Windows 8 to Get Time Machine-like History Vault

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]lamorpa[/nom]Is your 80GB drive getting filled up? Um, I haven't seen a drive produced with under 500GB is 2 years, the current standard is >= 1TB. What possible difference could it make if the OS is 10, 50 or even 100GB? Does the idea of it just keep you awake at night?[/citation]
There are still laptops that come with 250gb HDD. not to mention that 1tb laptops are basically non existent.
 
[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]There are still laptops that come with 250gb HDD. not to mention that 1tb laptops are basically non existent.[/citation]
Anyone have a calculator that can compute the fraction of 250GB that 50GB is? I'm pretty sure it's less than half...
 
Wait, so Apple copied a bunch of Windows System Restore and Shadow Copy stuff to build time machine. Anyone notice you have been able to right click on a folder and restore previous versions since windows 2003 folders? Yeah thats 8 years ago. So now they update their current dominating system and they are copying apple? Grow up.
 
[citation][nom]ProDigit10[/nom]Great, again a space waster on windows!If they could keep the modifications safe, that would be a huge difference, eg: of a certain text file, only keep the data that was modified, and where it goes. Then compress that data.I'm not too fond of having a WIndows 8, taking up 6GB of disk space, and an additional 14GB of data that can only expand, take CPU and HD cycles!Man,are the good guys at MS gone, and now there are only gadget geeks doing the programming?"Less is more" does not seem to count with MS.They're only satisfied by bringing an OS that no system can run due to it's complexity, and stuff people really don't need!I don't call this innovation, I call this degeneration![/citation]
Tell you what, let's go back to the feature set of Windows 3.11 and see how happy it makes everyone.
 
You guys are rediculous, of course 7 isn't going to be as fast as XP- it's 7 years newer. Reading the comments here I feel like I'm talking to Linux users. OMG $100 for an OS. Oh crap, now I'll have to spend $50 to get a ginormous 500 GB hard drive, I'm freaking out 7 uses 20 GB of space what will I do! Pull yourself together people you all sound like a bunch of whiney babies. Also Toms failed on finding a good Windows 8 logo. It looks like you matched the XP logo with the Windows 7 words and put in an 8 that doesn't fit. Also I haven't heard Microsoft mention they were coming out with a new OS- so all of you who are freaking out about having to upgrade I don't think it will be coming out for another 2 years and when it does it's going to be aimed at low-power systems that my parents would be using.
 
Why is it when Microsoft adds something, people whine and complain. But when Apple posts their 100+ features to every iteration of OS X, it's greeted like they were the tablets sent from God?

By the way, if you really want Windows XP performance but not the bloat, go grab the Windows ThinPC public release.
 
[citation][nom]aftcomet[/nom]You're the idiot here. Price isn't a problem because you can just steal it?Nice argument moron.[/citation]
Get yourself a medal if you can afford all software you need at 19. Even if i didn't pay for any, that doesn't make my argument irrelevant for the masses. You are a moron in this situation for shiting instead of bringing some valuable comments... or if that matters, some constrictive criticism to my post. Next medal you should get is for mentally retarded.

eh, no more feeding trolls for me.
 
[citation][nom]dimamu15[/nom]Get yourself a medal if you can afford all software you need at 19. Even if i didn't pay for any, that doesn't make my argument irrelevant for the masses. You are a moron in this situation for shiting instead of bringing some valuable comments... or if that matters, some constrictive criticism to my post. Next medal you should get is for mentally retarded.eh, no more feeding trolls for me.[/citation]

ah its the way of life isn't it if you can't afford it just break the law and steal it and you give the excuse that since your just a loser kid makes it ok. your just making yourself sound pathetic.
 
OK Microsoft, I'm not going to argue about it as several users will like it. Just make a control panel applet so we can disable it along with features such as System File Checker, Prefetcher and hotfix backups so the ones who don't like these features can have a slimmer, faster OS without using registry tricks and modified system files.
 
[citation][nom]11796pcs[/nom]You guys are rediculous, of course 7 isn't going to be as fast as XP- it's 7 years newer. Reading the comments here I feel like I'm talking to Linux users. OMG $100 for an OS. Oh crap, now I'll have to spend $50 to get a ginormous 500 GB hard drive, I'm freaking out 7 uses 20 GB of space what will I do! Pull yourself together people you all sound like a bunch of whiney babies. Also Toms failed on finding a good Windows 8 logo. It looks like you matched the XP logo with the Windows 7 words and put in an 8 that doesn't fit. Also I haven't heard Microsoft mention they were coming out with a new OS- so all of you who are freaking out about having to upgrade I don't think it will be coming out for another 2 years and when it does it's going to be aimed at low-power systems that my parents would be using.[/citation]

No, you idiot. It has nothing to do with the money you're forking out. it's about the competition.

Why in the hell would a business run something like windows server editions when they can run a linux server distro with better support and it's far safer and exponentially more reliable? The cost and performance are the bottom line and linux tends to win out there by a relatively large margin. Remember when people said open source won't make any money? Where the hell are they now and what's their excuse for being wrong?

If your average user doesn't game on the PC then they really have zero use for windows minus a handful of programs, nevermind at a ~$150 price tag when the alternative (pick a linux distro, any linux distro) will be safer and less intrusive/faster for free.

I can slap debian on any PC/laptop and not have to worry about any sort of hardware>software issues for millenia. The hardware inside the PC will turn to dust before debian experiences an error. Unless I need windows specifically for a handful of reasons then there's no reason to pay money when there's a better product for free. That's ignorance and credulity.
 
[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]ah its the way of life isn't it if you can't afford it just break the law and steal it and you give the excuse that since your just a loser kid makes it ok. your just making yourself sound pathetic.[/citation]

Are you dumb enough to think that I will shell out 300$+ for Windows 7 ultimate x64? Did Adobe ever sold a shelf copy of Photoshop?

MS isnt even trying to stop piracy in a significant way. If I cant pirate windows, well Ill install a Linux distro.
 
[citation][nom]ProDigit10[/nom]Great, again a space waster on windows!If they could keep the modifications safe, that would be a huge difference, eg: of a certain text file, only keep the data that was modified, and where it goes. Then compress that data.I'm not too fond of having a WIndows 8, taking up 6GB of disk space, and an additional 14GB of data that can only expand, take CPU and HD cycles!Man,are the good guys at MS gone, and now there are only gadget geeks doing the programming?"Less is more" does not seem to count with MS.They're only satisfied by bringing an OS that no system can run due to it's complexity, and stuff people really don't need!I don't call this innovation, I call this degeneration![/citation]

Don't forget its designed with newer products in mind (tablets, etc) - Windows 7 was a refined lesson, and i'm sure they learned the lesson with vista(we hope)

There are TB hard drives available for cheap, who cares about 100GB for the OS. Stop complaining. Also, you can probably disable those features.

Call MS if you want. OR mail them a letter.
 
[citation][nom]lamorpa[/nom]Anyone have a calculator that can compute the fraction of 250GB that 50GB is? I'm pretty sure it's less than half...[/citation]
Did I mention anything about the size occupied by Windows 7 OS? No! All I did was to refute the statement that a 1tb drive is the norm, when it clearly isn't.

You've said that no HDD bellow 500GB have been produced for two years when it's also not true. Samsung and Seagate for example still manufacture 160GB HDDs for both laptops and desktops.
 
[citation][nom]nao1120[/nom]Don't forget its designed with newer products in mind (tablets, etc) - Windows 7 was a refined lesson, and i'm sure they learned the lesson with vista(we hope)There are TB hard drives available for cheap, who cares about 100GB for the OS. Stop complaining. Also, you can probably disable those features.Call MS if you want. OR mail them a letter.[/citation]
I care. Large 5400/7200rpm HDD are cheap but not enterprise 10k/15k SCSI/SAS and SSD.

At home my desktop runs XP. The Windows folder currently takes 1.77GB which leaves me plenty of room in my old 15k rpm boot drive.
 
"ah its the way of life isn't it if you can't afford it just break the law and steal it and you give the excuse that since your just a loser kid makes it ok. your just making yourself sound pathetic."

wow your the loser!!! its stealing but from who.....People who make 600 million dollars a year..oh I'll cry myself to sleep
 
but no stealing is wrong! but so is calling people(19 year-olds) names like moron...you have to admitted spending 100-300$ for software is a little ridiculous every 2-3 years..just like blu-ray decoder is more money then a blu-ray player...
 
Funny thread here.

The fact of the matter is that Volume Shadow Copy has been present since Windows XP, this new "feature" will mostly be a better management interface, so that people actually start to understand what it's there for, and how they can use it.

The joke is that for once, Microsoft actually beat Apple by having a feature first, but they made it so cryptic and inaccessible that very few people knew it was there and even fewer people knew how to use it. Someone must've gotten a boot up their ass from Balmer when Apple launched "Time Machine" and everyone went, "Oooooh!". "You mean we had this thing BEFORE Apple, and they're STILL getting the credit?! You're FIRED!!!"

Let's just hope, for the sake of Microsoft, that this feature will actually work - unlike how system restore was broken in W7 - so they don't get a hailstorm of complaints from users with lost data.

Btw, talking about how "W98 is faster than XP, use that" or "DOS 6.22 is even faster". No, no they're not. Being simple is not the same as being faster. An OS kernel needs to take advantage of the capabilities of newer processors, including new instruction sets, hyperthreading, multicore, 64-bit addressing, and so on and so forth. You CAN have more features and faster OSes at the same time, they don't all have to be Vistas.
 
[citation][nom]memadmax[/nom]After the Vista disaster, Windows 7 makes up for it pretty good. But you still can't pry XP from my cold dead hands. If 8 can finally outperform XP then we'll see.....[/citation]
Win 7 uses the same kernel as Vista and therefore is Vista SP3. Still has the clunky user interface, the start menu is too hard to customize. OS X or Ubuntu any day.
 
[citation][nom]ReggieRay[/nom]Win 7 uses the same kernel as Vista and therefore is Vista SP3. Still has the clunky user interface, the start menu is too hard to customize. OS X or Ubuntu any day.[/citation]
Windows 7 does not use Vista's Kernel. Sure it does use an evolution of the Vista Kernel, but so does Mac OS X 10.6 uses an evolution of the kernel introduced with Mac OS X 10.0 and Ubuntu 10.10 uses an evolution of the kernel used in Ubuntu 4.10.
 
Geez, people complaining about Windows features really bug me. It's Windows. If you put your mind to it (or find a blog where someone else already has) you can disable any features you don't want. Meanwhile, GB's of HDD space are dirt cheap and the real world is full of home users who have no clue what the word "backup" even means, so having a feature like this out of the box would be absolutely great. I don't understand why people get upset about a company wanting to provide you with as many tools as possible. You pay a lot of money for a Windows OS (at least, if you're not a pirating douchebag), so it's nice to get your money's worth in features.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom