Windows 8 is off to a roaring start! It sold more copies in 5 days than Snow Leopard on launch day. Its sales in the first two weeks beat Mountain Lion's first week. Windows 8 is doing great! It obviously is not like Vista. Sales are way ahead of competitors. Don't be scared away by angry bloggers who haven't tried it!
- Status
[citation][nom]bystander[/nom]Do they really not understand this: You can't expect ARM CPU's to be able to run old x86 CPU software. Though .NET and web based stuff will work on both, as soon as you load a program that accesses architecture specific commands, you can't expect it to work on both. I might expect this ignorance from the average home user, but not from a tech guy.[/citation]
I think it's taken slightly out of the original context where it doesn't make a lick of sense because both are called "Windows 8", not because they are different CPU architectures, although one has the nomenclature of RT tacked on. A lot of people simply do not know what we technies know and it will lead to confusion in the market place.
I think it's taken slightly out of the original context where it doesn't make a lick of sense because both are called "Windows 8", not because they are different CPU architectures, although one has the nomenclature of RT tacked on. A lot of people simply do not know what we technies know and it will lead to confusion in the market place.
We're retired and have our own quality desktops and traveling laptops. Adding the IE 10 Preview Release for Windows 7 sure did speed things up. To me this is a way to get some of the speed advantage of W 8 easliy and for free. I don't plan on getting new PC's for a couple of years; by then who knows --maybe W 9?
It's the JIGSAW interface of Windows 8. It is awful. Well, this part is in metro, that isn't. FULL SCREEN APPS. THE GOD AWFUL START SCREEN. It's like someone took the worst parts of a mobile operating system and stuck them on a desktop counterpart. Not to mention, the in-system advertising. Jesus... That is awful. A lot of these metro apps should be only for a mobile device. A lot of people who use Windows 7, and love it, have desktops. They want a desktop equivalent. NOT THE METRO MOBILE VERSION. Did Microsoft think no one was going to notice that they just wrote one version of quintessential programs and tried to tailor it to desktop computers? Is Microsoft just trying to be cheap? I should be paid for how many times I've complained about every thing that is wrong with Windows 8. Are the developers too out of touch? Out of touch for a touchscreen UI... There is a great joke there. The App Changer Window. The WiFi Window. They are coded to look like Metro on the desktop. WTF?
Microsoft needs to focus on what is essential. Make desktop equivalents to the new emerging apps that are becoming essential. Messaging. Notifications. Contacts. SEPARATE METRO FROM WINDOWS ALL TOGETHER. MAKE A DESKTOP APP FOR THEIR STORE. THE END.
Microsoft needs to focus on what is essential. Make desktop equivalents to the new emerging apps that are becoming essential. Messaging. Notifications. Contacts. SEPARATE METRO FROM WINDOWS ALL TOGETHER. MAKE A DESKTOP APP FOR THEIR STORE. THE END.
[citation][nom]bison88[/nom]I think it's taken slightly out of the original context where it doesn't make a lick of sense because both are called "Windows 8", not because they are different CPU architectures, although one has the nomenclature of RT tacked on. A lot of people simply do not know what we technies know and it will lead to confusion in the market place.[/citation]
its not that hard to explain and not as complicated as you would like it to be, all you have to say is win rt is for low powered tablets only and doesn't support anything made before it while win 8 runs everything fine and to make it even easier win rt is only available on a small handful of tablets in the 500 to 700 price range and nothing else. as far as i know the surface is the only one i've seen that runs it.
here in Australia the only tablet I've seen that has windows 8/rt is the Sony duo 11 but runs a full copy of win 8 so i have yet to see win rt in th flesh.
also it is called windows rt not windows 8 (rt)
its not that hard to explain and not as complicated as you would like it to be, all you have to say is win rt is for low powered tablets only and doesn't support anything made before it while win 8 runs everything fine and to make it even easier win rt is only available on a small handful of tablets in the 500 to 700 price range and nothing else. as far as i know the surface is the only one i've seen that runs it.
here in Australia the only tablet I've seen that has windows 8/rt is the Sony duo 11 but runs a full copy of win 8 so i have yet to see win rt in th flesh.
also it is called windows rt not windows 8 (rt)
[citation][nom]Pulagatha[/nom]It's the JIGSAW interface of Windows 8. It is awful. Well, this part is in metro, that isn't. FULL SCREEN APPS. THE GOD AWFUL START SCREEN. It's like someone took the worst parts of a mobile operating system and stuck them on a desktop counterpart. Not to mention, the in-system advertising. Jesus... That is awful. A lot of these metro apps should be only for a mobile device. A lot of people who use Windows 7, and love it, have desktops. They want a desktop equivalent. NOT THE METRO MOBILE VERSION. Did Microsoft think no one was going to notice that they just wrote one version of quintessential programs and tried to tailor it to desktop computers? Is Microsoft just trying to be cheap? I should be paid for how many times I've complained about every thing that is wrong with Windows 8. Are the developers too out of touch? Out of touch for a touchscreen UI... There is a great joke there. The App Changer Window. The WiFi Window. They are coded to look like Metro on the desktop. WTF?Microsoft needs to focus on what is essential. Make desktop equivalents to the new emerging apps that are becoming essential. Messaging. Notifications. Contacts. SEPARATE METRO FROM WINDOWS ALL TOGETHER. MAKE A DESKTOP APP FOR THEIR STORE. THE END.[/citation]
id make a bet that if microsoft just did a bland win 7 clone and did a few tweaks all the tech news sites would be bleating "microsoft is out of touch with the consumer & fails again to take advantage of the mobile market" and you guys here would be saying "oh it just looks like win7, i think i'll pass until microsoft makes it worth my time, maybe w9 anyone?"
the reality is microsoft cant please everyone and i think it was about time to follow ubuntu and osx and give the os a face lift.
incase you dont know ubuntu has a full screen start menu, osx has a overlay that looks like ios & do i have to mention the amount of bitching everyone did when kde 4, gnome 3 & unity came out.
id make a bet that if microsoft just did a bland win 7 clone and did a few tweaks all the tech news sites would be bleating "microsoft is out of touch with the consumer & fails again to take advantage of the mobile market" and you guys here would be saying "oh it just looks like win7, i think i'll pass until microsoft makes it worth my time, maybe w9 anyone?"
the reality is microsoft cant please everyone and i think it was about time to follow ubuntu and osx and give the os a face lift.
incase you dont know ubuntu has a full screen start menu, osx has a overlay that looks like ios & do i have to mention the amount of bitching everyone did when kde 4, gnome 3 & unity came out.
They had to do it to add touch features to there os for tables and phones, but trying to charge the majority of pc users for it when they wont use it was a very very bad business decision. Everyone tried to warn them over and over again, and here we are on the day of the white elephant os for desktops, ie the majority.
As a desktop user with Win7 64U, Win 8 offers me absoulutly zero new features i want and that i would be willing to pay for which is really really sad i think. No i do not want to be a window licking tile noob thank you very much! Onto Win 9 with some real features please. Then i will pay.
As a desktop user with Win7 64U, Win 8 offers me absoulutly zero new features i want and that i would be willing to pay for which is really really sad i think. No i do not want to be a window licking tile noob thank you very much! Onto Win 9 with some real features please. Then i will pay.
[id make a bet that if microsoft just did a bland win 7 clone and did a few tweaks all the tech news sites would be bleating "microsoft is out of touch with the consumer & fails again to take advantage of the mobile market" and you guys here would be saying "oh it just looks like win7, i think i'll pass until microsoft makes it worth my time, maybe w9 anyone?"]
All Microsoft needs to do is to make it an option to allow user to choose which is the default UI mode, and able to switch at all. For those users who are running a x86 touchscreen tablet, the users might opt for the Metro UI as boot-up default. For those users running desktop or notebook with no touchscreen, they may opt for the traditional desktop mode. In fact, this was an actual option during the beta test, which is disabled now. It appears Microsoft is (1) arrogant, thinking that they should be more like Apple and dictate what the users really want (2) feeling insecure that if traditional desktop mode is an option, Metro UI will never gain traction in the market to compete against Google and Apple.
The problem is Microsoft tried to move too fast without checking the reality. A slower pace to allow the mobile app store to grow, and let the users switch into Metro mode at their own pace, would have been a better idea.
All Microsoft needs to do is to make it an option to allow user to choose which is the default UI mode, and able to switch at all. For those users who are running a x86 touchscreen tablet, the users might opt for the Metro UI as boot-up default. For those users running desktop or notebook with no touchscreen, they may opt for the traditional desktop mode. In fact, this was an actual option during the beta test, which is disabled now. It appears Microsoft is (1) arrogant, thinking that they should be more like Apple and dictate what the users really want (2) feeling insecure that if traditional desktop mode is an option, Metro UI will never gain traction in the market to compete against Google and Apple.
The problem is Microsoft tried to move too fast without checking the reality. A slower pace to allow the mobile app store to grow, and let the users switch into Metro mode at their own pace, would have been a better idea.
thecolorblue
Honorable
- Jun 5, 2012
- 548
- 0
- 10,980
[citation][nom]bystander[/nom]Do they really not understand this: You can't expect ARM CPU's to be able to run old x86 CPU software. Though .NET and web based stuff will work on both, as soon as you load a program that accesses architecture specific commands, you can't expect it to work on both. I might expect this ignorance from the average home user, but not from a tech guy.[/citation]
you simply do not understand his point... consumers will be totally confused... thatis his point.
i'm surprised you find this hard to grasp
you simply do not understand his point... consumers will be totally confused... thatis his point.
i'm surprised you find this hard to grasp
[citation][nom]helixfossil[/nom]Make default start screen the desktop. Re-add the start menu. Allow the metro UI be a addition if wanted such as widgets. Work on drivers and fail updates. All my issues solved.[/citation]
This.
Windows 8 is fine. The new UI is not. For desktop and laptop users that don't have a touchscreen is far less practical that the Aero desktop.
Keep Metro to where it belong. Smartphones and tablets.
This.
Windows 8 is fine. The new UI is not. For desktop and laptop users that don't have a touchscreen is far less practical that the Aero desktop.
Keep Metro to where it belong. Smartphones and tablets.
[citation][nom]Stevemeister[/nom]Let's see - Windows 2000 Fail, Windows XP Great, Windows Vista Fail, Windows 7 Great . . . . is there a pattern here?People get used to their OS's and unless the newest OS offers something noticeably better there is no real incentive to change. Windows 7 works great, Windows 8 may be good also but its not so overwhelmingly better that I would part with cash for it nor do I want to have to re-learn where everything is (time is money). Windows 7 is not that old and it's like a car - you don't buy a new one every 4 years unless you have money to waste. Most OS's will run well for 6-7 years before users decide they need to upgrade so don't expect too much until Windows 9.[/citation]
You made a mistake, there was Windows 2000 Professional (good system NT based) and Windows Millennium (bad win 98 based).
In case of Win 2000 Pro - it was grate Os i used it until XP got second SP or so. It was not meant for games but they mostly worked fine or some times needed some fix.
Windows Me only saw at some of my clients comps and happily changed to Win 2000 Pro.
You made a mistake, there was Windows 2000 Professional (good system NT based) and Windows Millennium (bad win 98 based).
In case of Win 2000 Pro - it was grate Os i used it until XP got second SP or so. It was not meant for games but they mostly worked fine or some times needed some fix.
Windows Me only saw at some of my clients comps and happily changed to Win 2000 Pro.
neiroatopelcc
Distinguished
- Oct 3, 2006
- 3,078
- 0
- 20,810
[citation][nom]weierstrass[/nom]Microsoft was probably the only one expecting Win 8 to sell well. What is Win 8 beside Win 7 + a live tile application?[/citation]
It does have a few corporate features worth the investment. Like the integrated hyper-v server and a vastly improved feedback from group policy actions.
It's hardly enough for me to suggest anyone to get it unless it's as an alternative to an icrap tablet though
It does have a few corporate features worth the investment. Like the integrated hyper-v server and a vastly improved feedback from group policy actions.
It's hardly enough for me to suggest anyone to get it unless it's as an alternative to an icrap tablet though
[citation][nom]bystander[/nom]Do they really not understand this: You can't expect ARM CPU's to be able to run old x86 CPU software.[/citation]Obviously he is not talking about the technical expert here, he is talking about the average user who expects to get the "all my programs will work" experience when buying WinRT. I still think something like http://www.tomshardware.com/news/arm-emulator-x86-windows-rt,18121.html would be better than nothing at all...
[citation][nom]changehappens[/nom]It seems pretty clear what side the Tom's Hardware posters are on here. If any of you bothered to take the time to learn the OS, you'd figure out pretty quickly that the start screen is just as good as or better than the old start menu. Search capabilities are better, there's now more horizontal room to pin programs, etc. Of course, I'm sure all of you are pretty averse to actually learning stuff and will argue that you shouldn't ever have to learn new things and that Windows should stay the same forever. But for the rest of us who live in a changing world, Windows 8 won't be a problem.[/citation]
You do not get it. Change is great if it really brought some tangible benefits. For mainstream usage Windows 8 does not add value for PC Desktops -- especially if you do not have the hardware for its new features which are not that great.
And learning how to use this OS is a waste of my valuable time. And the valuable time of others too who have more important things to get done, like getting their work done with what they have or have learned, or having a life outside of IT.
Microsoft pissed me and many other people too with another OS that does not offer significant benefits for the desktop environment. For ARM hardware, this OS is more appropriate. It is really an OS that serves Microsoft and does not empower me.
You do not get it. Change is great if it really brought some tangible benefits. For mainstream usage Windows 8 does not add value for PC Desktops -- especially if you do not have the hardware for its new features which are not that great.
And learning how to use this OS is a waste of my valuable time. And the valuable time of others too who have more important things to get done, like getting their work done with what they have or have learned, or having a life outside of IT.
Microsoft pissed me and many other people too with another OS that does not offer significant benefits for the desktop environment. For ARM hardware, this OS is more appropriate. It is really an OS that serves Microsoft and does not empower me.
If my employer installs Windows 8 on my engineering workstation, I think I am going to retire.
I have been working with computers for 35 years and have been dealing with change for years. I want SUSI Linux for my workstation but they will not allow me to have it. It has all of the environments and tools that I have used for years to do REAL work.
Life is too short dealing with this Windows 8 garbage and its time to install Linux and get a real life.
I have been working with computers for 35 years and have been dealing with change for years. I want SUSI Linux for my workstation but they will not allow me to have it. It has all of the environments and tools that I have used for years to do REAL work.
Life is too short dealing with this Windows 8 garbage and its time to install Linux and get a real life.
leandrodafontoura
Distinguished
- Sep 26, 2006
- 898
- 0
- 19,060
Nothing surprising to me
Microsoft really has no taste. They do eventually get one or other product right.
Microsoft really has no taste. They do eventually get one or other product right.
meh each to there own i guess, theres too many "experts" that know better then everyone else on this site. personally i like it and from other comments here every 3rd or 4th one is positive so it comes down to if you like it then ignore the trolls on here.
[citation][nom]winningdows[/nom][id make a bet that if microsoft just did a bland win 7 clone and did a few tweaks all the tech news sites would be bleating "microsoft is out of touch with the consumer & fails again to take advantage of the mobile market" and you guys here would be saying "oh it just looks like win7, i think i'll pass until microsoft makes it worth my time, maybe w9 anyone?"]All Microsoft needs to do is to make it an option to allow user to choose which is the default UI mode, and able to switch at all. For those users who are running a x86 touchscreen tablet, the users might opt for the Metro UI as boot-up default. For those users running desktop or notebook with no touchscreen, they may opt for the traditional desktop mode. In fact, this was an actual option during the beta test, which is disabled now. It appears Microsoft is (1) arrogant, thinking that they should be more like Apple and dictate what the users really want (2) feeling insecure that if traditional desktop mode is an option, Metro UI will never gain traction in the market to compete against Google and Apple.The problem is Microsoft tried to move too fast without checking the reality. A slower pace to allow the mobile app store to grow, and let the users switch into Metro mode at their own pace, would have been a better idea.[/citation]
yeah i agree there should be a option there but i find it fast in a few different ways since it forces me to use keyboard shortcuts or that handy hidden menu that has all the basics that i used the original start menu for (right click on the start button down the bottom left) since all i used it for was to right click on my computer to get to device manager or disk management, other then that i would just drag a few shortcuts to the desktop. so my point is i don't miss it since i never used it.
yeah i agree there should be a option there but i find it fast in a few different ways since it forces me to use keyboard shortcuts or that handy hidden menu that has all the basics that i used the original start menu for (right click on the start button down the bottom left) since all i used it for was to right click on my computer to get to device manager or disk management, other then that i would just drag a few shortcuts to the desktop. so my point is i don't miss it since i never used it.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
News Microsoft updates Windows 11 24H2 requirements, CPU must support SSE4.2 or the OS will not boot- Started by Admin
- Replies: 14
-
-
-
Question New Build GPU help- ASRock Steel Legend OC Radeon RX 7900 GRE - Keeps turning off
- Started by bp240
- Replies: 6
-
Question How can I make my AMD GPU scale *all* resolutions to 1080p, even resolutions that are "supported" by my TV?
- Started by Sol33t303
- Replies: 7
Latest posts
-
Question New Build, Fans Running, RGB working, no mouse, no keyboard, no display- Latest: drivinfast247
-
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram