Windows 8.1 Has Gone RTM, Final Build Number Revealed

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.


They implemented it because there are laptops (yes laptops) that do not have RTCs. The one thing about make some of those super thin ones is cutting parts out and a small battery, even a CR2032, takes up a lot of space.

As well, they design and test the OS on systems as they were meant to be. We may be able to overclock but you also have to remember that that is outside of standard specifications and as well is not warrantied by Intel/AMD or the motherboard manufactures.

I am sure they will fix it and put a switch to recognize a RTC and default to in in DT. Its a pretty big issue for some even if it wont affect the majority of people out there.



I wish I was paid by MS. Wouldn't hurt to have a little extra money on the side.

Sadly, no I am just a tech at a local shop and soon will be moving to a IT Consulting/Managing firm that's also local and as well just a mod at THG.

I am giving honest opinions with real experience. Not being paid.

Then again unlike a lot of people in the world I welcome change. I like having to learn new things and keep my mind fresh. Its why I love PCs so much as they always change and never stay the exact same. New tech always comes out. Which is strange how people put up with that but not software changed.



Apple lovers will buy anything Apple releases even when its tech is over a year old. Such as their laptops which used to come out with tech a year older.

As for Windows, you act like MS hasn't done this in the past. Does no one remember the shift from DOS to 95? I do. Hell I remember even into the days of XP people not wanting to leave DOS behind as they preferred the command prompt over a GUI. Or even the shift to XP. XP sucked before SP23 and didn't take off really until SP3 and people still clung to their 98/2K machines as if they were gold because they didn't like the changes to the GUI and if they moved to XP would change to classic shell.

Vista changed the layout again and people didn't like it. It had other issues but that was one that people didn't like.

7 was pretty perfect but I have had customers tell me they don't like 7 and prefer Vista. But still 7 didn't just take off like crazy at first. Hell it took until 2012 (3 years after 7s release) for it to take over XP in market share. So again, 7 is great. I loved it and had it on release but its all about time in this.

That is not to say that 8 didn't change it more but its not this massively bad change like DOS to 95. Most people do not even use their start menu as much as they say they do. Its funny honestly.

Its just a bunch of fuss and muss honestly and its getting old. Sad thing is a lot of people who say they hate 8 probably never used it in their life, a lot like what happened with Vista as it was just word of mouth.
 

nevilence

Distinguished
May 8, 2012
339
0
18,810
I have made the point of trying it, I hate being uniformed. Still didnt like it though. And yer it is all in all just a lot of noise over change, but if the noise isnt made then MS will keep steam rolling down a path that most its users arent happy with. We have seen recently how making noise can change MS's mind, the noise needs to be here so users get a product they want. Ultimately its feebback for MS just forum style =P

Oh and I know apple users cant be helped, but the point still stands ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.