Sign in to follow this  
hawkinator

What do you think of Windows 8?

Do you approve of Window 8?  

  1. 1. Do you approve of Window 8?

    • No, I think they took the wrong direction
      37
    • Not really, but it's OK
      12
    • I think Windows 9 will be good if they keep doing the same thing
      1
    • I like it but I think some things are annoying
      9
    • Love it!!!!!!!!
      7


Recommended Posts

I, personally like it,

6vfWXfN.jpg (click image to see larger)

Screenshot of my start menu, (note: you cannot get it to look like this without special tools, but with special tools you can do this and more)

Also, background is Chobit-389's PfL

Edited by hawkinator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A tablet os has no business pretending to be a pc os. Needless to say i abhor 8. I have tried it, lasted less than one week then reinstalled 7. Gimme back my start button, a proper default to desktop, full time aero(metro/ modern UI is irritating). That and they have this odd split personality theme going on. Some windows utils and progs run modern ui, others kick you back to aero, and they're all MS made... And why they decided that all progams dragged to the side of the screen must split 1/3 - 2/3 instead of whatever i decide........ I love their default for dual screen, why it isnt two desktops the default instead of 'here's your tabletised startmen....er...monitor', love the subtle message of 'buy our tablets, its the same os...'.

Except, it isnt. Windows Rt, desgned to run on arm cpus, intended for tablets, wont run the same programs even if the hardware is powerful enough. Love that. Go buy your Ms software twice....poorly planned, even more poorly executed money grab. I love how so many just call it WART, like one, it needs to die imo.

Nope, bought almost every verson of windows thus far(skiped ME and early NT versions), even liked vista(once the UAC was murdered), 8 imho is not even worth it if given to me or pirated.

When they either isolate the tablet stuff for its own dedicated os and stop trying to force desktop users to love their tablet features, or just give up on a battle they'll never win(windows competing with android and ios....yeah, they can so win that fight), then i might go back and try 9. Or maybe the next hasty revamp, 8.2?, if they relise they're still woefully short of the mark with 8.1. I dunno, maybe 8.1 will be tolerable.

The hint MS seems to be trying to bludgeon us all to death with is ' you should have bought a tablet'....ugh, no, they should just stay away from tablets.

Anyways, its just an opinion, if you like it, dont let me get in the way. They did boost performance, especially startup.

Edited by Amram

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like it for a tablet/laptop.(I use an old windows XP laptop for personal stuff.) I of course don't think they should continue this in windows 9, if they do maybe release a Windows 9 Tablet version that does this. Just my opinion, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Id be a very happy camper if they brought many of the little things to 7. They did make a lot of progress.

Hyper-V is a neat concept, but its neither new nor native to windows 8, its been around since server 08.. Its also incredibly limited. The day you can run a vm that is every bit as capable as the resources you share with it, ill be all over it. To be fair, i dont think any VM software can do that yet.

If its still part of windows in whatever version i decide i like enough to come back to, its nice to know i don't have to dualboot or get third party stuff just to have a hazmat os.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its also incredibly limited. The day you can run a vm that is every bit as capable as the resources you share with it, ill be all over it. To be fair, i dont think any VM software can do that yet.

What do you mean by this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I find it better than previous OS'es and have had far less troubles with it than previous windows versions. The start "menu" is tablet targetted and its the one thing I wish they had a better desktop experience for, but the perf improvements over windows 7 (on same hardware) far outweigh my gripes. That said I'm also a fan of the right tool for the job, so if I run Windows software this is it, If I'm doing design work I look at buying a Mac.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do you mean by this?
Just that gaming on a vm has never been viable, i think thats still true. They frequently lack proper contol of the gpu and instead end ip basically emulating evga, so ts almost like having not installed drivers for your gpu, but worse. IIRC vmware doesn't support direct-x either, if hyped-v does, thats a start at least.

Basically, i wish to one day see vm's allow one pc to have a split personality, the vm os isn't just a program, its fully functional and can do anything a native install can do. Then if your game only works in xp you need not dual boot, or keep an older system around, just use a vm.

Its no small task, so im not holding my breath, but someday it just might. Until then, vm's are very useful for doing things that you think might be harmful to your installed os.

Edit:apologies for typos, used my phone.

Edited by Amram

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Copying in my post from the Win3 thread:

Touch-screen orientation for PCs has amazing potential, but it's also incredibly difficult. A single operating system from your phone to your desktop is inevitable but that's like the biggest interface change since the GUI was invented.

No one has any experience doing something like that at all, it would be borderline impossible for MS to be able to do it perfectly first time. Just look at how long it took everyone to get mouse/keyboard based interfaces pleasant to use.

I absolutely agree MS made some mistakes with win 8 (forcing boot to start screen) but a lot is suggesting those types of mistakes are being resolved for 8.1 (free and out around a year after win 8 release). So what we're seeing is MS attempting something really new and challenging and then being hammered for not doing it perfectly first try when literally no one else has managed that even with more limited changes.

So, if you look at this with hindsight then what does MS's plan look like? Well, they wanted to make massive changes that they knew they couldn't get right the first time, so they did their best and put out a version designed to test as many of their ideas as they could and greatly reduced its price over their usual offerings. Next, they changed to a yearly release cycle and started hammering out massive improvements using what they learned to create what is essentially win 8.5 in less than half the time a normal release would take, they also decided to offer this for free to Win8 users. This is all at the same time as porting like 95% of the windows code to arm, optimising it for that, then porting all of that to be used on phones.

It's not gone completely smoothly but there's very little precedent to this sort of company wide paradigm shift so overall I'd say they did about as well as could reasonably be expected. My opinion from before Win8 was announced that it is impossible to judge MS on their new plan until at least Windows 9, with the new release schedule that puts us at the end of 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Underneath it's Win7 but more stable and faster - that is nice.

The UI is a bit of a mess. It's in transition. Win9 will probably be decent. But how, after so many years, and with so much money, does Microfsoft still blunder so often?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Basically, i wish to one day see vm's allow one pc to have a split personality, the vm os isn't just a program, its fully functional and can do anything a native install can do. Then if your game only works in xp you need not dual boot, or keep an older system around, just use a vm.

Hyper-V should be the most promising here, as it actually is integrated into the system. (As an optional system feature, of course.) Maybe it can't do many things it it was actually booted, but something that can run as in-depth as Hyper-V, it should if given enough code to do so. You can read about it more here.

The UI is a bit of a mess. It's in transition. Win9 will probably be decent. But how, after so many years, and with so much money, does Microfsoft still blunder so often?

If they do blunder, they have enough money to recover if they blunder 7 times in a row :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it that Microsoft Always tries to Cram new things too fast into a new OS?

Windows ME - Frequent Bluescreens and crashes, but Microsoft added some great features, like System restore and more support for USB.

Windows XP - A bluescreen once in a while, overall it was stable and looked great.

Windows Vista - Introduced some a great looking UI, but unstable, sometimes slow, and prone to crashes.

Windows 7 - Extremely Stable and fast, the UAC is annoying at times but you can turn that off. ( I've only had one bluescreen with windows 7, and that was because i was messing with the Boot file )

Windows 8 - Neat concept, but way too many foul-ups between the Metro UI and the desktop Areo. ( Like the fact you have 2 versions of Internet explorer, one for metro and one for Areo, and they act completely independent of each other.) And i Doubt any Business that gets stuff done would use it...

Where are we going with this?

Edited by ZedNova

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very important to remember with Win 8 that its development style is closer to Windows Phone than Win 7.

It's now on a yearly release and is very invested in mobile. Also, nearly every issue people have with it is UI related, that is the easiest thing to fix.

So look at how WP developed, you start with 7.0 which had potential but was very limited and underdeveloped. Then 7.5 made it usable 99% of the time. Then WP8 hit and now it's in line with iOS/Android in every area other than app quantity (which is not directly under MS control). So that's two years to go from nothing to competitive. This sort of development is not like the old style Windows process where MS was slow and ignored what people wanted. WP has repeatedly adapted based on feedback and the 8.1 leaks show that Win 8 is also going to do exactly that.

So if you don't want to use 8 then just use 7, if you are worried the direction is terrible and disaster awaits then give it time for the plan to complete. This is essentially a new operating system we're looking at, iOS sucked hard in the early days, Android stucked too, WP7 was no better, but in the end they all ended up fine and it's hard to remember what they once were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is very important to remember with Win 8 that its development style is closer to Windows Phone than Win 7.

It's now on a yearly release and is very invested in mobile.

and that is THE mistake. Touch/surface works alright on a small device that is laid flat or reclined. It doesn't work well for dual 27s that are three feet away, four feet wide in total, rasied off the desk, and vertical.

A uniform os is a mistake in this case. Its like a uniform control scheme between sports car and a fighter plane. Both are made to go places, each does things the other can not, each has an interface optimised for its own needs.

Touch/surface are a good substitute for a mouse/keyboard when they are not a good option, but for a desktop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why Linux on mobile (Ubuntu will soon be launching it on phones) will succeed where Win 8 fails; the UI is distinct from the OS.

Anyone using Linux will know they can chop and change window managers to suit their needs, yet the heart of the system remains untouched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and that is THE mistake. Touch/surface works alright on a small device that is laid flat or reclined. It doesn't work well for dual 27s that are three feet away, four feet wide in total, rasied off the desk, and vertical.

A uniform os is a mistake in this case. Its like a uniform control scheme between sports car and a fighter plane. Both are made to go places, each does things the other can not, each has an interface optimised for its own needs.

Touch/surface are a good substitute for a mouse/keyboard when they are not a good option, but for a desktop?

I completely agree the current implementation is very poor. I have stardock mods so that I boot to desktop, have a smaller version of the start menu that only takes up a quarter of my screen, and one to let me run metro apps as windows. With all of this everything is as good as 7 or better, the start screen when shrunk on a 24" monitor is fantastic and much better than the old menu.

But WP7 had all sorts of crap like this too, that was partly fixed in 7.5, then more in 8 and we'll get more still in WP8.1. The yearly release allows these changes to come quickly.

A hybrid OS that can adjust dynamically between a phone sized screen up to triple 30" monitors is certainly possible and would be fantastic. Obviously the key requirement here is that it is done well, which Win 8 does not do yet. What I'm saying is that this is a very hard thing to achieve and will take MS time, but they are only people even trying right now which you have to give them credit for.

Win8 does almost nothing to change for the screen size, it's OK on a touchscreen laptop but definitely inferior UX wise on dual desktop monitors, but stardock has managed to fix just about every complaint I have from stock and makes it amazing to use, not perfect but better than 7. If stardock can do this and make a lot of money doing it them MS is certainly capable of it. I think they could have done more for win8 launch but they had limited time to work on it. Now they do lots of regular improvements rather than waiting years like the vista > 7 jump so having issues initially is no so much of a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they had just stuck with the Windows Vista/7 design instead of trying to make it a tablet, maybe it would have been good. Now I'm deathly paranoid that my comp will be unusable within months because of the Windows 8 design...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I hate the idea of "PC are going to disappear and everything will be tablets" and "desktops are dying" and thats why they are making a tablet-desktop OS, for the transition and laptops being semi-tablets.

Windows 7 is AWESOME, best MS system so far, I wish they continue with it. Also, i hate windows8 for being more restrictive and not being able to change as many things as on win7, I dont mean desktop image or scroll bar color, I mean important PC adjustment. Same problem with macs, just remember this kids EASY TO USE = LESS OPTIONS. While in my opinion, more options, more fun.

Also, everything has a share option and a social media button, just why? why should I share EVERYTHING I have in my PC? I just dont want to publish my entire life, not see my friends entire life published!

I guess we would have to change to linux once linux is more extended and easier to use.

Microsoft is making windows a "you dont even have to think anymore" OS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but stardock has managed to fix just about every complaint I have
its good for the economy to generate more cashflow, its good for the user to have more options, i just dont think its wise to abandon the userbase that you have built your comany on for the last quarter century, on which you still rely, in order to put the newcomers at the top of your priorities. That your required undoing their major marketing points in order to enjoy it is telling. Its almost like day one dlc. Heres your os, now go buy the addns so you can enjoy it.

Tablet and touch related should never have been a default or even recommended feature for the desktop environment. Touchscreen monitors are not cheap, and all that code is a waste without them, in a market where people buy eithe cheaply, or for performance. Neither group is likely to ever embrace touch.

The jack of all trades is the master of none. To fully compete on phones/tablets wndows is far too bulky, the same experince needs more powerful hardware raising costs. A tablet/phone optmised os is too simple and constrained to fully leverage the flexibility qnd power of a desktop. Its a battle they cannot hope to win with only one os.

Im not oposed to change, im opposed to my tower becoming an expensive not portable tablet that cant even do what all other tablets can do. Im oppsed to implications that i have to wave my hands around like im in minority report to enjoy my interface. And most of all, im opposed to what looks every bit to be a company i like, which makes software i have relied on, shooting itself in the face on a gamble that itll all work out better when every indication is that it wont.

The new dev cycle is good though, itll be good to see it evolve faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it! I've had it for about 5 months now, and I have gotten used to it. Now, it's hard to use Windows 7, it's so slow, and even if you are used to it it takes longer to do things without all the shortcuts.

If you don't like it, that's ok, Win8 isn't for you then. But if you haven't tried it, please don't stop anyone else from trying it :) Not talking to someone specific, just saying. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I hate the idea of "PC are going to disappear and everything will be tablets" and "desktops are dying" and thats why they are making a tablet-desktop OS, for the transition and laptops being semi-tablets.

Windows 7 is AWESOME, best MS system so far, I wish they continue with it. Also, i hate windows8 for being more restrictive and not being able to change as many things as on win7, I dont mean desktop image or scroll bar color, I mean important PC adjustment. Same problem with macs, just remember this kids EASY TO USE = LESS OPTIONS. While in my opinion, more options, more fun.

Also, everything has a share option and a social media button, just why? why should I share EVERYTHING I have in my PC? I just dont want to publish my entire life, not see my friends entire life published!

I guess we would have to change to linux once linux is more extended and easier to use.

Microsoft is making windows a "you dont even have to think anymore" OS.

PCs as in the desktop/tower computer part are dying for personal use! That is the critical problem MS is working to address. People want portability, but people also need to be productive. That means we need a solution that can be both, the best answer for that is a tablet that can turn into a laptop and then turn into a desktop very easily. Sure, gamers and high demand people will need big PCs for years and years but that's a small portion of the population. As I've said before, stock Win 8 is awful for the desktop side right now, but it's fantastic for tablets and pretty good for laptops. We know MS can do desktop very well, we also now know (and importantly THEY know) that they can do tablets well, the only thing left is to bring those together. You can dispute whether MS's path for getting to the end is the best way or not (I'd say not quite) but the goal is exactly what is needed.

As for the simplicity side, simplicity is not just about ease of use, it's also about reliability and consistency and that is what MS is focusing on for the mobile side. Over time I desperately hope MS brings more customisability to mobile but it's not as important as it is for desktop use. Win 8.1 is opening a huge amount up with a lot more customisation and desktop oriented features, it's also narrowing the gap between Metro and desktop. As for general desktop hackability, that's pretty much stayed the same or improved with 8.

The share button doesn't hurt you, it's not in the way or forcing you. It's there because the basic UI needs to remain constant through the OS, it's also only really designed for the mobile side where it does make a lot of sense for people who use a lot of social stuff.

its good for the economy to generate more cashflow, its good for the user to have more options, i just dont think its wise to abandon the userbase that you have built your comany on for the last quarter century, on which you still rely, in order to put the newcomers at the top of your priorities. That your required undoing their major marketing points in order to enjoy it is telling. Its almost like day one dlc. Heres your os, now go buy the addns so you can enjoy it.

Tablet and touch related should never have been a default or even recommended feature for the desktop environment. Touchscreen monitors are not cheap, and all that code is a waste without them, in a market where people buy eithe cheaply, or for performance. Neither group is likely to ever embrace touch.

The jack of all trades is the master of none. To fully compete on phones/tablets wndows is far too bulky, the same experince needs more powerful hardware raising costs. A tablet/phone optmised os is too simple and constrained to fully leverage the flexibility qnd power of a desktop. Its a battle they cannot hope to win with only one os.

Im not oposed to change, im opposed to my tower becoming an expensive not portable tablet that cant even do what all other tablets can do. Im oppsed to implications that i have to wave my hands around like im in minority report to enjoy my interface. And most of all, im opposed to what looks every bit to be a company i like, which makes software i have relied on, shooting itself in the face on a gamble that itll all work out better when every indication is that it wont.

The new dev cycle is good though, itll be good to see it evolve faster.

MS hasn't abandoned the user base, what they've done is put out a masterpiece OS for their core users (7) and then taken a couple of years to work on other sides of the OS so it will be successful in the future. Also, it is looking increasingly likely that Stardock will lose a lot of purpose with 8.1 as MS is basically just checking off everything they are selling and adding it to the stock OS. This is just naturally filling out and polishing the OS as they get time to do it.

Your mid section is mostly covered above.

Evidence is suggesting MS is not stupid and they are starting to lean back towards the desktop, the eventual result of this will be that if you live 100% through a desktop PC it will be as good as Win 7. It's not there yet but just look at the XP>vista>7 UX improvements if you doubt MS can do it.

If MS didn't take these risks now and invest in the unpleasant adjustment period this early they would be a much worse long term position. For one of the first times ever MS is taking preemptive action rather than reactive, that has to be celebrated.

If it sounds like I'm too optimistic then all I can say is that I'm not certain about this, I know it's possible but MS has a long history of screwing things up, but so far? They have consistently done enough to maintain the momentum over the last few years, they still screw up a lot but they get a lot right too. My personal view is that I will stick with them until the WIn 9 time (2015), if they haven't achieved their goals by then I will look around for alternatives. Unfortunately on that front neither Apple or Google are showing any intention of moving to the future, Apple wants iOS to take over OSX (while MS is making Windows take over mobile instead), and Google seem to think that chromebooks are a valid desktop substitute! That is insane!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said this a million times, Windows 8 is Microsoft's way of trying to grab the lions share of the tablet market. I have Windows 8 on a tablet, not the crap RT version, but full blown win8. For a touch OS it's really good. The software availability is the biggest issue currently. Most of the software on their store is utter crap or a junk port or wrapper.

While you can run and access standard windows programs, the UI is hard to use due to the small active areas. It's like using your PC with all thumbs. You really need a mouse or touchpad to use a pointer to hit small buttons and menus with the old school UI. Sure you could run Windows 8 on a standard PC, but the whole point of the OS is control via touch surface and really, who has a touch monitor? Yes, they are out there, but honestly, do you want one? Touch screens will always be a part of the portable market.

The bottom line is if you're getting a tablet, Windows 8 is a serious choice. Get the full version and not "Windows 8 RT". If you're getting a standard PC with a keyboard and a mouse, get Windows 7 and wait for Windows 9. I'll lay even odds at Windows 9 being more like 7 than 8 with the option of using the touch UI if it's included at all. MS is going to have to go down two product paths here, an OS for a portable touch surface and and OS for keyboard/mouse "real" PC.

Here's the tablet I have: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00AA6OVLI

Arrr!

Capt'n Skunky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this