Windows 8 to Make USB Portable Workspace

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.
To anyone complaining about how this needs a 16GB USB drive to run... boo hoo, go drop $20-$25 on a drive and quit whining:

http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=56520&vpn=PSF16GUSB&manufacture=Patriot&promoid=1317

Or better yet... wait until these drop in price: http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=55888

I have 2 of them already and they read quicker than some of today's lower end to mid-range SATA drives when connected to a USB 3.0 port. By the time Windows 8 ships, USB 3.0 ports will be much more common, and the Kingston DT Ultimate drives will be at least half of their current price.. probably less than half.

I guess there's no pleasing some people... it's really sad that you're complaining about features that have yet to be confirmed by Microsoft, that come in an OS that hasn't even shipped yet. Complain all you want once it arrives, but to do so now is completely pointless.
 
[citation][nom]Proxy711[/nom]Thought it was obvious he was talking about personal computers, in which case he is pretty darn close windows has a 85-90% market share when we talk about personal computers. 10 seconds of google searching: Also from Wiki : The way they got this info was taken by recording what OS a web browser reports the user is using.[/citation]
What a terrific source of information there. Maybe you should spend 11 seconds and find something other than from Wiki. My favorite is your use of the recordings from what a website shows the OS and/or browser of being of users visiting their site. Many gay porn sites provide their findings also so good to know many M$ fanbois have a great place for gathering.
 
Portableapps does nearly the same thing, while taking up less space and having more app selections. It's awfully late for Microsoft to be doing this.
 
HELL YEA

i hate windows 7, but i have games that are dx10 only i would love to play. if i can boot windows from a stick, get dx11+ features, and still have a better version of windows for when im done (xp) im all for it and if consumer level doesnt get it i will pirate the ever loveing @$%# out of this.

BE WARNED MICROSOFT THIS IS A POTENTIAL SALE YOU MAY MISS BECAUSE OF DOUCEBAGGERY
 
[citation][nom]EnFoRceR22[/nom]While I'm not a fan of current linux. This is IMO false. Linux can be a lot of what it was set out to be. It could compete with windows but wont replace it. It could be a super gaming OS that everyone could use. its just not going to the way it is. It needs a standard that ALL distros HAVE TO FOLLOW. Linux needs to be uniform when it comes to the "end user" has to be click click install easy. has to just work with the programs not some obscure pos no one cares about that emulates something you can already do in windows with out the useless effort. THEN yes linux can be a major player in the end user market. But then all the linux people will complain about it and move on to the next crappy OS that no one is using and talk about how great it is.But yes as it is now... its just a million different flavors of crap.[/citation]

for gameing, graphics cards need to fun their own kind of dx, not a microsoft mandate dx, because than its tied to windows. if apple, i hate the thought of this, ever got its act togather, and became a os that everyone sought, than we would have a multi platform gaming experience, not this crap we have now. where its tied to windows.
 
[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]HELL YEAi hate windows 7, but i have games that are dx10 only i would love to play. if i can boot windows from a stick, get dx11+ features, and still have a better version of windows for when im done (xp) im all for it and if consumer level doesnt get it i will pirate the ever loveing @$%# out of this.BE WARNED MICROSOFT THIS IS A POTENTIAL SALE YOU MAY MISS BECAUSE OF DOUCEBAGGERY[/citation]


Then I guess you will hate Windows 8 then considering Windows 8 will resemble a lot like Windows 7 in a lot of areas.
 
[citation][nom]Tomtompiper[/nom]Nope I'm running a Snapdragon and doing something you can only dream about, I'm using the same tab on the same browser on my mobile phone as I do on my Pc. They are fully synced and work without a virus checker. Now please let me know how this is 386 technology?[/citation]

Well for one i don't want to do that. I don't see any way i would care about that. #2 I'm not using a virus checker either ty. But my comment was about your ridiculous hours to do a virus scan even on a 386 it didn't take vary long. I also don't consider phone and tablet OS's as worth mentioning when it comes to the desktop. So you can run your phone and PC surf a single page on multi devices and have fun with that uselessness. Everything i DO use however is synced through out all my devices and those devices use windows. (well not my phone anymore since its now a BB)
 
[citation][nom]EnFoRceR22[/nom]Well for one i don't want to do that. I don't see any way i would care about that. #2 I'm not using a virus checker either ty. But my comment was about your ridiculous hours to do a virus scan even on a 386 it didn't take vary long. I also don't consider phone and tablet OS's as worth mentioning when it comes to the desktop. So you can run your phone and PC surf a single page on multi devices and have fun with that uselessness. Everything i DO use however is synced through out all my devices and those devices use windows. (well not my phone anymore since its now a BB)[/citation]

As you don't know what his computer was running, how big the hard drive was, or what the problem was, then how can you complain about the time it took to repair it? As it happens it was a two year old laptop with a dodgy power connector, an intermittent fault on the screen/hinge switch and a malware infestation. The time needed was commensurate with the problems and the solution which included a dual boot instillation of PCLinuxOS so that he could surf in safety from now on, yet boot into Windows to play games. The virus scan itself took around thirty mins and is still far too long, On my only dual boot machine I perform one about once a month and due to the size of the hard drives and the number of files it can take up to three hours, no wonder I only use it to play the odd game. Your Luddite remarks about Tablets and Phones does not surprise me, and this is why Windows is in decline, fact.
 
As far as i can see windows has never been a real player in mobile other then hardcore business . I simply could care less about mobile OS's period since this is about desktops. You don't need linux to surf safe thats just stupid. If it wasn't for irrelevant to desktop mobile OS's windows wouldn't be declining at all. But once you add all obscure os's for any device yeah sure windows has less of a market share. But again who cares this is about a desktop OS. Last time i checked i couldn't load android or IOS or BB OS or whatever other mobile OS is out there on my desktop and run everything i run now. So their relevance in the over all desktop OS market share is pointless. Perhaps your friend could learn a little common sense and not click yes every time the word is presented to him on the screen? At that point its no longer the OS's fault the user is retarded.
 
Also i think you misunderstand me. I don't give two craps which OS is the best or who has more market share. I only care if i can run what i want to run on it. If thats windows then I'm all for windows if its linux then whatever. If it was Mac OS i would be using that. I don't give two craps who it is as long as i can do what i want. I have been rooting for linux since before XP but until it gets there i don't care to use it more then a curiosity. I have ubuntu loaded on a thumb drive but it cant do what i need it to so its not my main OS. For right now its windows.


Sorry for the double post.
 
I cannot agree, an operating system that allows itself to be compromised because a user clicks one wrong button is not fit for purpose. Apple and Linux have the right idea where programs are kept in a repository (app store) and they can be checked for malware before they are downloaded by the user. At the rate that Microsoft is borrowing from linux this will happen sooner or later.
 
[citation][nom]mobrocket[/nom]good job microsoft, copying from linux again...[/citation]
If Linux is so good and has had all these fantastic features for so long, as well as being free, how come people still just don't want to use it?

Also, this is the best bit, seeing as it's free and open source, who exactly is going to file a patent infringment case?

No one, if you want to keep these features to yourselves you need to close up and run like a real business instead of a hippy basement project.
 
i think a portable windows, regardless of whether it is for USB sticks or not, is a great idea! If possible, upgrading from an old computer to a new computer would potentially be as simple as just switching hard drives. While I know it is possible to do that now, sorta at least, it is often a problematic task.

Would it be possible for two computers to share the same hard drive? Would it work with a NAS or cloud drive, since they are both as ~fast as a thumb drive. Neat possibilities, *maybe*

why the comparison to linux? no one is saying, "wow, that is something I wish my Mac would do". this is a good move; it does not warrant bashing.
 
@xyster

actually not possible, the mere act of changing hard drive/mobo will kick WGA into overdrive and you would have to reactivate windows again, do that a few times and it refuses to reactivate.....

why do you need to take the OS with you, in theory you would only need the data and apps relevant to you, something like maybe a portable workspace......
 
[citation][nom]mobrocket[/nom]good job microsoft, copying from linux again...[/citation]

MS does not innovate any longer. They have the $$$ to either buy companies with an innovative killer app or simply take an idea and make it their own. Either way it is a good move that MS has allowed a USB workspace that will have great support possibilities in the business environment.
 
[citation][nom]EnFoRceR22[/nom]Then no OS is fit for purpose.. No OS is that safe.. other then no one caring about their none existent market share.[/citation]

Please show me where i can get my linux machine compromised just by clicking on a browser popup window?

Windows users tend to blame the user when in reality its windows poor security model.
 
[citation][nom]guzz46[/nom]Please show me where i can get my linux machine compromised just by clicking on a browser popup window?Windows users tend to blame the user when in reality its windows poor security model.[/citation]

I said once you click ok.. learn to read please. and yes the user is a idiot if you cannot use a little common sense and not click ok every time it pops up in front of them. and since someone before wanted to say the android OS should be included in these OS's for some reason that was stupid. you can install some apps that compromise that os and all you have to do there is click ok. so i guess linux isn't as great in security . Also im sure its way more then possible on linux as well to get a virus from a popup. Otherwise you would be saying is linux is impossible to hack and crack. just because its not common doesn't mean it cannot happen. I blame the user because almost any Problem i have ever seen a computer have has been the users fault. Once you push OK linux windows mac or whatever if that file had a virus in it that was written for your OS you just got a virus. Maybe if more then 2 people used linux you would see it more often .
 
[citation][nom]EnFoRceR22[/nom]I said once you click ok.. learn to read please. and yes the user is a idiot if you cannot use a little common sense and not click ok every time it pops up in front of them. and since someone before wanted to say the android OS should be included in these OS's for some reason that was stupid. you can install some apps that compromise that os and all you have to do there is click ok. so i guess linux isn't as great in security . Also im sure its way more then possible on linux as well to get a virus from a popup. Otherwise you would be saying is linux is impossible to hack and crack. just because its not common doesn't mean it cannot happen. I blame the user because almost any Problem i have ever seen a computer have has been the users fault. Once you push OK linux windows mac or whatever if that file had a virus in it that was written for your OS you just got a virus. Maybe if more then 2 people used linux you would see it more often .[/citation]

More evidence of how windows users tend to blame the user for the operating systems poor security, but you can still prove me wrong by directing me to a link where i can get my linux machine infected by clicking on a popup window, (you do know how linux works don't you?) and don't use android as an example, its based on the linux kernel but its not a linux distro.
And being hacked is completely different from getting a virus.
 
I could waste a day looking for websites to prove my side but i haven't seen anything that can come close to proving yours either. Just a bunch of BS. besides the kernal is Supposedly why linux is so damn secure so why wouldn't a OS that uses it be just as secure? And no i don't know fully how linux works but i do know if you think it cant get a virus your totally fooling your self. I also am not sure how this popup link can about. I have been talking about pushing ok which i don't care if you put it a min n different ways thats the user fault. You can use it as "proof" all you want. Since that has been what i have been talking about show me how once you click ok with a virus infected item how linux's magic underwear is suppose to just be like o this has a virus I cannot install this even if you said ok every time i ask. wherever you got this popup crap i don't know. Unless you think virus's have to be popups. Not that i have any delusions its not possible. Though that seems to be more the browsers department :)

I was doing a search for linux viruses and found this funny post.

'yes, you could be thinking it was a specific software you want, but granting it permissions to execute is human mistake and not a system's hole "

99.99% it is yes. Granting something to install AS I HAVE BEEN SAYING is the users own dumb ass fault.

Best ill give you is linux is a lot better at detouring these things but there are plenty of ways to destroy a linux box.

And this

"Now, even if it would have a lot of users, a lot of users that don't know what a computer mouse is and one major distro, whit very few virus's, and these few virus's would still be a result from users mistakes"

Now these are linux people that only use linux saying what I'm saying. IS that more evidence of a windows user blaming the user? a virus can infect any system where the user says OK its harder in linux then windows (well because no one really uses it and why waste the time to make them) but safer isn't impossible.
 
[citation][nom]EnFoRceR22[/nom]I could waste a day looking for websites to prove my side but i haven't seen anything that can come close to proving yours either. Just a bunch of BS. besides the kernal is Supposedly why linux is so damn secure so why wouldn't a OS that uses it be just as secure? And no i don't know fully how linux works but i do know if you think it cant get a virus your totally fooling your self. I also am not sure how this popup link can about. I have been talking about pushing ok which i don't care if you put it a min n different ways thats the user fault. You can use it as "proof" all you want. Since that has been what i have been talking about show me how once you click ok with a virus infected item how linux's magic underwear is suppose to just be like o this has a virus I cannot install this even if you said ok every time i ask. wherever you got this popup crap i don't know. Unless you think virus's have to be popups. Not that i have any delusions its not possible. Though that seems to be more the browsers department I was doing a search for linux viruses and found this funny post.'yes, you could be thinking it was a specific software you want, but granting it permissions to execute is human mistake and not a system's hole "99.99% it is yes. Granting something to install AS I HAVE BEEN SAYING is the users own dumb ass fault.Best ill give you is linux is a lot better at detouring these things but there are plenty of ways to destroy a linux box.And this"Now, even if it would have a lot of users, a lot of users that don't know what a computer mouse is and one major distro, whit very few virus's, and these few virus's would still be a result from users mistakes"Now these are linux people that only use linux saying what I'm saying. IS that more evidence of a windows user blaming the user? a virus can infect any system where the user says OK its harder in linux then windows (well because no one really uses it and why waste the time to make them) but safer isn't impossible.[/citation]

Looking for websites that prove your side of what? just how easy it is to get a virus in windows just by clicking on something? why don't you go to malwareblacklist.com and see how many links they have for windows malware, currently 26953 URL's

The kernel is only part of the reason, the user not running as admin, not giving files executable permissions by default, getting software from trusted signed repo's and not from the net are some of the other reasons, if you knew how linux worked then you would know that it doesn't use .exe files that can be hiding a virus that gets executed as soon as you click on it (like clicking on a popup window for example) and even if you did click on a file after giving it executable permissions it wouldn't be able to install without asking for your password.

So to sum up an average user would have to do something like... browse the net, download something, give it executable permissions, click on it (or they may even have to run it in a terminal) then enter their root password for it to infect their system, thats why no linux viruses have been able to survive in the wild.

Now that's a whole lot more hoops to jump through than just mistakenly clicking on something.
 
Actualy from what i read they don't have to give it any permissions but basic to start a cascade effect. Which goes from trojan to hacking in a manner of seconds. And really all you said was the user has to the user has to which has been my point this whole time. The USER is at fault for most of their problems. If the user didn't do alot of stupid crap they user wouldn't get virus's. Also i never said it wasn't easy to get a virus in windows. I think your arguing with the wrong person. You keep making points that i never either said or disagree with. I know how linux doesn't use exe. files and its 3 layers of "security" Which in the end is really Dependant on the user using it. After reading some stuff Linux being a cluster F of distros is one major reason its hard to infect. Course its also one reason its just gunna be a toy OS for the average user. BTW people in windows don have to run as admin but F that crap. Thats just what i want to enter my password every time i want to install something which in the end is useless as UAC cuz i will of course tell the program i want to install all 10 times. All it does is add 10 layers of annoyance.

Funny thing is the more i read from linux forums and and threads on linux security the more they tell me how (even though more secure) unsafe linux can be to the user thats been brain washed into thinking it cannot get a virus or malware. And how they put it on the user to make sure they scan everything they download before installing it since from what i read it takes root access for a lot of programs to even install.

Anyways if your arguing anything other then the user is at fault for pushing ok then your wasting my time. i don't care how easy it is for windows to get a virus any idiot knows that. So unless you have any proof its not the user at fault when installing something or pushing ok to let something run both of which would need the user to accept (and you don't keep bringing up any crap i didn't even argue in the beginning.) BTW from what i read linux virus's to survive in the wild. A lot never found because the user thinks hes immune and most don't do anything because there is no user base to infect.

Anyways i cannot find anything that even remotely says the user isn't at fault. IN fact everything i read says the suer should be even more careful then they are now. And to not run things they cannot trust ect.

so to sum up.. OF course windows has more viruses it has a user base ffs its made to be a consumer level OS and has to be compatible with decades of hardware and software for the most part. Even a hard to get and execute virus for windows can run ramped because there are millions and millions of stupid users to keep it spreading.
 
I don't know where you read that you don't need to give executable permissions in linux because you do, you obviously didn't read fully read my post, how easy it is to get a virus is the whole point, remember tomtompiper said this "I cannot agree, an operating system that allows itself to be compromised because a user clicks one wrong button is not fit for purpose" and you replied "Then no OS is fit for purpose.. No OS is that safe" so show me where i can get my linux machine infected just by clicking on a popup window, because you can in windows (which is down to the design of the OS) thats why so many people get viruses in windows because they only need to be fooled into clicking on the wrong thing (they don't even have to be installing anything) the bottom line is you wouldn't be seeing people with infected PC's if they were running linux because as i pointed out its much much harder to get malware on a linux machine.

And people don't have to run as admin in windows but the default user in windows is created as admin (another OS security design flaw) and entering a password once is easier than clicking yes.. yes.. no... no.. etc... when installing a windows program, and i don't know where you are getting your information from but why would a linux user need to scan something he downloads before installing it when linux users get their software from trusted signed repo's (another OS security design benefit) and don't be fooled into thinking linux small user base is the reason why linux is safer because its not, its linux superior security design.
 
Ok forget it.. i don't care about popups i never said it wasn't easier to get a virus on windows i never said it wasn't harder to get one on linux just forget it. you want to argue about obviousness i was just stating a fact. If you think its impossible good for you may your ignorance not spread if linux ever does anything other then fill a nitch. assuming everyone gets software from trusted sources is another thing you assume. Its smaller user base IS why its a lot more secure its one of a couple reasons. Thinking thats not is another mistake of yours. You can keep arguing points I'm not even denying have fun. From a lot of what i read about linux your just talking out of your ass when it comes to malware and viruses not being able to infect linux. Though its more secure its not impossible to get them even by clicking ok.

Admin accounts aren't a security flaw since i do believe all os's have them. you could at best call it a mistake that MS made it default. But its just one more thing i don't have to change when i log in other then turning off UAC.

I also fail how to see a "trusted signing" is an OS security design benefit. Everything has trusted sources. Seems to me thats a user addition not so much an OS addition. Even if everything you say is true it doesn't matter. Linux simply isn't ready.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom