Recommended Posts

As someone that kicked Windows 7 completely to the curb with the release of the Consumer Preview (I now use it only in VMs), the FUD over Windows 8 (and the Consumer Preview) has, if anything, grown more vociferous - despite even the detractors' admission that Windows 8's Consumer Preview is actually better at backward compatibility than the Windows 7 beta (same stage of development).

So I took a look at where we are in terms of both hardware and software and came to some rather surprising conclusions.

1. Justifying an OS change (any OS change) has gotten a lot harder. For all too many computer users (not just desktop PC users), what they have (hardware and software) is just fine. The concern is that Windows 8 will be like the Affordable Care Act - looks great on the surface, but with a hidden sting in the tail.

2. High-power hardware is actually highly affordable on the desktop. Thanks largely to Sandy Bridge, high-power hardware is no longer expensive - far from it. It's gotten affordable, if not downright cheap. While even Windows 8's Consumer Preview can leverage Sandy Bridge better than Windows 7, how many folks can (or will) actually use what Sandy Bridge brings to Windows 8? (The situation is, on the desktop, no better with Ivy Bridge; however, IB, unlike predecessor SB, brings more benefits to smaller formfactors. It still remains to be seen how many users will actually buy the new IB Ultrabooks, tablets and slates, as opposed to sticking with their current hardware and Windows 7. One feature both Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge both bring with Windows 8 is better support for desktop virtualization with Hyper-V - however, even with as much of it that I do now, and will in the future with a Windows 8 desktop featuring SB or IB, I'm not typical - I'm an admitted outlier in that area.)

3. It's always easier to not spend than to spend (time OR money). This is the enterprise/SMB position - basically do more with less. The UI change is plenty of excuse not to move (training costs), despite that their core line-of-business applications need not change much, if at all.

By and large, the detractors are comfortable, and don't want to move - and are perfectly willing to make any excuse to NOT move, no matter how silly-sounding it may be. While I see the benefits of upgrading to Windows 8, a rather vocal group of detractors are quite comfortable where they are, and are absolutely unwilling to move.

  • Like 2
despite even the detractors' admission that Windows 8's Consumer Preview is actually better at backward compatibility than the Windows 7 beta (same stage of development).

Well, no ****, why wouldn't it be? It isn't as if they threw out all of the final Windows 7 code and started over. I always have to roll my eyes at idiotic statements like that.

Well, no ****, why wouldn't it be? It isn't as if they threw out all of the final Windows 7 code and started over. I always have to roll my eyes at idiotic statements like that.

They didn't throw out the final Vista code and start over with Windows 7 either, so the comparison is fair in this regard. A better question is "Why was the Windows 7 beta less compatible than the Consumer Preview?"

The real reason for FUD regarding Windows 8 has nothing to do with anything you talked about.

It basically boils down to this:

Windows 8 on the desktop looks like **** and belongs nowhere near a desktop environment. It's a freaking tablet/phone OS.

Well, no ****, why wouldn't it be? It isn't as if they threw out all of the final Windows 7 code and started over. I always have to roll my eyes at idiotic statements like that.

So what is behind all the distaste for the Consumer Preview then?

Pretty much *every* whine and complaint from the detractors has to do with the UI.

In other words, never mind that backward-compatibility (both hardware and software) is better than even Windows 7; because the UI changed, (insert name here) will pass, and recommend others pass also.

When the Developer Preview came out, my biggest concern was, in fact, backward-compatibility (both hardware and software) largely *because* of the radically-different UI. Guess what - applications worked pretty much as they did in Windows 7. Absolutely unheard-of (Windows 7's own Consumer Preview wasn't this good, and Linux desktop environments are actually far worse than Windows 7 was in that area, and don't get me started on Lion's backward-compatibility with Snow Leopard, or even Snow Leopard's backward-compatibility with Leopard). Basically, the biggest problem with Windows betas to date has become a non-factor, and despite the biggest UI change since Windows 9x - and it gets pooh-poohed.

If anything, the Consumer Preview hardened the detractors' positions even further - again, because the UI is unchanged from the Developer Preview. I actually *widened* the application test pool - I included all the games I normally ran in Windows 7 and (due to having a much larger boot drive) added more (both applications and games). Despite the widened test pool, applications (both old and new) worked as well as, if not better than, Windows 7. Same applies to games. Same even applied to all my hardware. What are all the detractors saying? "Meh - it still has that radically-different UI. Pass."

This isn't going from XP to Vista (which I DID do while still running a P4 Northwood-C), as I'm actually *behind* the power curve at present (which I was squarely in the middle of when the XP/Vista changeover began) - pushing an Intel quad-core in LGA775 (no less than the defining quad-core - Q6600), but still behind the curve for desktops by at least a generation, if not two. Yet folks with better hardware than I have (again, by at least a generation) didn't want to move from Windows 7.

It's why I took a look at not just the state of software that runs on both 7 and 8 (traditional applications and games, in other words) and the state of computer hardware (motherboards, CPUs, GPUs, etc.) to uncover the reality behind the reticence.

Part of the issue has its genesis in the brouhaha over Crysis 2 - it's a multiplatform game, and therefore doesn't stress PC hardware very much at the defaults. The same has been pretty much a constant throughout gaming, and even to an extent in the entire application space. Except for outliers, there's no *gotta-have* game, or even application, out there that will even push Windows 7, let alone the Windows 8 Consumer Preview to where folks will upgrade from whatever they have now. (One feature that I did, in fact, point is a biggie in the current generation of Intel CPUs - support for Hyper-V - is an outlier feature; how many Neowinians even care about improved desktop virtualization? I stated quite plainly that I do, and it is, in fact, why I'm going to be upgrading to, at the very least, Sandy Bridge, if not Ivy Bridge - however, I'm also an admitted outlier.)

With no reason driving an urge to move, with a new version of Windows coming up fast, the hunt is on for reasons (or excuses) NOT to move. However, the usual reasons (too stressful on hardware, application breakage, driver breakage) aren't there this time. And with the usual reasons gone, folks are trying to come up with new ones.

I get every bit that change (especially a radical change such as a user interface) can be quite stress-filled - and this is a monster. However, unless you want things to remain firmly in the Land of "Meh" (which is exactly what a lot of us in computing have been complaining and whining about), staying put simply doesn't get it done.

seriously though, I DON'T understand all the rage for the new metro start screen

if you don't like it install something like Classic Shell to bring back the start menu, there is just too much improvement to Windows 8 to put it down and diss it just because of a stupid UI change that's very easy to work around

So what is behind all the distaste for the Consumer Preview then?

Pretty much *every* whine and complaint from the detractors has to do with the UI.

In other words, never mind that backward-compatibility (both hardware and software) is better than even Windows 7; because the UI changed, (insert name here) will pass, and recommend others pass also.

When the Developer Preview came out, my biggest concern was, in fact, backward-compatibility (both hardware and software) largely *because* of the radically-different UI. Guess what - applications worked pretty much as they did in Windows 7. Absolutely unheard-of (Windows 7's own Consumer Preview wasn't this good, and Linux desktop environments are actually far worse than Windows 7 was in that area, and don't get me started on Lion's backward-compatibility with Snow Leopard, or even Snow Leopard's backward-compatibility with Leopard). Basically, the biggest problem with Windows betas to date has become a non-factor, and despite the biggest UI change since Windows 9x - and it gets pooh-poohed.

If anything, the Consumer Preview hardened the detractors' positions even further - again, because the UI is unchanged from the Developer Preview. I actually *widened* the application test pool - I included all the games I normally ran in Windows 7 and (due to having a much larger boot drive) added more (both applications and games). Despite the widened test pool, applications (both old and new) worked as well as, if not better than, Windows 7. Same applies to games. Same even applied to all my hardware. What are all the detractors saying? "Meh - it still has that radically-different UI. Pass."

This isn't going from XP to Vista (which I DID do while still running a P4 Northwood-C), as I'm actually *behind* the power curve at present (which I was squarely in the middle of when the XP/Vista changeover began) - pushing an Intel quad-core in LGA775 (no less than the defining quad-core - Q6600), but still behind the curve for desktops by at least a generation, if not two. Yet folks with better hardware than I have (again, by at least a generation) didn't want to move from Windows 7.

It's why I took a look at not just the state of software that runs on both 7 and 8 (traditional applications and games, in other words) and the state of computer hardware (motherboards, CPUs, GPUs, etc.) to uncover the reality behind the reticence.

Part of the issue has its genesis in the brouhaha over Crysis 2 - it's a multiplatform game, and therefore doesn't stress PC hardware very much at the defaults. The same has been pretty much a constant throughout gaming, and even to an extent in the entire application space. Except for outliers, there's no *gotta-have* game, or even application, out there that will even push Windows 7, let alone the Windows 8 Consumer Preview to where folks will upgrade from whatever they have now. (One feature that I did, in fact, point is a biggie in the current generation of Intel CPUs - support for Hyper-V - is an outlier feature; how many Neowinians even care about improved desktop virtualization? I stated quite plainly that I do, and it is, in fact, why I'm going to be upgrading to, at the very least, Sandy Bridge, if not Ivy Bridge - however, I'm also an admitted outlier.)

With no reason driving an urge to move, with a new version of Windows coming up fast, the hunt is on for reasons (or excuses) NOT to move. However, the usual reasons (too stressful on hardware, application breakage, driver breakage) aren't there this time. And with the usual reasons gone, folks are trying to come up with new ones.

I get every bit that change (especially a radical change such as a user interface) can be quite stress-filled - and this is a monster. However, unless you want things to remain firmly in the Land of "Meh" (which is exactly what a lot of us in computing have been complaining and whining about), staying put simply doesn't get it done.

Well f***ing said.

The real reason for FUD regarding Windows 8 has nothing to do with anything you talked about.

It basically boils down to this:

Windows 8 on the desktop looks like **** and belongs nowhere near a desktop environment. It's a freaking tablet/phone OS.

A person's opinion doesn't make it a fact. Metro has been working for me just fine, even on the desktop.

Another person's trash, is another's treasure. Metro will continue to evolve for Windows 9 where many people will pick up using it.

The real reason for FUD regarding Windows 8 has nothing to do with anything you talked about.

It basically boils down to this:

Windows 8 on the desktop looks like **** and belongs nowhere near a desktop environment. It's a freaking tablet/phone OS.

And if the Consumer Preview (let alone the Developer Preview) had kept the Windows 7 UI (which the two previous leaks did) it would have faced the same abrupt dismissal said leaks did - it's not different *enough* from Windows 7 (which would be an absolutely correct assessment). In fact, consider the Samsung Series 7 - it's a tablet driven by an i5-2400 CPU (an Ultrabook competitor); while it was given to attendees with the Developer Preview at BUILD, it shipped simultaneously with Windows 7 installed on it (which is what it ships with today). Even those that OWN the Series 7 are embracing the Consumer Preview (which the detractors, which are running current-generation, but traditional, formfactor hardware are passing up). Your complaint that it's a *phone OS* is exactly what it sounds like - an attempt to pigeonhole Windows 8's Consumer Preview into an easier-to-dismiss category, as opposed to considering it on its merits. The very fact that traditional Windows 7 applications and games (as well as traditional hardware) work as-is utterly trainwrecks the *phone OS* argument - you might as well be saying that Android tablets (EEE Transformer Prime and Galaxy Tab/Note) are "phone tablets" - in fact, you'd be a lot closer to the mark with THAT assessment (especially since they are all running Android) than you would with Windows 8's Consumer Preview (or even Windows RT) as there is practically *everything* in common between Android on tablets and smartphones - and, other than parts of the UI, practically nit between Windows Phone and either Windows 8 or Windows RT. You don't want to move, and are looking for any reason - or excuse - to justify it.

The real reason is that people need something to whine about. Windows 8 just happens to be the latest thing.

This sounds about right, but also the fact that there's no need to upgrade.

When Windows Vista came around, it had system requirements that put it out of reach for most people, including for new systems being sold. When Windows 7 came around, peoplle had been sticking it out with Windows XP for so long that they were happy for a change. People haven't been using Windows 7 long enough to get tired of it.

And if the Consumer Preview (let alone the Developer Preview) had kept the Windows 7 UI (which the two previous leaks did) it would have faced the same abrupt dismissal said leaks did - it's not different *enough* from Windows 7 (which would be an absolutely correct assessment).

I completely forgot about that. People bitched up a storm becuase Windows 7 didn't look too much different from Vista, and many, MANY, tech pundits predicted its failure as a result.... Now look where we are. :rolleyes:

They didn't throw out the final Vista code and start over with Windows 7 either, so the comparison is fair in this regard. A better question is "Why was the Windows 7 beta less compatible than the Consumer Preview?"

It's valid for another reason - 7 did NOT make a UI change and a driver change at the same time (which Windows 8 DID do). Yet Vista had quite a few standard and traditional applications (let alone games) break under 7; however, my transition from 7 to the Consumer Preview was absolutely flawless - in every hardware and software aspect. So what did the Windows 8 Consumer Preview get right (despite a much bigger change) that 7's Consumer Preview blew up in?

This sounds about right, but also the fact that there's no need to upgrade.

When Windows Vista came around, it had system requirements that put it out of reach for most people, including for new systems being sold. When Windows 7 came around, peoplle had been sticking it out with Windows XP for so long that they were happy for a change. People haven't been using Windows 7 long enough to get tired of it.

I covered that - in fact, it was the first of my three points. The lack of *gotta-have-it* is, indeed, a major problem. I'm simply pointing out that staying put (which is the detractors' exact advice) won't fix that problem (which predates Windows Vista, and actually had it's "birth", so to speak, in that five year lag between XP and Vista). We, as computer users, are the real driving force behind change - unless we get off our butts, change won't happen.

FUD looks and just sounds stupid, and yes...I know what FUD means.

IMO, the reason why lots of people are skeptical about Win8 is because its a big change to how the OS looks. I dont like the tiles and really dont like the design of the OS...but again, thats my opinion. I also never cared for the ribbon menu system.

Will I use Win8? Sure I will probably when it goes RTM since I need to keep up to speed on these things for my job.

And if the Consumer Preview (let alone the Developer Preview) had kept the Windows 7 UI (which the two previous leaks did) it would have faced the same abrupt dismissal said leaks did - it's not different *enough* from Windows 7 (which would be an absolutely correct assessment).

That's an assumption, not a fact as far as I know.

Your complaint that it's a *phone OS* is exactly what it sounds like - an attempt to pigeonhole Windows 8's Consumer Preview into an easier-to-dismiss category, as opposed to considering it on its merits.

If you expect me to believe that Microsoft didn't have the tablet/phone market in mind when they built this then you are living a fanboy dream.

The very fact that traditional Windows 7 applications and games (as well as traditional hardware) work as-is utterly trainwrecks the *phone OS* argument.

I never said that applications did not or will not work on Win 8. Not once. I do however feel/know that it works like crap on a desktop. Not intuitive at all. (In my opinion).

As far as a desktop OS, it's a great tablet.

FUD looks and just sounds stupid, and yes...I know what FUD means.

IMO, the reason why lots of people are skeptical about Win8 is because its a big change to how the OS looks. I dont like the tiles and really dont like the design of the OS...but again, thats my opinion. I also never cared for the ribbon menu system.

Will I use Win8? Sure I will probably when it goes RTM since I need to keep up to speed on these things for my job.

That's why I said that the UI (how the OS looks) is an excuse - if it actually made a difference to applications, there would be more application breakage than there has been (in my own case, there hasn't been ANY application breakage).

Was I skeptical? You better believe it - that is precisely why I tested with the Developer Preview for precisely that (and why I further opened the testing gamut even wider since with the Consumer Preview). Given that not a single everyday (or even part-time) traditional application or game failed (which couldn't be said about the Windows 7 Consumer Preview) the radically-different UI certainly isn't a problem in that sense.

Despite the radically different UI, it's still Windows (with the same application, game and even hardware base that Windows 7 has, in fact). I'm certainly having nary an issue with it, and that's on a traditional desktop - not a tablet, slate, or Ultrabook/netbook. While the UI is a curve, if anything, it's a hanging curve - over the heart of the plate; why are you having issues smacking it out of the park?

Lastly, the very fact that the UI *is* so important to the detractors (enough so that they can, and quite deliberately do, dismiss that Windows 8's Consumer Preview gets right the two major issues new versions of Windows usually get wrong) leads me to my theory of comfort zones and whinging for its own sake.

  • Like 3

you people making threads bashing other people who like/disklike windows 8 need to all go fly a kite and leave the world alone. no one cares. it's an opinion. deal with it.

Especially when we're talking about a product that MS wants actual money for. It seems to be the assumption here that it is the default setting of users to just be waiting to finally be able to pay for a new OS - regardless of whether it brings anything of significant value to the table for them...

you people making threads bashing other people who like/disklike windows 8 need to all go fly a kite and leave the world alone. no one cares. it's an opinion. deal with it.

As much as I sometimes disagree with my fellow Neowins, (sometimes too harshly), there would be no need for forum discussions or for that matter, forums in general. The livelihood of any forum is to debate each other, to sometimes agree with each other and to sometimes disagree with each other. Because of YOUR opinion(s), this topic continues.

Especially when we're talking about a product that MS wants actual money for. It seems to be the assumption here that it is the default setting of users to just be waiting to finally be able to pay for a new OS - regardless of whether it brings anything of significant value to the table for them...

I agree. Change is not always good.

They didn't throw out the final Vista code and start over with Windows 7 either, so the comparison is fair in this regard. A better question is "Why was the Windows 7 beta less compatible than the Consumer Preview?"

The final Vista code had huge compatibility issues, many of which were resolved in the final version of 7. However, even the beta of 7 was better than the final version of Vista.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Samsung introduces new AI classroom tools and interactive displays at ISTELive 2026 by Fiza Ali Samsung has announced several new education-focused software features and interactive displays for schools during ISTELive 2026, taking place in Orlando, Florida, from 28 June to 1 July. The focus of these updates is on making shared classroom displays easier to use for teachers while giving IT administrators more control over managing devices. One of the key additions is the Samsung Account Management Solution (AMS). In many schools, multiple teachers share the same interactive display throughout the day, which means signing in and setting everything up can become repetitive. With AMS, teachers can log in by scanning a QR code or tapping an NFC-enabled ID card. Once signed in, their personalised workspace, including wallpapers, bookmarks, app shortcuts, and files, can be instantly accessed through Home Personalisation. Samsung has also included a screen lock feature, allowing teachers to lock the display if they need to step away briefly. Furthermore, the company is also updating its Education Portal with new tools designed for school IT administrators. The portal will allow IT administrators to register teachers, enrol devices, and manage user access from a central dashboard. Administrators can also link NFC cards to teacher accounts, making sign-ins quicker across shared displays. Another addition is a Tags feature that lets schools organise displays by building or classroom. Those tags can also be used to send emergency notifications to selected Samsung Interactive Displays through compatible platforms such as InformaCast and Raptor. Moreover, the tech giant's AI Assistant is gaining several new features aimed at supporting everyday classroom tasks such as lesson planning and classroom engagement. One of the features is Circle to Search, which lets teachers circle text or images on the display to quickly find related information, videos, or web results without interrupting the lesson. The content can then be brought into Samsung Whiteboard. Another feature, Live Transcript, converts spoken lessons into real-time captions, which could be useful for students with hearing impairments or those in multilingual classrooms. The AI Assistant also introduces AI Summary and AI Quiz. The summary tool creates summaries of recorded lessons, while AI Quiz generates questions based on lesson content so teachers can quickly check how well students are following along. Teachers signed in through Samsung AMS can also return to their previous AI-generated lesson materials without logging in again. Alongside the software updates, Samsung has expanded its Android-based Interactive Display range with three new models: the WAF-S, WAFX-PS, and WAHX-M. The WAF-S and WAFX-PS ship with Android 16, bringing updates to security, accessibility, and overall usability while maintaining compatibility with Google's education services including Google Classroom and Google Drive through EDLA certification. Meanwhile, the new WAHX-M is the biggest addition to the lineup, introducing a 98-inch display for larger spaces such as lecture halls and conference rooms. It will also be available in 65-inch, 75-inch and 86-inch sizes. Samsung says the WAHX-M further includes on-device AI features such as voice commands, text-to-speech, and an AI calculator, alongside support for Samsung AMS and AI Assistant. Samsung AI Assistant has been available since April, while Samsung AMS and the updated Education Portal will begin rolling out in July.
    • It's been $24 (single) or $89 (4-pack) for many days on both Amazon and Walmart as far as I know. That isn't a big discount. If these end up like the 1st gen, the 4-pack will routinely get down around $80, give or take a dollar. I think they have even hit $69 at times.
    • Microsoft brings Claude to its own Azure infrastructure, powered by Nvidia GB300 Blackwell by Karthik Mudaliar Anthropic's Claude models are now generally available in Microsoft Foundry on Azure and are running on Nvidia's GB300 Blackwell Ultra systems. Nvidia wrote in its announcement that the models are hosted on Microsoft Azure and accelerated by GB300 Blackwell Ultra GPUs, with Quantum-X800 InfiniBand networking used to support larger agentic systems and specialized sub-agents that can operate across business domains. This is great for customers and enterprises that want to build autonomous and domain-specific AI agents using Claude without moving outside Microsoft’s cloud platform. Microsoft currently offers Claude models in Foundry in two forms: “Hosted on Azure,” which runs end-to-end on Azure infrastructure and is generally available, and “Hosted on Anthropic infrastructure,” which remains in preview. This separation is quite important for organizations that have procurement, compliance, data processing, or internal governance requirements tied to Azure. Anthropic currently has 11 Claude models listed in Microsoft Foundry, including Opus 4.8, Sonnet 4.6, and even the unavailable Mythos and Fable models. Billing is handled through Claude Consumption Units (CCUs). Microsoft says CCU is an invoicing unit for Claude models in Foundry, with token usage converted using Anthropic’s published per-model token rates. The usage is billed through Azure Marketplace just like models from other distributors and appears on the customer's Azure invoice, while eligible spend can count against a Microsoft Azure Consumption Commitment. For starters, GB300 NVL72 is a rack-scale, fully liquid-cooled system that combines 72 Blackwell Ultra GPUs and 36 Grace CPUs. Nvidia has listed 37TB of fast memory, 130TB/s of NVLink bandwidth, and FP4 Tensor Core performance of up to 1,440 petaflops with sparsity. The deal is also part of a three-way partnership between Microsoft, Nvidia, and Anthropic. Under the deal, Anthropic has committed to buying $30 billion in Azure compute capacity and contracting additional capacity up to one gigawatt. Nvidia and Microsoft also said they would invest up to $10 billion and $5 billion in Anthropic, respectively.
    • WhatsApp is getting usernames, and you can reserve your preferred one now by Fiza Ali Sharing your phone number isn't always something you want to do, especially with people you've just met. Whether it's someone from a class, a local community group, or a sports team chat, handing over your number can feel like giving away more personal information than necessary. That's exactly the problem WhatsApp is trying to solve with its upcoming usernames feature. The company has announced that users can now reserve a unique WhatsApp username ahead of the feature's wider rollout later this year. Once usernames become available, they'll let people connect without revealing their phone numbers. It's a change that makes a lot of sense for group chats. Right now, everyone in the group can see your phone number. With usernames enabled, that won't necessarily be the case when someone contacts you for the first time. WhatsApp says it's opening username reservations early because more than three billion people use the app, meaning plenty of people are likely to want the same usernames. Reserving one now gives users a better chance of securing the name they actually want before the feature launches more broadly. If your preferred username is already taken, WhatsApp will also offer a built-in username generator to suggest available alternatives. The feature isn't only aimed at individual users. Creators, businesses, and organisations will be able to claim the same username they already use on Instagram or Facebook, making it easier to keep a consistent identity across Meta's apps. Furthermore, privacy is a big part of how WhatsApp is introducing usernames. There won't be a public directory where people can browse or search for usernames. Instead, people will need to know your exact username before they can start a conversation with you. Additionally, users can also choose to enable a username key, which adds another layer of control by requiring people to enter that key before sending a message. Once the feature rolls out, people who choose to use a username will no longer have their phone number shown when messaging a person or business for the first time. If you want to reserve a username, make sure you're running the latest version of WhatsApp, then head to Settings > Account > Username. The tech giant says usernames will roll out gradually over the coming months, and users will receive an in-app notification when the feature becomes available in their country.
    • When I think about a network, there are really two aspects, the hardware and the wiring. So here is what I would do for both. Wiring: Use Cat6A for the patch panel, outlets, and all structured cables (cables installed in walls). Run plenty of Wireless Access Point (WAP) cables, as a general rule, assume a signal can only pass through 2-3 walls and can't pass through a floor (that is conservative, but trust me on this if you want strong WiFi)  Cat6 patch cables are fine for now if you don't plan to run 10gig, those are easy to replace later if needed. Run OS2 single-mode fiber to anywhere you think you may have a server or sub-switch. (yes, single-mode for everything on a small network, don't mess with multimode unless you are at a scale where that minor cost and power savings will matter). If you really want to future proof, also run fiber to any high density WAP locations, it is likely that WiFi 8 and beyond WAPs will push the limits of 10g. Run 6-12 pairs of single-mode fiber between your MDF and the building's MDF, even if you only need 1 or 2 pairs now, those extra pairs will pay off down the road. Hardware: (its easy to say "get all the features incase you need them", so instead of futureproofing, I am going to take approach of suggesting areas worth investing in, and areas you can save money). Don't overspend thinking you need every feature on every port. You don't need 10g on every port, you don't need PoE on every port. Don't overspend on redundancy either, unless you are ready to buy two of everything, don't waste money buying two of some things and not others. Dual power supplies are worthwhile, but probably not HA or multi-path redundancy.  Get 1 "distribution layer" switch that your router/firewall will connect to as well as all your access layer switches below. This should be a fully managed 10g+ switch with a combination of copper and SPF ports, a few 25g uplink ports are nice for this switch. Given that you said it is a small network, I suggest also using that distribution layer switch for servers and WAPs, meaning it will need PoE. Speaking of wireless, get good professional tri-band WAPs, and either turn on the band stirring options, or limit 2.4 to an IoT only SSID. This will provide a solid WiFi capable nearly everything but the highest of bandwidth clients...you could even consider skipping wiring workstations depending on usage. Access layer switch for workstations and printers can be cheaper switches, 2.5g is a good sweet spot between price and future proofing, but even 1g is fine for most individual clients (the kind that could probably be fine on WiFi). You can consider saving a little on access layer switches by only getting 1 PoE switch for whatever needs it (remember your WAPs are connecting to the distribution switch, not here), and non-PoE for your workstations, because desk phones are falling out of favor. You can also save money here by not buying managed switches if you don't need them--but really do some soul searching there, if you go this route, then anything that isn't on your workstation VLAN would either need to be connected to the distribution switch, or its own access layer switch. Also, don't feel like you need a fancy fabric stacking switches for your access layer, that is the point of the higher-end distribution layer, to remove the need for things like that at this level. Home Hardware: I'm realizing the above assumed an office setting, if this if for your house and home lab then the above still applies, but you'll probably want everything managed and PoE, just because, but you probably also don't need multiple access layer switches. If your total port count is below 24, just skip separating distribution layer and access layer and just get one nice switch with the features you want. If you are at the point of considering a 48-port switch, I would instead get a nice high-end distribution switch for things that need it, and cheaper access layer switches with specs based on the needs of connected devices. For home use, don't worry about home running every device to the main switch, there is nothing wrong with running sub-switches for your media areas and office, those essentially become your access layer, just look for sub-switches with a 10g uplink so sharing bandwidth isn't an issue. Just make sure you always connect them to your distribution/main switch, don't daisy chain, the path should never have more steps than Client>Access>Distribution>Firewall>Internet or Client>Access>Distribution>Server if it is local.
  • 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
      536
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      269
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      150
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      98
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!