Recommended Posts

I was being sarcastic, although there is some truth in it.

I just signed off on purchasing 500 Win 7 desktop workstations, where I work.

We are skipping Win 8 upgrade for the simple reason of inefficiency and loss of productivity.

I am glad that there are brave and curious souls out there that are willing to work with anything new that's thrown at their plate.

Personally... actually by consensus, after using Win 8 for couple of months, we decided to stick with Win 7.

I work in the financial industry - R&D dept.

I hope they are good PCs. You probably just bought something that will have to last until they stop supporting it.

Windows 8 is different and makes you rethink some of the things you are used to, but calling it unproductive for professional use is just silly

Once you get used to it, it's just as productive as Win7

Microsoft needs to choose. Metro or desktop. Having those two paradigms at the same time doesn't work. and honestly it sucks when you have to fight against interface mechanisms intended for a touch screen when you only have a mouse or trackpad

one of the things that drives me nuts about Windows 8 more than the lack of a start button is the lack of a "Computer" button. Yes, I know you can click the explore button and then click "computer" on the left, or you can right click the "Hidden" start button and choose computer, or you can just click start and search for it. I still miss an actual physical "Computer button"

The fact that you can search for it, but can only pin it to the start menu is retarded.

That's not some new Windows 8 problem though is it? Windows 7 doesn't have a "Computer" button either, if I recall correctly.

That's not some new Windows 8 problem though is it? Windows 7 doesn't have a "Computer" button either, if I recall correctly.

It does, on the start menu. You can view it as a menu or link. Not the end of the world but for people who used the Start menu this way, they will find some of Windows 8 less efficient.

Microsoft needs to choose. Metro or desktop. Having those two paradigms at the same time doesn't work. and honestly it sucks when you have to fight against interface mechanisms intended for a touch screen when you only have a mouse or trackpad

Well if you think desktop / metro is bad, just imagine straight metro on the desktop.

If the desktop really is a dying breed, then let it die with some dignity.

Win8 is a whole different story and far more efficient and productive to use than 7 thanks to Metro.

"far more efficient and productive"? That depends on the user and the tasks at hand. I boot directly into the desktop, as I have no need for a tablet interface on a laptop. I'm as big of a fan of Microsoft as anyone, but the way they did Windows 8 is just so discombobulated. They should have never gone the hybrid route, imho. But whatever, my $.02. I'll stick with it. This will be my last laptop anyway.

To people saying they shouldn't bring the start button back...

At first I thought it was dumb that MS got rid of it, then looking at screenshots, I thought it looked stupid not being there.

After trying Win 8, it's absolutely retarded that it's gone, seeing is that to bring up the Start Panel, you move the mouse cursor down to the lower left corner, then a little box pops up and you click on it to go to Start Panel. Now how much sense does that make?!? Would have been faster to just have the Start Button there and click it to still bring up that Start Panel.

I think people that do like Win 8 like the Start Panel, and I ain't saying it's bad, but what does removing the actual Start Button have to do with it, when you gotta click down there anyways? Think about it. Der.

So in summary of this topic: "Windows 9 in development, almost exactly like Windows 8"

...yay?

That pretty much sums it up. :laugh:

To people saying they shouldn't bring the start button back...

At first I thought it was dumb that MS got rid of it, then looking at screenshots, I thought it looked stupid not being there.

After trying Win 8, it's absolutely retarded that it's gone, seeing is that to bring up the Start Panel, you move the mouse cursor down to the lower left corner, then a little box pops up and you click on it to go to Start Panel. Now how much sense does that make?!? Would have been faster to just have the Start Button there and click it to still bring up that Start Panel.

I think people that do like Win 8 like the Start Panel, and I ain't saying it's bad, but what does removing the actual Start Button have to do with it, when you gotta click down there anyways? Think about it. Der.

The start screen doesn't make any sense for me, I don't need a tablet interface on my computer. But as I said earlier, I think Microsoft should stick to their original plan, given the number of start menu replacements out there for me to use.

Demanding that they don't put back a feature that a lot of people clearly want judging by the sales of start menu replacements just to satisfy you, who is the clueless one here?

for sure. the couple thousand at most third party start menus == 40+ million windows 8 activations. How dumb of me

We are skipping Win 8 upgrade for the simple reason of inefficiency and loss of productivity.

How are you losing efficiency and productivity ? when the start screen opens just as fast if not faster, offers faster locate and click, allows MORE organized pinned favorite apps than the largest disorganized list of pinned start menu apps on 7. allows you to organize the pinned apps as you see fit, increasing organization and efficiency.

In no way does 8 reduce efficiency and certainly not productivity. for the majority of users it will increase efficiency.

For pretty much EVERYONE it will have little practical effect as most people at work have 1 - 3 apps open depending on the job they do. So the launcher being better has absolutely NO practical effect on their efficiency or productivity at all.

To people saying they shouldn't bring the start button back...

At first I thought it was dumb that MS got rid of it, then looking at screenshots, I thought it looked stupid not being there.

After trying Win 8, it's absolutely retarded that it's gone, seeing is that to bring up the Start Panel, you move the mouse cursor down to the lower left corner, then a little box pops up and you click on it to go to Start Panel. Now how much sense does that make?!? Would have been faster to just have the Start Button there and click it to still bring up that Start Panel.

I think people that do like Win 8 like the Start Panel, and I ain't saying it's bad, but what does removing the actual Start Button have to do with it, when you gotta click down there anyways? Think about it. Der.

Actually the removal of the start button makes perfect sense if you look past the desktop.

for the desktop, it's still there in the corner. and because of the metro apps, the pop out button needs to be there since you need a way to call the start button when in full screen metro apps. this allows you to have full screen apps and quick access to start without the taskbar taking up a significant part of the bottom of your screen and disrupting the metro experience.

So if they had kept the button, you would have had to buttons on top of each other. and as I said, it's not gone anyway, just hidden.

The start screen doesn't make any sense for me, I don't need a tablet interface on my computer. But as I said earlier, I think Microsoft should stick to their original plan, given the number of start menu replacements out there for me to use.

But it's not a tablet interface, and in fact it works in general better with a mouse and keyboard anyway.

I hope they are good PCs. You probably just bought something that will have to last until they stop supporting it.

Microsoft needs to choose. Metro or desktop. Having those two paradigms at the same time doesn't work. and honestly it sucks when you have to fight against interface mechanisms intended for a touch screen when you only have a mouse or trackpad

I've been using Win8 for almost a year now without any form of touch and I really have no issues moving around.

  • Like 1

Google translate does a decent job for anyone who wants to read it.

I read it, could it be true? I mean they would really have a windows 9 started already!? win8 is just out.

Someone said in a later post "He is a Microsoft official. . ." Regarding to the OP I think

Of course. How soon after Windows 7 went RTM did Windows 8/Windows Server 2012 development kick off?

Also, Windows 9 will likely be a *tick* (to Windows 8's *tock*) - just as 7 was a *tick* to Vista's *tock*.

It does, on the start menu. You can view it as a menu or link. Not the end of the world but for people who used the Start menu this way, they will find some of Windows 8 less efficient.

That's right. I thought he meant a button on the taskbar.

To people saying they shouldn't bring the start button back...

At first I thought it was dumb that MS got rid of it, then looking at screenshots, I thought it looked stupid not being there.

After trying Win 8, it's absolutely retarded that it's gone, seeing is that to bring up the Start Panel, you move the mouse cursor down to the lower left corner, then a little box pops up and you click on it to go to Start Panel. Now how much sense does that make?!? Would have been faster to just have the Start Button there and click it to still bring up that Start Panel.

I think people that do like Win 8 like the Start Panel, and I ain't saying it's bad, but what does removing the actual Start Button have to do with it, when you gotta click down there anyways? Think about it. Der.

The start screen preview window isn't supposed to be clicked. The user actually uses the thing in the same way as start button: Move the mouse to the bottom left corner, and click. The image itself isn't really supposed to be a click target, evidenced by how the preview disappears the moment the mouse moves more than a few pixels away from the corner.

Actually I wasn't aware anyone actually regularly put in the effort to stop on the actual image of the button, and then clicked that. I always relied on the corner itself. That's a lot easier.

As for removing the button, I guess it gives more room for one more pinned icon...?

Demanding that they don't put back a feature that a lot of people clearly want judging by the sales of start menu replacements just to satisfy you, who is the clueless one here?

Start Button is still there, move mouse to bottom left corner, left click.. same as it always was.

Of course. How soon after Windows 7 went RTM did Windows 8/Windows Server 2012 development kick off?

Also, Windows 9 will likely be a *tick* (to Windows 8's *tock*) - just as 7 was a *tick* to Vista's *tock*.

Windows 8 was in developement quote some time before Win7 was finished in fact.

Start Button is still there, move mouse to bottom left corner, left click.. same as it always was.

not really. it's been replaced with a hot corner.. a purely 'touch' concept..

and also you're missing the fact that it's not the button that we're missing. It's the damn menu that goes with it. It's the fact that the start screen takes up your whole desktop.

not really. it's been replaced with a hot corner.. a purely 'touch' concept..

and also you're missing the fact that it's not the button that we're missing. It's the damn menu that goes with it. It's the fact that the start screen takes up your whole desktop.

u

mm actually, the hot corner is PURELY a mouse concept. the hot corner doesn't work at all with touch, only the side bar slide ins work on touch.

and OMG, a faster, more organized more efficient launcher that you see a handful of times a day takes up your whole screen :rolleyes:

u

mm actually, the hot corner is PURELY a mouse concept. the hot corner doesn't work at all with touch, only the side bar slide ins work on touch.

and OMG, a faster, more organized more efficient launcher that you see a handful of times a day takes up your whole screen :rolleyes:

why would you explain something to people that obviously have no clue. You can tell by reading the stuff they put that they don't know how something works. Its the generic W8 comments that you see in all forums just copy and pasted by someone else. Go on facebook and go to the Microsoft and windows page, you see it in the comments to everything there as well. Ignorance is easier then experimentation.

I would like to see some changes to the colour palettes used for both Modern UI and especially the Desktop as no matter how hard I try, it still looks a bit like pastel hell.

Other than that, I like where they are going with things. I would imaging that at this stage they are just starting to build things on top of a Windows 8 fork, just as they did for Windows 7.

damage control ?

failure ?

Okay, PANICKED damage control and MASSIVE failure. No need to get so pickayune about it. :)

why would you explain something to people that obviously have no clue. You can tell by reading the stuff they put that they don't know how something works. Its the generic W8 comments that you see in all forums just copy and pasted by someone else. Go on facebook and go to the Microsoft and windows page, you see it in the comments to everything there as well. Ignorance is easier then experimentation.

And kneejerk responses like yours are easier than actually trying to address the specific points being raised. Saying "Deal with it" and (my personal favorite from the Metrotard camp) "You're being left behind" doesn't say anything of substance at all.

Okay, PANICKED damage control and MASSIVE failure. No need to get so pickayune about it. :)

Damage control for what ?

and what failure. there is no failure. Windows 8 is selling well and everyone I've shown it to novice or advanced users takes to it immediately and once I show them how it works no one picks 7 over 8, even if they come in with their minds set on 7 because the media told them 8 is horrible.

I wish I could fail the way MS does if you think this is a failure.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • With the current hardware prices Microsoft should lift the restriction. Then if you have the correct TPM then allow you to use X feature, if you don't have the correct TPM then don't but still actually let you run windows. 11. With a disclaimer during install that X features would be unavailable.
    • It's good for recycling of course. But commence inflation of a second hand RAM bubble and price gouging on DDR 4 inventory in 3... 2... 1...
    • Bypassed Windows 11 shows surprising stability on ancient, completely unsupported hardware by Sayan Sen When Windows 11 was first released, one of the most complained-about issues with the new desktop Microsoft OS was its higher system requirements, which pushed many relatively modern and powerful processors and devices onto the officially unsupported list. Thankfully, they have not been updated again for the base OS, though systems require four times the memory and storage if they want to run AI-powered apps and features. As such, Windows 11 technically runs on 4GB of memory, and there is no imposed restriction on the generation of memory it supports. Speaking of memory, prices are extremely high nowadays for hardware, especially DDR5 and DDR4 kits due to the current silicon shortage, and there are also reports of it affecting DDR2 as well, and it might only be a matter of time before even DDR1 gets affected. Before that could happen, an enthusiast took an ancient DDR1-based system and decided to try out Windows 11 on it to see how well the modern OS would fare on such hardware. The system runs an outdated graphics card interface standard based on AGP, or Advanced Graphics Port, called AGP 3.0 or AGP8x. AGP was essentially succeeded by the modern PCI Express (PCIe) bus standard. The user behind the experiment is retro hardware enthusiast Omores, who built the system around an ASRock ConRoe865PE motherboard based on Intel's i865PE chipset from way back in 2003, around the time when AGP was still in fashion. What made this board special back in the day was its unusual support for newer Core 2 Duo and even Core 2 Quad processors while still retaining older DDR1 memory support and an AGP8X graphics slot, making it an ideal bridge or link between two vastly different generations. Powering the machine was Intel's Core 2 Quad Q6600 alongside 3GB of DDR1 RAM and an ATI Radeon HD 4650 AGP graphics card, one of the final and most capable GPUs released for the aging AGP interface. While installing Windows 11 itself was relatively easy by bypassing Microsoft's hardware checks, getting the graphics card fully functional proved to be some challenge. Microsoft had quietly dropped native AGP support after the earliest releases of Windows 10, meaning newer versions of Windows no longer include the necessary Graphics Address Remapping Table (GART) drivers required for proper AGP acceleration. Without them, AGP graphics cards typically boot up, though with limited functionality, and can often throw a Code 43 error in Device Manager. To work around the limitation, Omores extracted Intel's legacy AGP440 SYS driver from an early Windows 10 release and paired it with a modified INF file so Windows 11 would correctly recognize the chipset. Following this and combined with AMD's final 64-bit Catalyst AGP drivers from 2012, the Radeon HD 4650 was able to operate with full AGP 8X acceleration intact. The result was said to be surprisingly usable for hardware that is over two decades old. Hardware-accelerated H.264 video playback worked correctly and benefited apps like Firefox, while legacy applications and games ran without major graphical issues. The system also successfully completed the 3DMark 2001 benchmark, although performance naturally lagged behind what the same hardware achieves under Windows 7, which is significantly lighter than Windows 11. There was, however, one unavoidable limitation as Microsoft's Windows 11 version 24H2 introduces a mandatory SSE4.2 CPU instruction requirement that cannot be bypassed through installer modifications or registry tweaks. Since no AGP-era processor supports SSE4.2, Windows 11 version 23H2 effectively becomes the final release capable of running on such systems. Regardless, it is still a very cool feat and quite fascinating to see just how stable Windows 11 turned out to be on such unfamiliar hardware. Source: Omores (Patreon) via O_MORES (Reddit)
    • That will only really help other players that are also responsible for creating the problem.
    • Well, it's good to know that they have found a workaround to a problem that they helped create, I guess...
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      538
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      266
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      98
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!