes, whereas Mac OS still can't even hold a candle to Windows PC in market share. Microsoft has no reason to change what was not broken, which is exactly why they kept WinXP on top for so many years, and what they should have done with W7. Yet here we are with this monstrosity which I still can't believe actually exists.
Going from WinMo to Windows Phone 7 made sense because it was an actual improvement. The person that assumed the same could work for their already-well-established PC OS should just be fired, plain and simple.
That about sums it up doesn't it? It's not a bet on what they think the future of PCs will be, it's them trying to adapt to Apple and Google's already-existing methods of over simplification to cater to the mainstream. It's going to be another "me too" OS just like Windows Phone 7, and that's going to bite them in the ass when they realize how important the older, more versatile versions of Windows were to the PC market. With Windows Phone 7, the only place they could go was up......I mean look at what came before it. WinMo 6 was the absolutely bottom of the barrel for phone OSes, whereas Mac OS still can't even hold a candle to Windows PC in market share. Microsoft has no reason to change what was not broken, which is exactly why they kept WinXP on top for so many years, and what they should have done with W7. Yet here we are with this monstrosity which I still can't believe actually exists.
Going from WinMo to Windows Phone 7 made sense because it was an actual improvement. The person that assumed the same could work for their already-well-established PC OS should just be fired, plain and simple.
belardo
Splendid
- Nov 23, 2008
- 3,540
- 2
- 22,795
[citation][nom]eklipz330[/nom]vista was hated because it was unoptimized and broken. windows 8 seems to be far more optimized, but these days, every computer sold has the horsepower AND THEN SOME to run any fancy looking UI and many many background processes.its funny because vista after the first service pack was completely fixed. but it was still optimized like shit, and the OS asked for too much from the system.[/citation]
It shouldn't require 8GB of RAM and a quad core CPU to open a web browser. Vista is forever broken... it sucked memory because it was defective. SP2 and SP3 did not fix the problems built into vista.
The stupid crap that Win7 does are hold-overs from vista (like going to a folder and waiting 30 seconds for the system to THINK about what to show you). Win7 runs quite good on anything without the CPU or memory requirements of vista. This means less power, less heat and better experience.
[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]windows vista failed because the morons tried to install it on 10 year old PC's. Vista was stable even without service packs.[/citation]
Er... no. Vista ran like shit on the new PCs it was installed on. A mid-range 1GB XP box needed to have a 6~8GB Vista system to run decently. Back then, 1GB of DDR-400 RAM was about $100~150!
So, a good VISTA box was core2 with at least 6GB of RAM at $600~800 using a 64bit OS which has little 64bit support. An old lady's Celeron 600 XP box died, replaced it with a $450 HP with Vista (She didnt want to wait for me to build something) - it came with 512mb, brand new... even thou I pulled the crapware out, the dual-core Pentium was ungodly slow. *IT* was unstable... it may not shut down. It may not wake up from a sleep. She complained at least once a week about vista. I even gave her a 1GB stick of RAM I had to spare. To unpack a 40mb ZIP file, Vista says it'll take 12minutes to unpack!?! I formatted her HD, stuck on WinXP (she bought) - unpacked the same 40mb file (Audio driver for XP for her HP) in about 10 seconds. Yeah, vista SUCKED ASS. Years later, she has that same HP computer... never a peep from her about its operation.
Win7 fixed a lot of problems from vista. Give credit where credit is due. I run Win7 on a 2GB ThinkPad with a bottom end Core2... runs better than when I had XP on it (factory OS was XP). I've installed Win7 on 2004 type hardware with even 256mb and it ran better than vista with 1GB (It was a test).
It shouldn't require 8GB of RAM and a quad core CPU to open a web browser. Vista is forever broken... it sucked memory because it was defective. SP2 and SP3 did not fix the problems built into vista.
The stupid crap that Win7 does are hold-overs from vista (like going to a folder and waiting 30 seconds for the system to THINK about what to show you). Win7 runs quite good on anything without the CPU or memory requirements of vista. This means less power, less heat and better experience.
[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]windows vista failed because the morons tried to install it on 10 year old PC's. Vista was stable even without service packs.[/citation]
Er... no. Vista ran like shit on the new PCs it was installed on. A mid-range 1GB XP box needed to have a 6~8GB Vista system to run decently. Back then, 1GB of DDR-400 RAM was about $100~150!
So, a good VISTA box was core2 with at least 6GB of RAM at $600~800 using a 64bit OS which has little 64bit support. An old lady's Celeron 600 XP box died, replaced it with a $450 HP with Vista (She didnt want to wait for me to build something) - it came with 512mb, brand new... even thou I pulled the crapware out, the dual-core Pentium was ungodly slow. *IT* was unstable... it may not shut down. It may not wake up from a sleep. She complained at least once a week about vista. I even gave her a 1GB stick of RAM I had to spare. To unpack a 40mb ZIP file, Vista says it'll take 12minutes to unpack!?! I formatted her HD, stuck on WinXP (she bought) - unpacked the same 40mb file (Audio driver for XP for her HP) in about 10 seconds. Yeah, vista SUCKED ASS. Years later, she has that same HP computer... never a peep from her about its operation.
Win7 fixed a lot of problems from vista. Give credit where credit is due. I run Win7 on a 2GB ThinkPad with a bottom end Core2... runs better than when I had XP on it (factory OS was XP). I've installed Win7 on 2004 type hardware with even 256mb and it ran better than vista with 1GB (It was a test).
belardo
Splendid
- Nov 23, 2008
- 3,540
- 2
- 22,795
Win8 has bigger picture... I see why MS is doing it. It makes sense. They are going to make their phones / tablets and desktops run that same OS. Apps for the phone run on the desktop... it doesn't care. That is METRO. This is about MS killing off legacy Win 9x~NT code base... which is a pure mess.
This is MS trying to make computers easier for novices... and for idiots... which is about 90% of their customers. This is business. Its about money. And if they lose some techies, oh well. There is always Linux.
Think about that. Games for PCs is pretty dire... most AAA titles are PS3 and XBOX and MS doesn't bring their titles to PCs (Gears of War 2 or 3? Halo 3 or 4? Hello?) So *WHAT* do you need Windows for? Any computer device can run a web browser, do facebook, etc... who cares about the OS?
Seriously, if Apple made a mini-tower Mac - I might go for that.
For true power users, there will always be Linux. So if you hate Windows8+, you know where to get Linux for free... which is a far better deal with lots of goodies that smoke the $285 Windows7/8 Ultimate editions.
PS: I'm planning on staying with Windows7... I'm not seeing Win8 offering me anything I need. I do plan to play with it on a test-desktop soon. IF I find I like it and Metro works, then I'm open to it.
This is MS trying to make computers easier for novices... and for idiots... which is about 90% of their customers. This is business. Its about money. And if they lose some techies, oh well. There is always Linux.
Think about that. Games for PCs is pretty dire... most AAA titles are PS3 and XBOX and MS doesn't bring their titles to PCs (Gears of War 2 or 3? Halo 3 or 4? Hello?) So *WHAT* do you need Windows for? Any computer device can run a web browser, do facebook, etc... who cares about the OS?
Seriously, if Apple made a mini-tower Mac - I might go for that.
For true power users, there will always be Linux. So if you hate Windows8+, you know where to get Linux for free... which is a far better deal with lots of goodies that smoke the $285 Windows7/8 Ultimate editions.
PS: I'm planning on staying with Windows7... I'm not seeing Win8 offering me anything I need. I do plan to play with it on a test-desktop soon. IF I find I like it and Metro works, then I'm open to it.
WOW, Aero is a nice feature, i like the looks, and every PC I build or Re-Install, gets positive reaction to Aero.
Now I have tested Win 8 on several people, not one of them liked it!
Does Microsoft not read the negative press out on the internet over Windows 8!
This is just an example of how wrong they are getting it, it looks terrible, what a fuck up!
Now I have tested Win 8 on several people, not one of them liked it!
Does Microsoft not read the negative press out on the internet over Windows 8!
This is just an example of how wrong they are getting it, it looks terrible, what a fuck up!
demonhorde665
Distinguished
- Jul 13, 2008
- 1,492
- 0
- 19,280
what an A--hole , to out a and say that window's 7 main design was bassically cheesy and lame ??? HELLO windows 7 was MS's second most popular version of windows (after XP). what a way to stick his foot in his a-- and then his mouth
Vladislaus
Distinguished
- Jul 29, 2010
- 1,290
- 0
- 19,280
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]So we have to buy it and use it for a while before we decide if we should switch? LolWindows 8 will work exactly like the Consumer Preview. If you hate the Consumer Preview, you'll hate Windows 8. There's not much they can do from now to release, except fix critical bugs, test and tweak the UI (slightly).[/citation]
As is stated in the article, the consumer preview and the upcoming release preview doesn't feature the complete UI, so we'll have to wait and see how it turns out.
As is stated in the article, the consumer preview and the upcoming release preview doesn't feature the complete UI, so we'll have to wait and see how it turns out.
CaedenV
Splendid
- Jun 14, 2011
- 4,829
- 3
- 23,465
What a bunch of whiners!
1) The start menu sucked from day one, and metro (while very different) does not exactly make the start menu any worse
2) Apple has an app store, as do many versions of linux, and they have both had them for several years with nobody complaining about 'walled gardens' or other stupidity. You can still download a program from a website and install it, developers will still be able to make software for free distribution, or go through other distributers. Really, this is no big deal.
3) Aero is awesome, and runs perfectly fine on any computer made in the last 6-8 years. Complaining about the UI being too big and demanding is dumb. Aero is wonderful in that it makes the OS less distracting, and focuses the eye towards your content, and does not look like some silly cartoon interface like XP. the UI for win2K, and Aero are my all time favorites.
4) Moving away from Aero or Aero-like interface may be a dumber move than getting away from the start menu. We want our devices to be sleeker, not stuck in the '90s. And what hardware exactly are they thinking Aero would not run on? Whatever it is I do not want it.
5) I love that they are basically moving to having a single OS for all Windows devices, but they still need to learn that OS is not the interface, and that we need more, or at least different interface designs based upon the device it is installed on. I love the ribbon for touch screens, as well as Metro for touch screens, but they need something different for keys/mouse users. We also need to look ahead to Kinnect, voice, and even brain controlled devices that are either out, or soon to be out. Each way of connecting caters to a different way of doing things, and everyone has their preferences (personally I like touch and keys for day-to-day use), but without more options we will stagnate.
6) keep in mind that linux and macOSX are not actively working on new ways of interacting with their devices, and that may hurt them in a few years. Win8 is not the answer, but at least they are trying.
1) The start menu sucked from day one, and metro (while very different) does not exactly make the start menu any worse
2) Apple has an app store, as do many versions of linux, and they have both had them for several years with nobody complaining about 'walled gardens' or other stupidity. You can still download a program from a website and install it, developers will still be able to make software for free distribution, or go through other distributers. Really, this is no big deal.
3) Aero is awesome, and runs perfectly fine on any computer made in the last 6-8 years. Complaining about the UI being too big and demanding is dumb. Aero is wonderful in that it makes the OS less distracting, and focuses the eye towards your content, and does not look like some silly cartoon interface like XP. the UI for win2K, and Aero are my all time favorites.
4) Moving away from Aero or Aero-like interface may be a dumber move than getting away from the start menu. We want our devices to be sleeker, not stuck in the '90s. And what hardware exactly are they thinking Aero would not run on? Whatever it is I do not want it.
5) I love that they are basically moving to having a single OS for all Windows devices, but they still need to learn that OS is not the interface, and that we need more, or at least different interface designs based upon the device it is installed on. I love the ribbon for touch screens, as well as Metro for touch screens, but they need something different for keys/mouse users. We also need to look ahead to Kinnect, voice, and even brain controlled devices that are either out, or soon to be out. Each way of connecting caters to a different way of doing things, and everyone has their preferences (personally I like touch and keys for day-to-day use), but without more options we will stagnate.
6) keep in mind that linux and macOSX are not actively working on new ways of interacting with their devices, and that may hurt them in a few years. Win8 is not the answer, but at least they are trying.
killerclick
Distinguished
- Jan 13, 2010
- 1,563
- 0
- 19,790
[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]As is stated in the article, the consumer preview and the upcoming release preview doesn't feature the complete UI, so we'll have to wait and see how it turns out.[/citation]
I was talking about Metro and features removed from the desktop mode, not about the new skin. Metro is what it is (big tiles, you can split a window 80:20 or use it fullscreen) and desktop mode is what it is (no start menu) and that's not going to change until at least the next Windows is released.
I was talking about Metro and features removed from the desktop mode, not about the new skin. Metro is what it is (big tiles, you can split a window 80:20 or use it fullscreen) and desktop mode is what it is (no start menu) and that's not going to change until at least the next Windows is released.
killerclick
Distinguished
- Jan 13, 2010
- 1,563
- 0
- 19,790
[citation][nom]CaedenV[/nom]The start menu sucked from day one[/citation]
Wrong.
[citation][nom]CaedenV[/nom]You can still download a program from a website and install it, developers will still be able to make software for free distribution, or go through other distributers. [/citation]
Wrong. Metro apps can only be installed from the Windows store.
[citation][nom]CaedenV[/nom]Win8 is not the answer, but at least they are trying.[/citation]
Microsoft is innovating their way to irrelevance... or future computers will all be handheld and touch-enabled. People who do actual work on computers can't work on tablets.
Wrong.
[citation][nom]CaedenV[/nom]You can still download a program from a website and install it, developers will still be able to make software for free distribution, or go through other distributers. [/citation]
Wrong. Metro apps can only be installed from the Windows store.
[citation][nom]CaedenV[/nom]Win8 is not the answer, but at least they are trying.[/citation]
Microsoft is innovating their way to irrelevance... or future computers will all be handheld and touch-enabled. People who do actual work on computers can't work on tablets.
the_crippler
Distinguished
- Jun 14, 2010
- 495
- 0
- 18,960
[citation][nom]JohnUSA[/nom]Goodbye Windows 8.You died before you were born.[/citation]
Every-Other Rule continues.
Every-Other Rule continues.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question New build wont post Gigabyte B650M Gaming Plus wifi , AMD Ryzen 5 7600X CPU, 32GB T-Force RGB DDR5. Need help!
- Started by Notmiserable
- Replies: 26
-
Discussion PSU recommendations and power supply discussion thread - Tom's hardware- Started by Darkbreeze
- Replies: 2K
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
Question Upgraded from a 1060 6GB to a 2070 Super, barely notice the difference in fps???- Started by MrFlyingstickman
- Replies: 18
-
Question Debit card compromised, paranoid about malware
- Started by royrichard1290
- Replies: 3
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram