Jump to content
|Topic||Stats||Last action by|
|Microsoft To Delay Xbox One Launch In China||
|Tatu 'lesbian' says she wouldn't accept her son if he was gay||
|Worried with this virus..||
|US official: Military has been asked to send more troops to Iraq||
|Report: Sony signs deal with Viacom, will stream TV to Playstation in 2014||
Posted 29 October 2012 - 19:56
Posted 29 October 2012 - 20:04
Posted 29 October 2012 - 20:19
Posted 29 October 2012 - 20:22
Posted 29 October 2012 - 20:23
Posted 29 October 2012 - 20:30
Posted 29 October 2012 - 20:33
If you ask me here is the comparison. that is relivent to the Windows 95
And you also have to remember I have ran all of them
Win 286/386 Tree Maps (and 1.0/2.0)
Win 3.1 had -- "Windows with Icons on the Desktop"
then came Win95
"Oh no how will I find the programs if they are not on the desktop-"
Microsoft said - In the start menu of-course
98/ME/2k/XP/ Start menu
Vista\7 all continued with the start menu Other than adding gadgets
Now with Windows 8
People say "where can I find my programs if they are not in the start menu?"
We have almost come full circle where the Icon's have returned to the desktop in one big window that scrolls except now they are called tiles and are active which replaced the gadgets" They basically combined Icons+ functions of a gadget = Tile .
Now that is a comparison to Win95 where people say it changes what people were used to- Which is exactly what Windows 8 does
What next this?
Posted 29 October 2012 - 20:34
Posted 29 October 2012 - 21:12
Posted 29 October 2012 - 21:16
The fact is, there is nothing wrong with win8, as soon as Classic Shell is added. It then becomes a fine replacement for win7. It is the metro nonsense that is an epic fail. It is noteworthy that ms hedged their bets by leaving the ability to go back to full desktop. Win9 will surely see a built in option to choose.....
Posted 29 October 2012 - 21:31
Sorry, I've been running it full time in production since March, how much longer must I run it before I've given it a fair chance?