Were these Windows 7 bugs fixed in Windows 8?


Recommended Posts

For those of you who are running Windows 8 can you tell me if these 2 bugs in Windows 7 were fixed in Windows 8?

(Bug 1) The Red X button under Device Manager hardware list flickers

(Bug 2) When you drag a window like Windows explorer to the right the UI near the top right corner starts to tear off.

Hmmm... never got any of these in W7 myself, much less in W8!

Its there you just are not looking in the right plase :)

Those bug don't exists in 7, your Windows installation is probably messed up (sounds like bad gpu drivers to me).

Not true

I know because when I went to Best buy everyone of there computers does it too.

Bug 1: even tho I've never experienced it in Windows 7, it's not present in the WDP

Bug 2: I don't understand :(

EDIT:

Bug 1: Ah, I just found out what you're talking about. Yes, the problem is still present in WDP.

still don't get Bug 2, tho :(

Not having any of these issues with Windows 7 64bit SP1.

Like I'd trust Best Buy to keep their display computer updated with the latest patches and drivers :)

I think these bugs may be unique to you only.

Like I have an iPod 4, and when I installed iOS5, some features in Opera Mini browser stop working. And no else got this problem with the same hardware and software.

And also when I go to Spotlight search, it always gets stuck for a moment. Unique to me.

And and on Windows 7, I got this strange bug that whenever I turned on my PC, IE9 opened automatically. I have two other PCs, and this issue happened to with only this one.

Though after 4 days, this "useful" bug stopped showing up.

So this problem may only be unique to you and some other people, and it may also be temporary, like in my case. :)

I will upload a video :)

Thanks. That'll be helpful. :)

@FMH, the first bug (at least) isn't unique to him. If you go into device manager then right-click on one of the things on the list then properties, then hover your cursor over the red X button and watch really carefully and the X button kind of gets selected and unselected once every few seconds.

@FMH, the first bug (at least) isn't unique to him. If you go into device manager then right-click on one of the things on the list then properties, then watch really carefully and the X button kind of gets selected and unselected once every few seconds.

It happens to me in IE9 sometimes.

Bug 2 does not show up very wel on the video I made so I will not upload it.

However if you open My Computer window and starting dragging the window from the border moving your mouse to the right you should see what looks like the window tearing off a little bit.

It reallty hard to explain.

Yeah bug 1 exists in Windows 7, it is old news. You people didn't try it before responding...

Thanks you for conforming

Does sit also happen in Windoes 8?

video of "bug 2" here :

Bug 2 he talks about is minor, nothing like in that video, at least for me, the only place I see some tearing is by the explorer search bar and the command bar under it, nothing drastic like in that video, but on the other hand that video is pretty outdated already.

Bug 2 he talks about is minor, nothing like in that video, at least for me, the only place I see some tearing is by the explorer search bar and the command bar under it, nothing drastic like in that video, but on the other hand that video is pretty outdated already.

Yes the tearing near the search bar is what I mean :)

Not a "BUG" I I would say is a feature--

The Shadow of the mouse is what you are seeing and if you turn that off in the effects the "BUG" will disappear.

If you notice there is a highlight under your mouse before you "mouse over" the close "X" which follows you to the Close "X"

The same effect can also be seen if you mouse over the start menu orb where it highlights itself to show it can be selected.

In earlier Windows such as XP that effect was called mouse spotlight.

It is not selecting and deselecting anything but showing you it is a click-able item.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!