- Status
kawininjazx
Distinguished
- May 22, 2008
- 1,372
- 0
- 19,460
[citation][nom]XD_dued[/nom]No one is forcing you to get it.I wonder if they will make any solution to run x86 programs on ARM systems. But I think it'd probably be too difficult.[/citation]
You are forced to buy an OS when they stop supporting the old one, so it's kind of forced.
You are forced to buy an OS when they stop supporting the old one, so it's kind of forced.
Prescott_666
Distinguished
- May 13, 2009
- 166
- 0
- 18,690
When (and I guess if) a free 90-day evaluation version is available for download from Microsoft, for either beta or Enterprise, I will download it and evaluate it.
It's possible that I will love it and decide I have to have it, but unless I see some real improvement in something, it's more likely I will stay with Windows 7.
My mother's computer is still on XP, and she isn't particularly interested in changing anything. My sister and I have decided to leave her on XP as long as Microsoft continues to issue security updates for it, and then we will decide what to do.
It's possible that I will love it and decide I have to have it, but unless I see some real improvement in something, it's more likely I will stay with Windows 7.
My mother's computer is still on XP, and she isn't particularly interested in changing anything. My sister and I have decided to leave her on XP as long as Microsoft continues to issue security updates for it, and then we will decide what to do.
[citation][nom]tofu2go[/nom]If the only change in Windows 8 is the tile interface and the API additions to support it, this should be a $29 or less update, much like Snow Leopard was.[/citation]
Actually Snow Leopard was more like a Service Pack. Something that people get for free on Windows.
Actually Snow Leopard was more like a Service Pack. Something that people get for free on Windows.
The tiled interface looks so ugly, impractical and outdated to me for a desktop work machine I forgot to read more about other features the new OS will bring. So I need to understand better and read more why MS will name this W8.
Will it be a way to attract many to experiment with a new interface mostly produced for tablets or for a living room PC? As for the price I agree with a lowered upgrade price (IF) it wont bring other mayor new features or performance.
Will it be a way to attract many to experiment with a new interface mostly produced for tablets or for a living room PC? As for the price I agree with a lowered upgrade price (IF) it wont bring other mayor new features or performance.
JamesSneed
Judicious
- Oct 26, 2009
- 2,783
- 116
- 32,490
That sounds good but you know Apple charges a good deal more up front since they control the hardware so they can charge less on OS upgrades. This is just as silly as saying Windows should be free because Linux is free.
I hear you I wish Windows was cheaper but I don't think MS will have an issue selling Windows 8 so saying it should be $29 is a pipe dream.
[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]If you're silly enough to go and buy every new software that comes out, then MS certainly earned the right to take your money. Besides, 98, XP, Vista and 7 were great, no matter what people say. 98 ran all the games great, XP was like fresh air after horrible 2000 and still kicks ass unless you're a DX11 gamer with more than 4GB RAM, Vista was some skilled trolling from MS and a beta version of Win7, and 7 is the best OS I've had in years.[/citation]
With your experience of windows, it sounds like you yourself were "silly enough to go out and buy every version of windows" lol
[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]Before accusing Windows of being "crappy", got any alternative?[/citation]
Just because there are no alternatives doesn't mean they've built a great product. Microsoft has never been an innovator, they just steal or buy software made by others in order to undermine competition before they become a serious threat. They didn't beat Apple's ass by producing quality software, did they?
With your experience of windows, it sounds like you yourself were "silly enough to go out and buy every version of windows" lol
[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]Before accusing Windows of being "crappy", got any alternative?[/citation]
Just because there are no alternatives doesn't mean they've built a great product. Microsoft has never been an innovator, they just steal or buy software made by others in order to undermine competition before they become a serious threat. They didn't beat Apple's ass by producing quality software, did they?
I use Linux for computing ;-D
That's an alternative....
If you know what your doing, you can too.
That's an alternative....
If you know what your doing, you can too.
[citation][nom]JamesSneed[/nom]I hear you I wish Windows was cheaper but I don't think MS will have an issue selling Windows 8 so saying it should be $29 is a pipe dream.[/citation]
It should be free considering Windows 7 is just barely getting started to be supported in businesses, (will probably never be supported where I'm at), and so far it seems that it really isn't anything more than a different paint job over Windows 7 anyway. Still though, OEM prices make it reasonable enough but it just breaks up the PC market by needlessly dividing users into different Operating systems. I can't imagine developers being thrilled.
What we need is competition. Instead of waiting for Microsoft to randomly fart out something that is somewhat of an improvement we need competitors to drive innovation. Microsoft is the reason desktop PC sales have stagnated, they haven't given anybody a good reason to upgrade. Meanwhile Apple does what Microsoft failed miserably originally by producing a tablet PC that has created a new genre, and inadvertently a serious threat to the desktop PC business Microsoft relies so heavily on. As much as I dislike Apple for various reasons, at least they produce things people are excited to have, whereas Microsoft produces things people resent but are ultimately forced to adopt.
It should be free considering Windows 7 is just barely getting started to be supported in businesses, (will probably never be supported where I'm at), and so far it seems that it really isn't anything more than a different paint job over Windows 7 anyway. Still though, OEM prices make it reasonable enough but it just breaks up the PC market by needlessly dividing users into different Operating systems. I can't imagine developers being thrilled.
What we need is competition. Instead of waiting for Microsoft to randomly fart out something that is somewhat of an improvement we need competitors to drive innovation. Microsoft is the reason desktop PC sales have stagnated, they haven't given anybody a good reason to upgrade. Meanwhile Apple does what Microsoft failed miserably originally by producing a tablet PC that has created a new genre, and inadvertently a serious threat to the desktop PC business Microsoft relies so heavily on. As much as I dislike Apple for various reasons, at least they produce things people are excited to have, whereas Microsoft produces things people resent but are ultimately forced to adopt.
CaedenV
Splendid
- Jun 14, 2011
- 4,829
- 3
- 23,465
[citation][nom]aaron88_7[/nom]Unlike some of the Window's ass kissers around here, I completely agree.This isn't even a new operating system, it's just an update to Windows 7 that Microsoft is charging for.I can't wait until Google goes for the kill and released their own operating system![/citation]
Um no... 2000/XP was based on WinNT, Vista/7 was based on Unix, and from what I am reading on other sites 8 is going to be something else entirely. I am sick and tired of people confusing Operating System with an interface. The OS is responsible for interacting between hardware and software. It is all about memory management, and directing the flow of information, not window and button placement. That it like looking at a Ford F150 and a diesel F350 and saying that they are the same car because they have the same manufacturer and a similar style to their design when the engine and drive train are entirely different.
NT/2K/XP have the same core OS, the same general way of dealing with information and hardware. It is very open due to the nature of early networking of winNT, and thus very insecure (but business was more conserned with easy networking in the '90s than they were with ID theft). After finally figuring out that the general infastructure of the core OS was flawed beyond repair they moved Vista over to a Unix based core which is closed by nature, and is thus more secure. The early problems with Vista were due to their lack of expierence with the OS and understanding how it reacts to changes. By the time win7 came out Vista was running fine and smoothe, and 7 is essentially Vista but with more inteligent use of hardware accelleration for the interface which was what was slowing the system to a crawl. You may note that now you must aprove the installation of a virus on your win7 machine in order to infect your system. Bugs may infect other programs (like IE, or one of the various platforms like java, .net, silverlight, Flash etc), but to infect the core OS requires your aproval (unless you turn off the UAC).
Any system builder will tell you what a dream win7 is to set up compared to XP. The whole process is very easy. Plus you get to take advantage of new hardware and technology that did not exist when XP reigned. Put XP and 7 on the same machine (with at least 1GB of ram), and 7 will smack XP down every time.
Win8 is the first attempt at a different core OS archatecture sinse winNT. There will be some growing pains as there were with Vista because it will be a whole new monster to deal with. However, it will be unique (for windows) as it will be able to run on multiple archatectures with the same core OS. The tile interface is not the OS, nither is the desktop, they are just ways for you to interact with the OS, which in turn will interact with your information. I personally hope that the tiles will be a fad that goes away for the desktop space, but after looking at phone7 I think it is very effective for a mobile/tactile enviornment. It just sucks as a productivity interface.
Google's OS is just another rehash of linux, but it is tied directly to the web, so it will be entirely useless in areas with low/no bandwidth which much of the US has. I am a bit of a google fan boy, but the Chrome OS just will not take the market here. Maybe it will do better elsewhere in the world with more redily available internet access. Win8 will in theory have much more integration with winLive features such as SkyDrive which will allow it to do much of what ChromeOS does, while keeping local file useage and programs available.
Personally I hope that ChromeOS is a huge success and that it will merge with Android. Bringing the Android interface with a more robust OS infastructure that allows for better multitasking and productivity could potentially be a winning combination!
Um no... 2000/XP was based on WinNT, Vista/7 was based on Unix, and from what I am reading on other sites 8 is going to be something else entirely. I am sick and tired of people confusing Operating System with an interface. The OS is responsible for interacting between hardware and software. It is all about memory management, and directing the flow of information, not window and button placement. That it like looking at a Ford F150 and a diesel F350 and saying that they are the same car because they have the same manufacturer and a similar style to their design when the engine and drive train are entirely different.
NT/2K/XP have the same core OS, the same general way of dealing with information and hardware. It is very open due to the nature of early networking of winNT, and thus very insecure (but business was more conserned with easy networking in the '90s than they were with ID theft). After finally figuring out that the general infastructure of the core OS was flawed beyond repair they moved Vista over to a Unix based core which is closed by nature, and is thus more secure. The early problems with Vista were due to their lack of expierence with the OS and understanding how it reacts to changes. By the time win7 came out Vista was running fine and smoothe, and 7 is essentially Vista but with more inteligent use of hardware accelleration for the interface which was what was slowing the system to a crawl. You may note that now you must aprove the installation of a virus on your win7 machine in order to infect your system. Bugs may infect other programs (like IE, or one of the various platforms like java, .net, silverlight, Flash etc), but to infect the core OS requires your aproval (unless you turn off the UAC).
Any system builder will tell you what a dream win7 is to set up compared to XP. The whole process is very easy. Plus you get to take advantage of new hardware and technology that did not exist when XP reigned. Put XP and 7 on the same machine (with at least 1GB of ram), and 7 will smack XP down every time.
Win8 is the first attempt at a different core OS archatecture sinse winNT. There will be some growing pains as there were with Vista because it will be a whole new monster to deal with. However, it will be unique (for windows) as it will be able to run on multiple archatectures with the same core OS. The tile interface is not the OS, nither is the desktop, they are just ways for you to interact with the OS, which in turn will interact with your information. I personally hope that the tiles will be a fad that goes away for the desktop space, but after looking at phone7 I think it is very effective for a mobile/tactile enviornment. It just sucks as a productivity interface.
Google's OS is just another rehash of linux, but it is tied directly to the web, so it will be entirely useless in areas with low/no bandwidth which much of the US has. I am a bit of a google fan boy, but the Chrome OS just will not take the market here. Maybe it will do better elsewhere in the world with more redily available internet access. Win8 will in theory have much more integration with winLive features such as SkyDrive which will allow it to do much of what ChromeOS does, while keeping local file useage and programs available.
Personally I hope that ChromeOS is a huge success and that it will merge with Android. Bringing the Android interface with a more robust OS infastructure that allows for better multitasking and productivity could potentially be a winning combination!
They actually did, Apple almost went bankrupt, thanks to "so called regulators" that MS gotta keep Apple alive.
Speaking of copying, since when Apple create anything? all they did is put some old or existing technology and warp it inside a pretty box/case and call it an "revolutionary" new product. Did they even create their OS Kernel? no they did not. it's just another re-package crap. It's still loaded with 20-30 year old bug that they never bothered to fix.
SteelCity1981
Distinguished
- Sep 16, 2010
- 1,129
- 0
- 19,310
I just hope they come to their senses and drop the office 2007 look alike menu bar. If it works don't fix it and every time micrsoft has success they try to fix it anyway...
[citation][nom]caedenv[/nom]Um no... 2000/XP was based on WinNT, Vista/7 was based on Unix, and from what I am reading on other sites 8 is going to be something else entirely. I am sick and tired of people confusing Operating System with an interface. The OS is responsible for interacting between hardware and software. It is all about memory management, and directing the flow of information, not window and button placement. That it like looking at a Ford F150 and a diesel F350 and saying that they are the same car because they have the same manufacturer and a similar style to their design when the engine and drive train are entirely different.NT/2K/XP have the same core OS, the same general way of dealing with information and hardware. It is very open due to the nature of early networking of winNT, and thus very insecure (but business was more conserned with easy networking in the '90s than they were with ID theft). After finally figuring out that the general infastructure of the core OS was flawed beyond repair they moved Vista over to a Unix based core which is closed by nature, and is thus more secure. The early problems with Vista were due to their lack of expierence with the OS and understanding how it reacts to changes. By the time win7 came out Vista was running fine and smoothe, and 7 is essentially Vista but with more inteligent use of hardware accelleration for the interface which was what was slowing the system to a crawl. You may note that now you must aprove the installation of a virus on your win7 machine in order to infect your system. Bugs may infect other programs (like IE, or one of the various platforms like java, .net, silverlight, Flash etc), but to infect the core OS requires your aproval (unless you turn off the UAC).Any system builder will tell you what a dream win7 is to set up compared to XP. The whole process is very easy. Plus you get to take advantage of new hardware and technology that did not exist when XP reigned. Put XP and 7 on the same machine (with at least 1GB of ram), and 7 will smack XP down every time.Win8 is the first attempt at a different core OS archatecture sinse winNT. There will be some growing pains as there were with Vista because it will be a whole new monster to deal with. However, it will be unique (for windows) as it will be able to run on multiple archatectures with the same core OS. The tile interface is not the OS, nither is the desktop, they are just ways for you to interact with the OS, which in turn will interact with your information. I personally hope that the tiles will be a fad that goes away for the desktop space, but after looking at phone7 I think it is very effective for a mobile/tactile enviornment. It just sucks as a productivity interface.Google's OS is just another rehash of linux, but it is tied directly to the web, so it will be entirely useless in areas with low/no bandwidth which much of the US has. I am a bit of a google fan boy, but the Chrome OS just will not take the market here. Maybe it will do better elsewhere in the world with more redily available internet access. Win8 will in theory have much more integration with winLive features such as SkyDrive which will allow it to do much of what ChromeOS does, while keeping local file useage and programs available.Personally I hope that ChromeOS is a huge success and that it will merge with Android. Bringing the Android interface with a more robust OS infastructure that allows for better multitasking and productivity could potentially be a winning combination![/citation]
Umm, no. Windows 2000/XP/Vista/7/Server 2003/Server 2008/Server 2008R2/WHS/etc... are ALL based off of Windows NT. Period. Updated, upgraded, modded, improved... But all NT... Not Unix.
MacOS is based on Unix. Chrome may be as well, as is the underlying 'daddy' of Linux, but not Windows... MS went from DOS based to NT based. Period.
Umm, no. Windows 2000/XP/Vista/7/Server 2003/Server 2008/Server 2008R2/WHS/etc... are ALL based off of Windows NT. Period. Updated, upgraded, modded, improved... But all NT... Not Unix.
MacOS is based on Unix. Chrome may be as well, as is the underlying 'daddy' of Linux, but not Windows... MS went from DOS based to NT based. Period.
[citation][nom]jacekring[/nom]windows 8 will flop, be a total failure....it's M$'s destiny. They should just skip it and work on win 9. Here's the proof:win 3.11 - Awesomewin 95 - FLOPwin 98 - Awesomewin ME - FLOPwin XP - Awesomewin Vista - FLOPwin 7 - Awesomewin 8 - going to be a FLOP[/citation]
XP was far from awesome. 98 was fast, but easily corrupt-able. It was awesome that it was so easy to reinstall, but it was still a fundamentally flawed OS. 95 was an experiment. Not as good as 98 SE, but it was a step up from 3.11, assuming you had the hardware to run it...
XP was far from awesome. 98 was fast, but easily corrupt-able. It was awesome that it was so easy to reinstall, but it was still a fundamentally flawed OS. 95 was an experiment. Not as good as 98 SE, but it was a step up from 3.11, assuming you had the hardware to run it...
[citation][nom]jacobdrj[/nom]XP was far from awesome. 98 was fast, but easily corrupt-able. It was awesome that it was so easy to reinstall, but it was still a fundamentally flawed OS. 95 was an experiment. Not as good as 98 SE, but it was a step up from 3.11, assuming you had the hardware to run it...[/citation]
And 2000 was a darned good OS for its time. Rock solid and required less system requirements than XP, until SP2/3. Once you had SP2, you could USE XP. SP3 was already after XP was a dead product, but it was a welcomed enhancement to performance, after they fixed the AMD infinite auto-reboot problem fixed...
I resisted XP for the longest time until I just couldn't anymore (new video card). Once I did, I still thought it to be slow and buggy until SP2.
And 2000 was a darned good OS for its time. Rock solid and required less system requirements than XP, until SP2/3. Once you had SP2, you could USE XP. SP3 was already after XP was a dead product, but it was a welcomed enhancement to performance, after they fixed the AMD infinite auto-reboot problem fixed...
I resisted XP for the longest time until I just couldn't anymore (new video card). Once I did, I still thought it to be slow and buggy until SP2.
JohnnyLucky
Glorious
- May 30, 2007
- 10,903
- 11
- 44,315
jimmysmitty
Champion
- Oct 5, 2007
- 21,595
- 595
- 59,140
[citation][nom]droking[/nom]Honestly I will never change from window xp till the day they make it easy for me to run old games on windows 7 then i just might get a 7... but if its still retarded with old games then forget it ill just stick with my XP[/citation]
Only one problem. After some time, drivers for new hardware will stop supporting XP. Then you will be stuck.
Its best to have an old machine for older games and a new one for newer. Besides, Windows 7 is great. I have run a lot of old games on it that run on Windows 95 like Decent, C&C and Duke Nukem 3D.
Only one problem. After some time, drivers for new hardware will stop supporting XP. Then you will be stuck.
Its best to have an old machine for older games and a new one for newer. Besides, Windows 7 is great. I have run a lot of old games on it that run on Windows 95 like Decent, C&C and Duke Nukem 3D.
drwho1
Distinguished
- Jan 10, 2010
- 1,271
- 0
- 19,310
[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]Only one problem. After some time, drivers for new hardware will stop supporting XP. Then you will be stuck.Its best to have an old machine for older games and a new one for newer. Besides, Windows 7 is great. I have run a lot of old games on it that run on Windows 95 like Decent, C&C and Duke Nukem 3D.[/citation]
I was having the same problem until I got (A)DOSBOX 0.74 now I can run all DOS games on full screen complete with sound everything that I have tried so far works great without problems.
(B) Microsoft Virtual PC it allows you to install under this virtual PC program another OS like win 95/ win98 / win XP and install and run any program or games on their own virtual machine.
Again so far all that I have tried it works without any problems.
I was having the same problem until I got (A)DOSBOX 0.74 now I can run all DOS games on full screen complete with sound everything that I have tried so far works great without problems.
(B) Microsoft Virtual PC it allows you to install under this virtual PC program another OS like win 95/ win98 / win XP and install and run any program or games on their own virtual machine.
Again so far all that I have tried it works without any problems.
DroKing
Distinguished
- Feb 14, 2010
- 412
- 0
- 18,790
I still play counter-strike 1.6 and it ran like crap had ton of problems with win 7 till i reverted back to XP then from there it ran flawlessly. But it could have to do with my old crappy hardware which somebody once told me before yet at same time few of my CS buddies have trouble running their cs with smooth FPS with CS... quite sad.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question No POST on new AM5 build - - - and the CPU & DRAM lights are on ?
- Started by Uknownflowet
- Replies: 13
-
-
Question Please help diagnosing a dying RX 6800 XT ?- Started by sandijs11
- Replies: 10
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram