Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Evening Tech Bits

View
40 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

40. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 8, 2012, 23:25 Ant
 
Hellbinder wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 00:54:
I really don't get it. I like the metro and I like the modern yet classic lines of the new look windows 8 has. reminds me of my old Amiga days. Mixing old and new is not a bad thing. Navigation under metro is far better and it does not feel like a phone or console.

The task manager is FAR superior to windows 7 as are all the progress indicators I have seen so far. I also like the pointer and navigation layout in file explorer. wireless seems quicker to connect and more stable.. not to mention easier to use.

And did I fail to mention again that this thing is FAST. Everything is much faster with windows 8 on the same hardware I was using with windows 7. memory management, screen management, application switching, file copying.. there is literally not a single negative or weak point I have seen yet.
You like using Metro with a mouse on a desktop computer? Ick.

I do like its task manager.
 
Avatar 1957
 
Ant @ The Ant Farm: http://antfarm.ma.cx and Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net ...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39. Re: Consumers To Pay More For Basic Cable. Dec 8, 2012, 23:23 Ant
 
jdreyer wrote on Dec 5, 2012, 19:49:
I've been off cable since 2004, and this only further cements my decision to stay off of it. I get everything I need from the internet, thanks.
Legally or illegally?
 
Avatar 1957
 
Ant @ The Ant Farm: http://antfarm.ma.cx and Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net ...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 7, 2012, 01:30 Stolk
 
Dades wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 07:23:
Stolk wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 00:09:
If I didn't know better I'd think you knew what you're talking about!

If you knew better you could probably talk about any feature from Windows 8 in detail other than "file copy and task manager!" but no, the improvements people always mention are copy and pasted from reviews because they do not even understand what they're using actually using. I doubt any of you have even used storage spaces or know what they did to the memory heap, you're ratting off bullet points and regurgitated talking points to justify your personal upgrades. When they give me real reasons to upgrade from Windows 7, I will consider it. The os being cheap isn't a reason to upgrade.

- DADES - This is a signature of my name, enjoy!

Hey smartguy, I think you quoted the wrong person. "file copy and task manager" what? I simply pointed out that I am a perfectly happy Windows 8 user, then made fun of you. Please work harder on your comeback posts.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 13:38 Verno
 
Tim wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 12:58:
I'll assume some of that was a generalisation rather than targetted at me but I find app load times, install times, start and shutdown times quicker.

I don't know, the only difference I saw was in an h264 encoder, literally every single other thing was the same or so minor as to be unnoticeable. Everything from Photoshop to a compiler to videogames to even Office. Startup/Shutdown makes no difference to me personally, I noticed hibernation was a bit faster but it didn't seem particularly noteworthy. If people are having different experiences I'd love to hear about them since I'm inherently nerdy and want to test it myself but no one ever seems to get specific.

Well there's stuff in there that made a difference to me - but I don't see the point of rehashing that (as you say) either. I'm somewhat perplexed where the "slowing sales" thing comes from though? I'd expect a rush initially, sure, but I was under the impression we're not really going to see valuable figures for some time yet from MS.

There have been several articles linked here over the past few days about it, some in the comments IIRC. Basically OEMs are unhappy with the figures and some internal Microsoft leaks say projections aren't being met. Ballmer in turn has been blaming OEMs so its sort of a back and forth thing. Microsoft also halved their hardware order for Surfaces for the year so Windows RT doesn't seem to be making an impact either. Fair enough on the rest.

As a sidenote - that was a little selective in response but no worries (and that's not a slight - just perplexed somewhat).

I tend to only respond to the sections where I have something to add, if I particularly agree/disagree with something or etc. Plus sometimes the responses get pretty big and I lose track of the point by point so I just dissect and summarize

The problem with Windows 8 in general (which we seem to agree on) is that its arriving after Windows 7 (a celebrated, stable OS) with little to offer desktop users despite asking them to make some design concessions for a totally different market. Concessions that weren't even necessary if Microsoft had listened to feedback, made more things optional and rethought some stuff instead of rushing this to market. The average user wants a reason to basically change his whole computer. It is hard to "sell" it to people because its not necessarily any better to an end user, just a bit different in a potentially bad way or the same depending on how you use it.

Tablets in general are a weird market. They're profitable if you're Apple and can leverage suppliers into the kind of pricing you want so you can hit higher profit margins but otherwise you're left with the pickings. Their growth is strange too, it's very explosive now but who knows if the upgrade bubble will burst considering their very casual usage scenarios which don't need a lot from hardware. In some ways it feels too dependent on savvy marketing and fickle consumers.

This comment was edited on Dec 6, 2012, 13:58.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Dragon Age Inquisition, Far Cry 4, This War of Mine
Watching: The Fall, The Walking Dead, Leon
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 13:13 Creston
 
noman wrote on Dec 5, 2012, 23:17:
Printer driver stack is rewritten (and the last time it happened was in Win2k) where you save half-a-gb space on hard-disk and a very real functionality improvement when talking to computer printers over home networks. If you every had issues keeping printers connected over WiFi to the PC, then move to Win8.

- Never had an issue with WiFi printers disappearing, and if you've been installing drivers that took up half a GB of drive space, I'm going to guess you were doing something wrong.

SSDs are managed by the OS (if you set the storage interface to AHCI) to the level where no third party utilities are needed.

- Amazing! Oh wait, my SSDs are being handled by Win7 without third party utilities too.

Kernel idle time handling is improved to the point, where you get 7-8% better battery life on laptops.

- Which benefits the desktop PC, how?

Desktop rendering is hugely improved.

- Because they took out basically every single effect and it's now blank colors. That's the same way that Nvidia used to "increase performance" on their drivers for certain games by actually lowering image quality.

DirectX has been expanded to run better on low power devices (well that was needed due to WinRT tablets)

- Which benefits desktop PCs how? I'm sure it's nice for people using it on their phone.

Security is further improved in how memory regions are managed for different applications.

- And then they put task manager on the bottom so you can't access it. Woot!

Hey, if you're happy with Win8, good for you. But stop trying to pretend that these things are somehow of massive benefit to the average desktop user, because they aren't.

Creston

 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 12:58 Tim
 
Verno wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 12:07:
Why is it that real terms never have a quantifiable measurement? People just vaguely say "faster or more stable" with zero information. People just say some feature like "stability!" *waves hands around*. Pretty much everything seems the same to me as Windows 7 in terms of speed and stability, I wish I could say I saw a noticeable difference but games, applications, etc all seems the same. That's also why I don't really complain about the underlying stuff, it seems the same.

I did run some benchmarks, saw very very minor marginal differentials that went back and forth in specific games but that was about it. I'd also note that most benchmarking sites also test some real world usage stuff in their tests, not just synthetic tests.

I'll assume some of that was a generalisation rather than targetted at me but I find app load times, install times, start and shutdown times quicker. Games wise not so much but experience tells me that will take time (as drivers mature and probably also as things slowly creep in the DX scale). I don't sit around running benchmarks all day but I do dual boot both on the same hardware on several systems and that's my impression (and therefore my opinion). I certainly appreciate it more at work than at home since at home i'm more or less just gaming. We'll leave it there.


Verno wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 12:07:
I don't see many things where I think "I'm glad they updated that, the Windows 7 implementation was flawed". There are some minor quality of life type adjustments to be certain but nothing that has a real impact on usage. I'll have to go digging back through the documentation but my impression was that many of the improvements only apply to WinRT built apps specifically. I'd argue some of the improvements (for example dual monitors) don't go far enough for my taste but I got it for free so I really have few personal complaints. I've been running and reading about Windows 8 since the first dev preview, I have no personal investment in its success or failure, I just recognize it for what it is.

Well neither do I - I don't work for MS and i'm certainly not one to subscribe to companies as being a religious cause. You should go back and read up as there's plenty of documentation talking about things like performance and security that specifically apply to the OS as a whole (and therefore desktop apps proper). Realistically Windows is *normally* only ever the sum of it's 'minor improvements' aside from big impact features (the drive model, the MUI layer) which cause major upset/or consternation. This on the one hand causes people to complain not much is different ("it has no worth to me") or on the other breaks things for them immeasurably ("i can't cope arrrrrgh"). It's amusing (and reflective of my own work in all honesty) at times and frustrating at others. For me there is no major blocker to using 8, I can live with it's foibles and I do enjoy it's improvements. I'm also aware that it's customisable (hey, it's Windows) and could be made to suit other's needs better. People will then complain they shouldn't have to - this doesn't sit well for me (but again, that's "me").

Verno wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 12:07:
Vista is vista, we've done the debate to death here already so I'm not going to rehash it. The problem with Windows 8 is that the only real feature you can say that makes a major impact on most usage scenarios is Metro and that has its own baggage. For the person with no operating system installed the choice is easy, you can disable Metro and use Windows 8 as a cheap copy of Windows 7. For the person who is weighing a potential upgrade the decision is murky and that's reflected now in the slowing sales now that early adopters are done and they clamped down on the $15 upgrade. The price is supposed to go up even higher next year as well.

Well there's stuff in there that made a difference to me - but I don't see the point of rehashing that (as you say) either. I'm somewhat perplexed where the "slowing sales" thing comes from though? I'd expect a rush initially, sure, but I was under the impression we're not really going to see valuable figures for some time yet from MS.

Verno wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 12:07:
I see just as many ridiculous assertions from other early adopters that people who don't want to upgrade are resistant to change, hate Microsoft, beat their dog, whatever. It goes both ways. I use Windows 8 at home on a test machine and like it for what it is but totally understand why others are not chomping at the bit to upgrade.

Oh sure, anyone can be unreasonable - and yes people will beat you to death with their views (in order to make you submit and 'agree') but that's not really my bag. I'm more just curious as to the root of why they think what they think - I spend a lot of time trying to understand user's needs and ratify them with both the views of others and are own internal needs (resources, roadmap etc). If someone has a valid viewpoint I can usually get my head around it and I'd happily lay into someone saying 8 was 500% faster in gaming than 7 (because it's bollocks) equally as someone who said 8 was less secure than 7 (because it's not).

All said and done though I do get asked about 8 a lot - both professionally and personally and I can't in all honesty tell people to avoid it because really there's not all that much to fear in there. Even my neighbour (who bought a laptop in ~june) has done an in-place upgrade (gotta say that was smooth as butter and remarkably quick too..) despite my warnings about it being "big time different". He's computer inept to say the least but he's finding the who MUI stuff 'great' as he put it (which has me scratching my head because some of the way it's implemented (switching apps, closing them or even getting back to the start screen) is freaky horrible to me.

I just hope that "Windows Blue" does arrive sooner than 3 years and we do see a lot of extra love for the desktop side now they've established their ecosystem for touch and tablet.

As a sidenote - that was a little selective in response but no worries (and that's not a slight - just perplexed somewhat).

 
Avatar 15972
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 12:17 Verno
 
I think that is a much better argument. It's not that Win 8 is bad, it wasn't really needed for most people. I'd been just as happy if Win 7 was still the latest release.

That's what many have been saying all along though. There is this silly us vs them mentality that seems to erupt between early adopters and other users.

Another way to look at it is that few people WANT Microsoft to fail, we all have a shared enthusiast desire for them to succeed if anything. I would love it if Windows 8 was great for desktop users, a huge success and boosted PC sales. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case so far. Metro was a big gamble, they put a lot into it and didn't take user feed back into account. Maybe people will buy into the unified platform idea but I'm not sure people are so adverse to fragmentation.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Dragon Age Inquisition, Far Cry 4, This War of Mine
Watching: The Fall, The Walking Dead, Leon
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 12:07 Verno
 
Tim wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:48:
Personally, first hand experience disagrees with this - benchmarks are one thing but in real terms it's faster for me. This, if anything, is the one positive kickback from the whole tablet focus - they need the thing to be as quick and efficient as possible.

Why is it that real terms never have a quantifiable measurement? People just vaguely say "faster or more stable" with zero information. People just say some feature like "stability!" *waves hands around*. Pretty much everything seems the same to me as Windows 7 in terms of speed and stability, I wish I could say I saw a noticeable difference but games, applications, etc all seems the same. That's also why I don't really complain about the underlying stuff, it seems the same.

I did run some benchmarks, saw very very minor marginal differentials that went back and forth in specific games but that was about it. I'd also note that most benchmarking sites also test some real world usage stuff in their tests, not just synthetic tests.

There are many minor improvements to Windows 8 but whether they warrant an upgrade to users is a different matter. People get booed as haters and bashers for not wanting to blanket endorse and adopt something for no reason. Maybe if Microsoft incremented more often people wouldn't expect more from the OS but generally speaking people want a big front of the box type feature these days, especially with the economy being so tight.

I disagree that it doesn't 'really solve' any problems from 7 - it obviously does (wireless, memory management, security, explorer, dual monitors etc have all been mentioned as much improved) in a number of areas as you'd expect. I do agree the MUI stuff is far from 'done' though (although like others i quite like some bits of it having used it for a few months). I also don't like hot corners all that much either..

I don't see many things where I think "I'm glad they updated that, the Windows 7 implementation was flawed". There are some minor quality of life type adjustments to be certain but nothing that has a real impact on usage. I'll have to go digging back through the documentation but my impression was that many of the improvements only apply to WinRT built apps specifically. I'd argue some of the improvements (for example dual monitors) don't go far enough for my taste but I got it for free so I really have few personal complaints. I've been running and reading about Windows 8 since the first dev preview, I have no personal investment in its success or failure, I just recognize it for what it is.

I find it interesting that people hold up 7 as being the second coming (and I love it don't get me wrong) when Vista's biggest 'mistake' (which turned out to be a huge step forward) was it's new driver model. Nothing else caused anywhere near that amount of grief for end users.

Vista is vista, we've done the debate to death here already so I'm not going to rehash it. The problem with Windows 8 is that the only real feature you can say that makes a major impact on most usage scenarios is Metro and that has its own baggage. For the person with no operating system installed the choice is easy, you can disable Metro and use Windows 8 as a cheap copy of Windows 7. For the person who is weighing a potential upgrade the decision is murky and that's reflected now in the slowing sales now that early adopters are done and they clamped down on the $15 upgrade. The price is supposed to go up even higher next year as well.

I've been using 8 full time for 4-5 months and I'm ok with it. I feel like i'll be vilified for saying that though.

I see just as many ridiculous assertions from other early adopters that people who don't want to upgrade are resistant to change, hate Microsoft, beat their dog, whatever. It goes both ways. I use Windows 8 at home on a test machine and like it for what it is but totally understand why others are not chomping at the bit to upgrade.

This comment was edited on Dec 6, 2012, 12:31.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Dragon Age Inquisition, Far Cry 4, This War of Mine
Watching: The Fall, The Walking Dead, Leon
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: More Big Picture Details Dec 6, 2012, 11:20 HorrorScope
 
PHJF wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:16:
Really, though, it boils down to Win8 being completely unnecessary. I don't need or want to change my OS every two years.

I think that is a much better argument. It's not that Win 8 is bad, it wasn't really needed for most people. I'd been just as happy if Win 7 was still the latest release.

But MS has to figure out how to get mobile/tablet/pc synergies working, you can see what they are thinking, they have to try, otherwise they are giving up way too much to competitors. So I get why they are doing what they are. I'm just glad there is a way to hide Metro, that is all I had an issue with.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: More Big Picture Details Dec 6, 2012, 11:14 HorrorScope
 
PropheT wrote on Dec 5, 2012, 21:53:
I don't mind Windows 8 from using it for the last month, since I had to learn support for it at work. But you know what? It's usable because I can just skip all the shit that makes it Windows 8 and use it exactly like Windows 7, without ever touching the new "desktop"... I never take it out of desktop mode in normal use. So why use 8 instead of 7? I can't honestly think of a good reason.

That is fair, but then it also doesn't mean Win 8 sucks, as some go straight to. To me it means there are two very close O/S's out there, one is slightly updated, but then again several apps we use get updates and that usually is a good thing. As you say, if you hate metro or don't need it (ME!), you can hide it and never see it and then it's a slightly updated Win7. Would I pay $40 or $100 for it? No. I rec'd a laptop with it on already, don't see no reason to move it to 7. System runs exteremely similar to Win 7, in the Control Panel there is a program that still uses the name Win7, doh!
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 10:32 Tim
 
wtf_man wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 10:14:
Tim wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:48:
I've been using 8 full time for 4-5 months and I'm ok with it. I feel like i'll be vilified for saying that though.

I don't have an issue with people that like it. That's their personal choice.

I have an issue with people trying to convince us to "buy it anyway"... then go "fix it" with classic menu or start8, or some other workaround, and for us to quit whining about the interface that we choose not to accept.

It's not about workarounds available... it's about we shouldn't have to use a workaround in the first place. Hence, no sale.

For me personally, those workarounds don't cut it, either... I'd need a full shell replacement like Windowblinds or Aston... but again, I'm not willing to support MS with my dollars, since they didn't make metro optional in the first place.

I have no issue with your view either - I don't agree with it and as a software developer I'm well aware of that I can't cover everybody's needs and at the same time I need to push my own agenda for future development.

I'm also completely accept 7 is a good OS and good enough for those with it right now. Choice is good. The only real debate in my mind is for those upgrading (the minority) since buying a new PC with 7 makes no sense to me (but that's my view). There's a big difference between the two propositions though.

 
Avatar 15972
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 10:14 wtf_man
 
Tim wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:48:
I've been using 8 full time for 4-5 months and I'm ok with it. I feel like i'll be vilified for saying that though.

I don't have an issue with people that like it. That's their personal choice.

I have an issue with people trying to convince us to "buy it anyway"... then go "fix it" with classic menu or start8, or some other workaround, and for us to quit whining about the interface that we choose not to accept.

It's not about workarounds available... it's about we shouldn't have to use a workaround in the first place. Hence, no sale.

For me personally, those workarounds don't cut it, either... I'd need a full shell replacement like Windowblinds or Aston... but again, I'm not willing to support MS with my dollars, since they didn't make metro optional in the first place.
 
Avatar 19499
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 10:05 Tim
 
Verno wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:23:
Others talk about the improved memory management and security models, ignoring the fact that it only applies to Metro apps.

Improved memory management applies to all applications (and services too if you count how their managed now) and security has been improved in a number of areas OS wide too (ASLR, kernel, heap etc). Whilst it's true that MUI apps are sandboxed and can be suspended that doesn't detract from the improvement for ye apps of old (or the ones I mostly use )

 
Avatar 15972
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 09:48 Tim
 
Verno wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:03:
Windows 8 doesn't really perform better than Windows 7, most benchmarks have them within a 2% differential margin.

Personally, first hand experience disagrees with this - benchmarks are one thing but in real terms it's faster for me. Given the amount of effort put into performance (and efficiency) and that's well documented via the dev blogs which i've read with interest over the past few months it'd be pretty weird if it'd had no effect noticeable. This, if anything, is the one positive kickback from the whole tablet focus - they need the thing to be as quick and efficient as possible.

Verno wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:03:
It also doesn't necessarily boot faster

..yes and not necessarily boot slower either. It's a strange thing to say and hardly a detractor. Is it designed to boot faster? Yes. In most cases it will too, in my (humble) experience. That's by design (7 doesn't have kernel hibernation).


Verno wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:03:
Having an SSD is going to make a greater difference than Windows 8 ever could.

Well, er.. yeah. And me having a faster newer PC will do too. Having 8 and that too will be better though.

Verno wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:03:
People keep harping about Vista being Windows 7 and that's true to some degree but Windows 7 pared down Vista quite a bit and fixed several of its more noticeable mistakes. Windows 8 doesn't really solve any problems from Windows 7, it actually manages to create a few by mixing a user interface that is literally at odds with the desktop.

I disagree that it doesn't 'really solve' any problems from 7 - it obviously does (wireless, memory management, security, explorer, dual monitors etc have all been mentioned as much improved) in a number of areas as you'd expect. I do agree the MUI stuff is far from 'done' though (although like others i quite like some bits of it having used it for a few months). I also don't like hot corners all that much either..

I find it interesting that people hold up 7 as being the second coming (and I love it don't get me wrong) when Vista's biggest 'mistake' (which turned out to be a huge step forward) was it's new driver model. Nothing else caused anywhere near that amount of grief for end users. I'm not sure what people expect from 8 though - it's essentially a good incremental improvement in all sorts of key areas for end users PLUS a radical UI/app framework over the top of it. It's the latter we're all hung up on (and with good reason it's plainly unfinished and favours the touch user more) but it's a relatively minor part of the desktop experience in reality (and entirely avoidable should you wish). I do like that it's bold and new though - and let's face it, MS are damned if they innovate or don't.

Verno wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:03:
Metro sucks for desktop users, you need to memorize several hotkeys just use it efficiently. Hot corners are an awful concept, the app management is rudimentary 2 simultaneous apps with statically set resizes? It is a disservice to mouse and keyboard users, too many tablet concessions. It can be fixed up but the question is will they bother or go full bore with tablet nonsense?

They'll bother. This is simply 'phase 1' - MS aren't blind but they've got an agenda to bring about change and leverage one market into another. That's understandable - not appreciated entirely no doubt by desktop users - but I think their roadmap accounts for their main userbase whilst having an eye on tablets and phones which are getting away from them right now. That said, I have to wonder where we are going on the desktop anyway given the range of new input methods we've seen (and the form factors they've introduced). The obviously stupid stuff isn't going to fly (i.e. touch screen at arms length dead on to you doesn't work) though.

Verno wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:03:
People keep bringing up the tickless kernel from an Arstechnica article but it is essentially meaningless to the end user and performance itself.

Then why add it? Time to burn at the Windows division? And if things like battery life are essentially meaningless, then what is?

I've been using 8 full time for 4-5 months and I'm ok with it. I feel like i'll be vilified for saying that though.

 
Avatar 15972
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 09:43 Beamer
 
PHJF wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 09:16:
and somehow the ones with the blinders off are the people who obstinately refuse to consider an upgrade, because...?

Don't know about anyone else, but because Win7 works great. Fast, stable, and not bad to look at. And I came from Vista x64, an OS with serious problems and compatibility issues.

Really, though, it boils down to Win8 being completely unnecessary. I don't need or want to change my OS every two years.

I'm surprised so many people here are jumping on the "it's a failure!" bandwagon for that exact reason. Ok, I understand why people say "its functionality is a failure," but sales?

How many of you upgraded OSs frequently? Most people do it when they buy/build a new system. The length of time between new systems has gone up significantly, lowering sales, and new products have also supplemented the need for new systems, further lowering sales.

Even if Windows 8 was awesome, how many of you would have rushed out to purchase it? I wouldn't have. I've never rushed out for an OS. I built a new PC for 95 and a new PC for XP, but more or less needed one at that point, anyway.

When it's time to build a new PC I'll go with Windows 8, or probably by then Windows 9 or Windows 8 2014 or whatever the hell they choose to call it.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 09:23 Verno
 
The flat, chrome look of Windows 8 isn't awful or anything but the lack of transparency is certainly annoying if you run a lot of apps simultaneously. Aero Glass was actually pretty cool and they put a lot of effort into it just to drop it but that's a Microsoft problem in general - Kin, Silverlight, their numerous online efforts, etc. They should have just made it optional like they did in Windows 7, they could default it off for mobile users.

Nobody gives a shit about the task manager. Do you stare at it all day or something? If you really want to know what is going on in your machine you are going to fire up Sysinternals Process Explorer ( a deep task investigative tool) or Process Monitor (basically an OS sniffer).

Ribbon on Explorer? I'm indifferent to that feature.
Wireless easier to use??? How the fuck is it not easy to use in Win7?
Other than booting since it's not really fully shutting down... the speed you claim is subjective at best. Benchmarks do not show a sizable improvement.

Indeed, well put. Lots of confirmation bias type claims. People want other people to use what they are using, it's human nature. I saw some idiot claim improved stability in the last thread even which is totally absurd and could only be anecdotal at this early stage. Windows 7 was rock solid anyway. Others talk about the improved memory management and security models, ignoring the fact that it only applies to Metro apps.

I use Windows 8 on a test machine at home, have for a long time and the best thing I can say about it is that you can treat it like Windows 7 for $15 and that having Startup items in task manager is kinda neat.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Dragon Age Inquisition, Far Cry 4, This War of Mine
Watching: The Fall, The Walking Dead, Leon
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 09:18 wtf_man
 
Hellbinder wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 00:54:
I really don't get it. I like the metro and I like the modern yet classic lines of the new look windows 8 has. reminds me of my old Amiga days. Mixing old and new is not a bad thing. Navigation under metro is far better and it does not feel like a phone or console.

The task manager is FAR superior to windows 7 as are all the progress indicators I have seen so far. I also like the pointer and navigation layout in file explorer. wireless seems quicker to connect and more stable.. not to mention easier to use.

And did I fail to mention again that this thing is FAST. Everything is much faster with windows 8 on the same hardware I was using with windows 7. memory management, screen management, application switching, file copying.. there is literally not a single negative or weak point I have seen yet.

No option to turn off the tile interface, if you don't like it, is it's biggest weak point. You may like it... I'm guessing most desktop users do not.

As for the rest of the theming engine... again... you may like it... I think it's outright fugly and a step backwards.

Nobody gives a shit about the task manager. Do you stare at it all day or something? If you really want to know what is going on in your machine you are going to fire up Sysinternals Process Explorer ( a deep task investigative tool) or Process Monitor (basically an OS sniffer).

Ribbon on Explorer? I'm indifferent to that feature.
Wireless easier to use??? How the fuck is it not easy to use in Win7?
Other than booting since it's not really fully shutting down... the speed you claim is subjective at best. Benchmarks do not show a sizable improvement.

The plain fact is... Microsoft trying to FORCE the users in a totally new platform (metro apps), wall it off with their own mandatory app store, treat windows desktop thick applications like the new 'red-headed-step-child'... what's not to get?

It turns a lot of people off.

I'm not paying for an OS, supporting Microsoft, and giving them a false indication of "good sales".... then going out and FIXING what should have been OPTIONAL in the first place. I vote with my wallet.

Some of you act like people that don't like Windows 8 are so "tech backwards". Tell me... do you keep going back to a restaurant where you don't like the food? If one doesn't like it... they really don't need a technical reason not to like it. It boils down to personal preference as a consumer. I didn't like WinME nor Vista neither... for different reasons... and I didn't buy them. Why the hell would I start buying an OS I don't like, now? (And yes I've had it on test machines at work, so I have plenty of experience with it)

My whole point?
You aren't going to convince me that it's the greatest thing since sliced bread... and I'm not going to convince you that it's a total piece of shit.

That's all you need "to get".

This comment was edited on Dec 6, 2012, 09:30.
 
Avatar 19499
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 09:16 PHJF
 
and somehow the ones with the blinders off are the people who obstinately refuse to consider an upgrade, because...?

Don't know about anyone else, but because Win7 works great. Fast, stable, and not bad to look at. And I came from Vista x64, an OS with serious problems and compatibility issues.

Really, though, it boils down to Win8 being completely unnecessary. I don't need or want to change my OS every two years.
 
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 09:03 Verno
 
Another Windows 8 mess and a shame that Prophets excellent and non-biased post was drowned out, it really deserves another read

Windows 8 doesn't really perform better than Windows 7, most benchmarks have them within a 2% differential margin. It also doesn't necessarily boot faster, it can even boot slower on many non-UEFI systems. I've measured a literal 1-2 second difference on several systems, not exactly back of the box type stuff. Having an SSD is going to make a greater difference than Windows 8 ever could. People keep harping about Vista being Windows 7 and that's true to some degree but Windows 7 pared down Vista quite a bit and fixed several of its more noticeable mistakes. Windows 8 doesn't really solve any problems from Windows 7, it actually manages to create a few by mixing a user interface that is literally at odds with the desktop.

Metro sucks for desktop users, you need to memorize several hotkeys just use it efficiently. Hot corners are an awful concept, the app management is rudimentary 2 simultaneous apps with statically set resizes? It is a disservice to mouse and keyboard users, too many tablet concessions. It can be fixed up but the question is will they bother or go full bore with tablet nonsense?

If you knew better you could probably talk about any feature from Windows 8 in detail other than "file copy and task manager!" but no, the improvements people always mention are copy and pasted from reviews because they do not even understand what they're using actually using. I doubt any of you have even used storage spaces or know what they did to the memory heap, you're ratting off bullet points and regurgitated talking points to justify your personal upgrades

I don't think that people need to code the operating system to talk about it but I do agree there is a lot of parroting going on. I dropped a point about the printer model being rewritten in the last topic but it turned out I was mistaken and this was done in Windows 7 yet I see someone repeating it here as if it was gospel. People keep bringing up the tickless kernel from an Arstechnica article but it is essentially meaningless to the end user and performance itself. Storage Spaces *sucks*, it is the worst storage pooling solution on the market, people are better off with any other third party program.

For $15 its a bargain because you can treat it like a cheap copy of Windows 7. Of course this ignores how ridiculously easy it is to permanently pirate Windows 7 but I'll assume we're all better citizens here As for the articles, they are not all written by haters, that's just absurd. There have been too many now all saying the same thing and if the CEO of Asus is a hater then Microsoft is really in trouble.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Dragon Age Inquisition, Far Cry 4, This War of Mine
Watching: The Fall, The Walking Dead, Leon
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Evening Tech Bits Dec 6, 2012, 08:02 Fibrocyte
 
Dades wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 07:23:
Stolk wrote on Dec 6, 2012, 00:09:
If I didn't know better I'd think you knew what you're talking about!

If you knew better you could probably talk about any feature from Windows 8 in detail other than "file copy and task manager!" but no, the improvements people always mention are copy and pasted from reviews because they do not even understand what they're using actually using. I doubt any of you have even used storage spaces or know what they did to the memory heap, you're ratting off bullet points and regurgitated talking points to justify your personal upgrades. When they give me real reasons to upgrade from Windows 7, I will consider it. The os being cheap isn't a reason to upgrade.

- DADES - This is a signature of my name, enjoy!

Actually, it was free for me. And I've had less issues with Win8 than I have with Windows 7. Windows 8 performs better (faster startup and better performance during runtime) and I like some of the features of the new UI.

I know better because I am using it and I have seen no steps backward and only steps forward.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
40 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo