winlonghorn Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 youre right - it's just that the 'new' feature in Windows 8 doesnt apply to me. so im still trying to figure out why i might need Windows 8 :laugh: It washes your dishes for you?.... lol :D jk. How about the idea of having the information that you need at a glance (without needing to open programs right away)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badb0y Posted February 6, 2012 Author Share Posted February 6, 2012 20 feb (official date maybe) how can ya say 20 Feb will be release date? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ensiform Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Why should there be a 32 bit version ? Exactly, 32-bit only processors were dead long ago :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeadEndAccount Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 how can ya say 20 Feb will be release date? bogas04 is referring to the 'Customer Preview' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REM2000 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 You know what I find funny - I remember when Windows 2000 came out, it was seen as the ultimate operating system for the hard core Windows user then Windows XP came out and it was ridiculed by 'had core Windows users' as being merely 'fisher price' GUI and how it was only a pretty face and nothing serious. Windows Vista came out and these same people said that Windows XP was absolutely awesome then suddenly a year or so later these same people said that Windows Vista had matured and that the bashing (of course that *THEY* never did *rolls eyes*) were by uninformed people. Same thing for Windows 7 and I'll promise you that the same thing will happen with Windows 8. Want to know what is pathetic - the fact that people are making a value judgement based on a incomplete customer preview not quite beta version of a project still in progress and concluding that based on a few screen shots that what they see will be the final product. Every time I see some posts here I die a little inside. I was one of those people who knocked Windows XP upon release and it's something i say till this day. Windows 2000 was a lot better than Windows XP, the fisher price GUI did slow the system down and use more memory, remember we are talking 2001/2002 when memory was not as abundant as it is now. Windows 2000 was a lot cleaner and allowed you to get the job done, Windows XP was noticeably slower and didn't really much if anything over Windows 2000, i used Windows 2000 till i had to switch because some apps required WinXP, however i moved to WinXP x64 for work and WinXP for games and kept the two environments separate. I found just using Windows XP (32bit) purely for games kept it pretty lean and not so bloated over a period of time, Using WinXP x64 was also designed a little differently being based on Win2k3 (which i thought was a great release over Win2k Server) made it a lot smoother and not prone to slow downs after a year, it was quite well optimised. I used Vista in beta and had high hopes for longhorn but found the release (RTM) bugs too troubling. The file copying in Vista was a disaster as too was the streaming of media due to a bug which would then throttle the network back. As well as some other performance bugs (high memory etc..troublesome wireless connectivity, especially when coming out of sleep), it was pretty messy for a RTM, SP1 did resolve most issues and because Microsoft had changed a lot of the core fundamentals of Windows, i hoped at the time the next release would mature these changes (new network stack, new UI drawn on the GPU instead of going through the CPU etc..). I find Windows 7 the same breath of fresh air Windows 2000 was, it has taken the technologies introduced in Vista and really matured and built upon these. The memory utilisation is incredibly well done with the caching/using all RAM really offering a big performance gain, since NT4 i have gotten into the habit of running task manager all the time in the bottom right hand corner to give me an idea of how the computer is performing so i generally keep an eye on memory usage and Win7 does this expertly. Windows 8 i am reserving judgement, i really like the new under the hood changes, such as the new file system, Hyper-V in the client etc.. however i do have my concerns about the Metro UX, i will see what the Beta is like, however i found the developer preview of Metro too jaring, i didn't like the switch between the metro start menu and the desktop/application. Hopefully this will a smoother experience, however again as above i will wait for the Beta and see how Microsoft has tackled this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XerXis Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Exactly, 32-bit only processors were dead long ago :/ no, not really. Never heard of this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Atom) processor range? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djdanster Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 no, not really. Never heard of this (http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Intel_Atom) processor range? It's only the Silverthorne, Lincroft and the N2xx series that don't support 64bit. The latest generations support 64bit fine. The only machines that they were mostly sold in were netbooks and those nebooks also don't have a large enough screen resolution to make the most of the Metro Start Page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullysnet Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I think most would agree as a tablet/phone the Metro GUI is fine, I'm not sure many would complain about that. But most PC's have a mouse and a keyboard. Seems really odd to me and I'm not sure what to make of it at all until beta. Most people hate change, lately I have pushed myself to adjust to changes in just about every application. So it maybe the same for Win8. I still don't get the UI for your standard desktop, tablet/phone on the other hand it would be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detection Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Why do people think "System Reset" is something new and exciting ? Correct me if I am wrong, but haven't we been able to do this for at least two OS's now by sticking the DVD in the drive while windows is running and choosing "Upgrade" essentially replacing the current broken OS with a fresh copy of the same while keeping all programs and files ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djdanster Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Why do people think "System Reset" is something new and exciting ? Correct me if I am wrong, but haven't we been able to do this for at least two OS's now by sticking the DVD in the drive while windows is running and choosing "Upgrade" essentially replacing the current broken OS with a fresh copy of the same while keeping all programs and files ? Hmmm Yes we have :p. Although this just removes the need for the DVD and places it on the HDD. This way is more user-friendly and speed efficient. Detection 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeadEndAccount Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I was one of those people who knocked Windows XP upon release and it's something i say till this day. Windows 2000 was a lot better than Windows XP, the fisher price GUI did slow the system down and use more memory, remember we are talking 2001/2002 when memory was not as abundant as it is now. Windows 2000 was a lot cleaner and allowed you to get the job done, Windows XP was noticeably slower and didn't really much if anything over Windows 2000, i used Windows 2000 till i had to switch because some apps required WinXP, however i moved to WinXP x64 for work and WinXP for games and kept the two environments separate.I found just using Windows XP (32bit) purely for games kept it pretty lean and not so bloated over a period of time, Using WinXP x64 was also designed a little differently being based on Win2k3 (which i thought was a great release over Win2k Server) made it a lot smoother and not prone to slow downs after a year, it was quite well optimised. As you pointed out, Windows XP was more or less Windows 2003 rather than being a direct lineage of Windows XP but one but point out that Windows XP introduced deep OS changes - it was more than just a 'fisher price GUI on Windows 2000'. There was an interesting article when Windows XP came out (IIRC it was a developer magazine by Microsoft or closely associated with Microsoft) that covered the deep OS changes such as removing some kernel memory limitations etc. I used Vista in beta and had high hopes for longhorn but found the release (RTM) bugs too troubling. The file copying in Vista was a disaster as too was the streaming of media due to a bug which would then throttle the network back. As well as some other performance bugs (high memory etc..troublesome wireless connectivity, especially when coming out of sleep), it was pretty messy for a RTM, SP1 did resolve most issues and because Microsoft had changed a lot of the core fundamentals of Windows, i hoped at the time the next release would mature these changes (new network stack, new UI drawn on the GPU instead of going through the CPU etc..).I find Windows 7 the same breath of fresh air Windows 2000 was, it has taken the technologies introduced in Vista and really matured and built upon these. The memory utilisation is incredibly well done with the caching/using all RAM really offering a big performance gain, since NT4 i have gotten into the habit of running task manager all the time in the bottom right hand corner to give me an idea of how the computer is performing so i generally keep an eye on memory usage and Win7 does this expertly. Windows 8 i am reserving judgement, i really like the new under the hood changes, such as the new file system, Hyper-V in the client etc.. however i do have my concerns about the Metro UX, i will see what the Beta is like, however i found the developer preview of Metro too jaring, i didn't like the switch between the metro start menu and the desktop/application. Hopefully this will a smoother experience, however again as above i will wait for the Beta and see how Microsoft has tackled this. From what I have read there will be XAML framework for traditional applications so I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up seeing more details being released right up till the 'Enterprise Preview' which will be more or less a release candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoffel Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 So far I really like what I'm seeing. There is no need for a start/orb button when you get the charm menu anyway I do still hope they are holding back on showing us the updated Destop, i hope they will integrate the icons and design of Metro a little bit more then right now. I feel the design differences make it feel a bit inconsistent. But let's see what the CP brings in about 2 weeks Looking forward to it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winlonghorn Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Why do people think "System Reset" is something new and exciting ? Correct me if I am wrong, but haven't we been able to do this for at least two OS's now by sticking the DVD in the drive while windows is running and choosing "Upgrade" essentially replacing the current broken OS with a fresh copy of the same while keeping all programs and files ? Probably because doing that leaves a lot of clutter and slows things down quite a bit. Everytime I have seen the "Upgrade" install used on Windows, it has caused the installation to become sluggish. This will wipe all of that old garbage clean and start everything fresh (and still maintain your files and settings). :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lunarworks Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 So far I really like what I'm seeing. There is no need for a start/orb button when you get the charm menu anyway I do still hope they are holding back on showing us the updated Destop, i hope they will integrate the icons and design of Metro a little bit more then right now. I feel the design differences make it feel a bit inconsistent. But let's see what the CP brings in about 2 weeks Looking forward to it If it's in a "Consumer Preview" state, this is what we're getting. It's essentially done. They just have to run it through tons of testing and iron out the multitude of bugs. Windows 7 "consumer preview" version was pretty much the final product, as was Vista's. Nothing is gonna change now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoffel Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 If it's in a "Consumer Preview" state, this is what we're getting. It's essentially done. They just have to run it through tons of testing and iron out the multitude of bugs. Windows 7 "consumer preview" version was pretty much the final product, as was Vista's. Nothing is gonna change now. I realize that, that's why I'm hoping they still have to merge the build with the adjusted UI with the one they are leaking right now A man can only hope right :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travelar Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Words of wisdom. Though I'm really unsure as to how Microsoft could develop such an undeveloped UI in the first place. Based on the last few versions of Windows, the UI is usually one of the last things to receive an overhaul. While they had to get Metro in, I would expect a large number of UI changes and polishing before the final. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detection Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Probably because doing that leaves a lot of clutter and slows things down quite a bit. Everytime I have seen the "Upgrade" install used on Windows, it has caused the installation to become sluggish. This will wipe all of that old garbage clean and start everything fresh (and still maintain your files and settings). :) I am not 100% about this, but I think you will find that Windows 8's reset feature is exactly the same as upgrading Windows 7 to Windows 7 same version. And upgrading to the same OS does not leave anything sluggish or slow, how could it, the files it is upgrading to are the same ones that were already there, upgrading from one OS to a newer one can leave many problems behind, but not to the same OS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthonyd Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 If it's in a "Consumer Preview" state, this is what we're getting. It's essentially done. They just have to run it through tons of testing and iron out the multitude of bugs. Windows 7 "consumer preview" version was pretty much the final product, as was Vista's. Nothing is gonna change now. Win 7 didn't had a "consumer preview", it had a beta and a RC, then RTM. The consumer preview for Win 8 is equivalent to 7 beta. And many things changed between the beta and the RC, so yeah, things can changes. The main issue here is that people just scream "it sux" without being constructive, MS have to spend to many time to sort out the real & constructives comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Are we still on this whole "Metro sucks, rage, rage, rage, I'm moving to Mac/Linux" thing? Either try out the damn beta or buzz off. Metro isn't going away, and if that doesn't suit you, Apple or Linux are there for you to use. You need to start realizing you're on a public forum where people are allowed to express their opinions regarding these subjects. Them being positive, negative or neutral. A lot of people tried the Windows 8 preview and still don't like Metro. If you can't deal with that simply "buzz off" yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ci7 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 the difference that is system rest gonna wipe out program and temporary files unlike upgrade Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Win 7 didn't had a "consumer preview", it had a beta and a RC, then RTM. The consumer preview for Win 8 is equivalent to 7 beta. And many things changed between the beta and the RC, so yeah, things can changes. What are you talking about? Interface-wise hardly anything changed from Windows 7 Beta 1 through RTM. The new task bar and modified Aero look were all in place and didn't seen substantial changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detection Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 the difference that is system rest gonna wipe out program and temporary files unlike upgrade Yea full reset without keeping files is gonna do that, but that is just a reinstall of the OS which can be done just as easily with Windows 7 The system reset using the option to keep all the files and folders is just an upgrade, so neither one of them is anything new, it just saves a few seconds by not having to put the DVD in, or saves no seconds at all if you have a folder with your setup files already extracted into on a separate drive or partition as I do Also remembering using the Keep Files option with the DP, it still asked me to put the DVD in, so it saves no time at all.... kinda goes hand in hand with the whole Metro UI nonsense :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
efjay Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Also hope they change the desktop to have a more Metro look, but just waiting to hit the download button..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ci7 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Yea full reset without keeping files is gonna do that, but that is just a reinstall of the OS which can be done just as easily with Windows 7 The system reset using the option to keep all the files and folders is just an upgrade, so neither one of them is anything new, it just saves a few seconds by not having to put the DVD in, or saves no seconds at all if you have a folder with your setup files already extracted into on a separate drive or partition as I do Also remembering using the Keep Files option with the DP, it still asked me to put the DVD in, so it saves no time at all.... kinda goes hand in hand with the whole Metro UI nonsense :D i can see there main need would be for those machines with no DVD drive (tablets + ultrabook/ultrathin laptop) as for requiring DVD , they would fully integrate image inside windows that is my bet --- myself rather not go the hassle with drive , hardly use it if ever. (this way would either use previous backup or just rest system) :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Veteran Posted February 6, 2012 Veteran Share Posted February 6, 2012 This is how I want Windows 8's desktop to look like: http://i.imgur.com/ydjOp.png (The image is quite large). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts