Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes, the new features are FANTASTIC!

2 (10%)

No, it's a Microsoft product - it'll be buggy for at LEAST a year (or three).

6 (30%)

Wait a while.

7 (35%)

WHY AREN'T YOU ON A MAC?????

1 (5%)

Closed-source operating systems are archaic.

1 (5%)

What's a "Windows"? (thumbs furiously typing on an iPad)

0 (0%)

I'm voting in this poll by use of MIND READING.

2 (10%)

Other (please state)

1 (5%)

Total Members Voted: 19

[jwhouk]

Given that I've just upgraded to Seven after spending nearly a decade using XP, I'm a bit hesitant to upgrade to Windows 8.

I apparently do have a free upgrade coming, since I bought the computer with 7 on it a few months ago, but I don't know if I really want it.

Anyone have opinions at all?

[Bluesummers]

My only opinion is that the price is FAR less than Windows 7...if I was reading the sale price correctly, it's $70 for the Windows 8 Pro at Office Depot.

Edit: Yeah, my eyes weren't deceiving me. And that's the sale price, good until the END OF JANUARY OH MY GOD WHY AREN'T PEOPLE BUYING THIS THING. I fear the end of office depot if they're actually good on their word.

EDIT AGAIN: The Office Depot one is an UPGRADE PACK, meaning you have to have Windows 7. Lucky you, jwhouk, you fit the bill.

For everyone else, Newegg sells the full version for $100. Still much cheaper than Windows 7.

[cesium133]

I'm sure Windows 8 won't be as bad as people are saying it's going to be, but meh, I'm not going to bother upgrading. Windows 7 works well enough.

[Bluesummers]

To answer your question, jwhouk, I would wait on it, if possible. With every Windows release there have been bugs, specifically security loopholes, that usually take several months to patch up. Microsoft can do all the beta testing they want, but nothing is as thorough as the general public in finding system bugs. Let's have a round of applause for those unwitting first-round public testers...

[pwhodges]

Windows 8 is the biggest change in Windows since Windows 95 introduced the desktop.  It is an attempt to make a single system that is good for touchcreens and OK for mousing in; I haven't tried it with a touchscreen yet (might get to it this week), but it's sure messy with a mouse.  Unless you have a reason to change to it, there will be no immediate benefit - at least wait till things have shaken down for a while.

[Pilchard123]

I can get every Microsoft OS since MS-DOS 6.0 for free. Just throwing that out there.

In fact, I'm pretty sure the only MS stuff I can't for free get are the recent Office packages and maybe Server 2012.

[Skaltura]

I've always been of the conviction that my Desktop OS (which has always been some derivation of Windows) only gets changed when I absolutely have no choice anymore, which in the case of 7 was for DirectX 10+ for games and stuff. I held onto XP and 2000 as long as I could before that. So far the only feature of 8 I like is the improved Task Manager, everything else looked like a step backward as far as Desktop computers to me. Won't change atm.

/edit: Maybe add a poll?

[LTK]

This article explores the implications of a closed application environment for developers and consumers by comparing it to the switch from MS-DOS to Windows 3.0. The bottom line is that it looks very likely that Windows as an open platform for development is going to disappear in the next 20 years if they keep this up. It's downright terrifying, and it definitely convinced me that I should stay the hell away from it.

[JonathanXS]

Go get Start8 ($5, 30day trial) or Classic Shell (free) and ignore the Metro ("Modern") UI. The performance boost is beautiful on my PC.

And you start to like the Metro UI... when it's not forced on you.

Like Pilchard though, I got my copy of 8 for free via Dreamspark Premium (MSDNAA) through my college. I'd happily pay the $40 for the upgrade though if I had to (do heed the warnings in that link though, as said before we are the first generation of public testers, and you're welcome for that! :p)

i run win8 ama, i'll be unbiased

[Bluesummers]

This article explores the implications of a closed application environment for developers and consumers by comparing it to the switch from MS-DOS to Windows 3.0. The bottom line is that it looks very likely that Windows as an open platform for development is going to disappear in the next 20 years if they keep this up. It's downright terrifying, and it definitely convinced me that I should stay the hell away from it.

That is...downright frightening. Does Microsoft really fear the threat of competition that much, that they would intentionally go Brave New World on us with Win8?

[LTK]

You mean 1984, and time will tell.

[snalin]

MS are probably looking at the rising competition from those Apple folks, and going "huh, they're getting a bigger and bigger piece of the market, and their platform is crazy closed! Now, since causation implies correlation, we should also close down our platform to not lose a bigger part of the market!"

W7 it is for me.

[JonathanXS]

That is...downright frightening. Does Microsoft really fear the threat of competition that much, that they would intentionally go Brave New World on us with Win8?

If they did, it would sound more like a suicide threat from the result of nearly every windows developer revolting at the notion.

[Blyss]

The initial proposal for things that Vista would do was damned frightening.  If you didn't remove or replace a driver correctly, your PC went away.  For good.

[Bluesummers]

You mean 1984, and time will tell.

Well, Orwell was mentored by Huxley, and I'm more familiar with literary works by the latter...but yeah, 1984 is a closer match. Hopefully Microsoft will realize that they can't play Big Brother is a world that's still fiercely capitalistic, and will fix these control issue before everyone jumps ship to Ubuntu or something.

[ackblom12]

I agree with the fact there are majorly bad implications to the world's most common OS going Walled Garden, but I'm laughing quite heartily at the idea of the world at large switching to Linux.

[Bluesummers]

Well yeah, we KNOW it'll never really happen. To many people not uncomfortable enough to bail from MS, too many corporations and school, etc that will buy Win8 licenses...meh. I'll stick with Vista for now. Not like I have a choice, it's the boss's computer.

[ackblom12]

Not just for the customer comfort, though that is a large part f it, but I'm also trying to imagine the Linux community being willing to do what's needed to make it a viable option for the average PC user in a world that's used to much more user friendly OS's. MAC is a much more likely switch over and Apple is fucking horrid.

[Bluesummers]

I actually went and bought a copy of Novell's SuSE Linux when I was in college. It cost me about $80, and everything that it offered was well worth it. The GUI was nice and simple, too. The only thing I didn't like was the Windows emulator, which was subpar, at best. But I'll assume that great strides have been made on that front, owing to the vast array of x86 & x64 .exe applications released in the seven years since I last used SuSE. Plus, owing to the fact that Linux is open-source by definition, I'm sure that other developers have better emulators.

[ackblom12]

Yeah, but you're not the average user. The average user doesn't build his (or others) own computer, as simple as it is. I finally broke down and decided to try out Linux again after several years of not using it and I can definitely see how someone who had never used a Computer before could learn it easily, but your average user who is used to MAC OSX or Windows is not gonna have a fun time. There have been ridiculous strides in comparison to the last time I used it, but it's still not as user friendly as either of the other 2 big alternatives.

Edit - Though to be fair, I've not used a pay version of Linux before. Never seen much point to it.

[pwhodges]

I'll stick with Vista for now.

I run my boss's computer, and the rest of them; I didn't have a single installation of Vista ever. 

However, with the end of support for XP only 18 months away (security is a big deal for me, working in clinical trials), I'm getting Windows 7 installed everywhere so that I can batten down the hatches again against Windows 8.  This is purely a UI issue for me; I have good evidence that there are considerable improvements in performance in W8.

[Omega Entity]

Windows 8 is the biggest change in Windows since Windows 95 introduced the desktop. 

Wait, I thought 3.1 had a desktop too? I distinctly remember that being installed on our old Packard Bell before we upgraded to 95, and it had a desktop.

[ackblom12]

3.1 was the first desktop, yes.

[pwhodges]

3.1 was the first desktop, yes.

There was little change in the operation of the minimal desktop between Windows 1 and Windows 3.11.  Windows 95 introduced a new paradigm with a far more interactive desktop (actually, it was a pale imitation of the OS/2 Workplace Shell, which was a true Object-Oriented interface) which included the task bar and was integrated into Explorer (replacing the much more simplistic File Manager).

[ackblom12]

[pwhodges]

I just tried to install Windows 8 (64-bit) on a machine that turns out to have only a 32-bit processor.  The message that the install program gave was:

Your computer needs to be repaired.
It does not have a 64-bit processor.

[ackblom12]

I think it might be getting snarky with you.

[pwhodges]

So I tried the 32-bit.  Setup lets me select regional time and keyboard options for the UK, but not language, which can only be "English (US)".

[jwhouk]

I guess you don't see the humor in that. At least you get to see all the pretty colors and everything.





(subtle language joke)

[pwhodges]

Ha ha.

It seems that although regional settings and input methods are built in, the "display language" has to be downloaded and installed via the control panel (or what passes for the control panel in Windows 8 ) for all other languages.

[LTK]

That sounds familiar to what I experienced when I tried to change the language of my version of Office to English. It can't. Microsoft wants me to pay €27 to download the language pack that the company itself uses. And you're not simply buying the English words, oh no. You are specifically paying for removing words from one language and replacing them with others. The words, you see, are free because you can get them if you install the package that gives you the English words as mouseover text, but if you want to get them without having to mouse over, you have to pay.

Brilliant logic, isn't it?

[snalin]

OpenOffice! Like Office, just without bullshit!

And without some of the advanced functionality, but oh well.

[cesium133]

OpenOffice! Like Office, just without bullshit!

And without some of the advanced functionality, but oh well.

I've learned the hard way to be careful about using OpenOffice's PowerPoint clone for equations. It has a really good equation editor (far better than the one in MS Office), but what it produces is not compatible with MS Office, so if you load it into Office, your equations will not display.

[Bluesummers]

OpenOffice! Like Office, just without bullshit!

Indeed. I use OOo for everything...the most recent version can decipher the new MS-Office formats (docx, xlsx, etc)

[LTK]

Spending ten minutes on Windows 8 on my dad's computer gives me these impressions:

Ease of use of the Metro interface on desktop computers is significantly lower because simple operations such as opening and closing programs are now performed by touchscreen-friendly controls, which means that opening a program involves going through at least one fullscreen operation, and closing it, wait for it, requires you to click and hold the LMB on the very top edge of the screen, then drag it all the way down to the bottom edge. If Microsoft is trying to win people over on their Metro interface, that doesn't help.

While Metro is substantially less flashy than Aero w.r.t. fading and animations, it still has some embellishments in the way of sliding screen elements, and these are impossible to disable within its own (extremely limited) options menu.

Bafflingly, the single feature that I would actually have liked about Windows 8 is not supported on desktop computers: Adjusting screen brightness.


Is this a fucking joke?

This guy wrote a software tool five years ago that dims your screen. It's 52 kb in size. To me, it just screams 'lazy', seeing that Microsoft haven't even bothered to implement a similar system for desktop computers, when it's already ubiquitous in phones, tablets and laptops.

Oh, and when I tried to run the aforementioned dimming tool, it was deemed unsafe and was blocked from running. The option to run it anyway only appeared after clicking 'more info'. [FOREBODE FOREBODE]

[Carl-E]

Doesn't the monitor have  brightness control? 


And, with due respects to Gallagher, it my not work on the internet...   

[Omega Entity]

The more I hear about 8, the more I'm sure I'll never upgrade to it until they pull their heads out of their asses. I'm still running on XP, for cripes sake.

Is it just me, or has it felt like they're trying to alienate people who have known how to use the interface that they used for a decade, and now the people who learned how to use Vista and 7's interface, which each recent Windows release?

[LTK]

Doesn't the monitor have  brightness control? 

Yes. Have you ever tried to use it? Do you know how many button presses it takes to bring the brightness down from a level that's comfortable during the day, to what's comfortable during the night? For my monitor, it's about 40.

[pwhodges]

Doesn't it repeat on holding?  Mine does.  Anyway, how often do you want to change it - a laptop is used in different circumstances, which makes it necessary (I presume Windows gets access to the function buttons that laptops have built in, but a separate desktop monitor doesn't give that access).

[jwhouk]

My problem isn't the brightness, it's the color hue. I can't adequately adjust the color hue using the OSD controls on my monitor, and have to use the ones through the graphics card. It's doubly hard, of course, because of my deuteranopia.

[Bluesummers]

Do your monitors (I'm talking to all of you who've had monitor backlight/hue/etc issue) use an SVGA port? (3-row, 15-pin DB-style port) Or does it use HDMI?

It's possible that Windows 8's hardware controls rely on a "higher-order" digital interface, either USB or HDMI 1.4. If the touchscreen uses USB, there's no guarantee that the USB control of the monitor extends to the options otherwise managed by the OSD. I'm just surmising with your monitors, but that's exactly how larger flat-panel displays work, and I'd assume Microsoft would try to mirror those methods.

[LTK]

Doesn't it repeat on holding?  Mine does.  Anyway, how often do you want to change it - a laptop is used in different circumstances, which makes it necessary (I presume Windows gets access to the function buttons that laptops have built in, but a separate desktop monitor doesn't give that access).

I turn it down every night, after the sun goes down. If I was using the monitor's controls, I'd have to bring the brightness down from 100 to 0 in order for it to be at a comfortable level. Takes about fourteen seconds to do that. The shortcut to Dimmer I have on my taskbar does it in less than one second.

Do your monitors (I'm talking to all of you who've had monitor backlight/hue/etc issue) use an SVGA port? (3-row, 15-pin DB-style port) Or does it use HDMI?

It's possible that Windows 8's hardware controls rely on a "higher-order" digital interface, either USB or HDMI 1.4. If the touchscreen uses USB, there's no guarantee that the USB control of the monitor extends to the options otherwise managed by the OSD. I'm just surmising with your monitors, but that's exactly how larger flat-panel displays work, and I'd assume Microsoft would try to mirror those methods.

As far as I'm aware, modern video cards have foregone VGA ports entirely, and instead use DVI ports predominantly. HDMI ports on video cards are a relatively recent addition, to accomodate people hooking up their tv's to their computers. My own monitor has a VGA and a DVI port, but no HDMI, and my dad's monitor is probably the same.

If Microsoft simply ceases to accomodate features for DVI-controlled monitors and switches support to USB and HDMI instead, that's even more evidence that they're completely out of whack.

Also, I found another 'interesting' change in the Metro interface: What do you do when you are on a webpage and you want to access the (auto-hiding) URL bar? First person to guess correctly gets a free meme.

[Lupercal]

Interesting. I remember seeing some early videos of Windows 8 vs the new Ubuntu, and people seemed to prefer Ubuntu. It would probably be more popular if it were more universal (for example, my university only accepted files that were MS Word, meaning Mac users had to get Word for Mac). Even though I've only ever used Windows, I'm considering a switch seeing as the options are:

Die a slow horrible death continuing to use Vista
Upgrade to Win 7 (seems logical, may still have a three-year-old free upgrade)
Buy Windows 8 against all the common sense on the internet
Switch to Ubuntu.

Windows seems to have alienated users since Vista came out, really. Only recently have I realised what a irritating system it is to use once you want to do more than just look at lolcats. Sometimes seems like Windows, as an OS, can rather stifle the humble laptop.

[pwhodges]

Upgrade to Win 7 (seems logical, may still have a three-year-old free upgrade)
Buy Windows 8 against all the common sense on the internet

Use the Windows 7 to get the cheap upgrade to Windows 8.  Then get a free app to add a Windows 7 style Start button back to the desktop.  If you're prepared to shell out an extra $5 you can get a similar app that does the same, but also persuades Windows 8 to boot to the desktop rather than the start screen.  Once you've sorted the desktop interface, you can take advantage of the fact that there are consistent reports that Windows 8 performs significantly faster.

Windows seems to have alienated users since Vista came out, really. Only recently have I realised what a irritating system it is to use once you want to do more than just look at lolcats. Sometimes seems like Windows, as an OS, can rather stifle the humble laptop.

Windows 95 alienated Windows 3.11 users.  Windows Millennium edition alienated everyone - worse than Vista; really.  Windows 2000 alienated the people that wanted to stay with a DOS-based Windows (i.e. 98 - see Millennium edition).  Vista alienated everyone who had started to feel that XP was the final long-term state of Windows.  Windows 3.11, 98, XP, and 7 didn't alienate people, simply because they were each a significant improvement on their predecessors, but with minimal change in the UI.  In each case the internal product number change was no a whole digit, but a point change.

[Bluesummers]

Also, I found another 'interesting' change in the Metro interface: What do you do when you are on a webpage and you want to access the (auto-hiding) URL bar? First person to guess correctly gets a free meme.

CTRL+D


Did I get it?

[LTK]

Also, I found another 'interesting' change in the Metro interface: What do you do when you are on a webpage and you want to access the (auto-hiding) URL bar? First person to guess correctly gets a free meme.

CTRL+D


Did I get it?

That could be true, I don't know what Ctrl-D does, but I was looking for the mouse command.

[snalin]

Yeah, I was going for ctrl+l, which is the standard for accessing the... address line. Don't think I've clicked up there in ages.

I would suppose that the was to access it is to put your mouse in that general area. But I guess it's not that easy?

[LTK]

No, you're right, because hovering the mouse cursor is an action that no longer exists on touch-based interfaces. Try again.

[pwhodges]

(click to show/hide)

Right-click in a non-active area of the web page.

Actually, I think it's something I might have tried automatically, though I don't see how it relates to the touch aspect of the interface...

[LTK]

(click to show/hide)

I'd say it's one of those things that's completely unintuitive for anyone familiar with Windows, but actually kind of clever. On the one hand, I ought to balk at the idea of getting rid of the context menu, because it's the one thing you can always rely on to find the action you want. When in doubt, right-click. On the other hand, I use the context menu in the browser exclusively for links and text, and it's pretty much useless outside of that, so I can see the sense in assigning it to a more useful action. I daresay it might actually be more efficient than the normal right-click functionality, at least for web browsers.

Edit: Now this, this is a useful guide.