windows 8 Do you like or hate Windows 8?

[+InsaneNutter MVC]

So true, just let the market decide in the end, though if it's a "flop" or not seems to be up in the air, for all the negative press and "flop" tags Vista got it did hit ~20% or so of the PC market until Windows 7 came, I wouldn't really call that a flop but oh well.

Anything Microsoft release will sell regardless of bad press as it comes pre installed on the majority of new PC's sold, nothing was really wrong with Vista anyway. OEM's just put it on PC's with 512mb of ram, full of bloat and expected it to run quicker than an older XP machine.

[TechAddict]

Congratulations. You've established that you can go and sit with the people who think Metro is great rather than the Metro haters.

Let's not create a thread for every person that has an opinion on Windows 8. Every time it just dissolves in to both parties bickering with one another. At the end of the day there will be people that like it and people that don't, you won't be able to change their mind.

Well..i was expecting at least some of the members to ask me why i think metro is good for pc. Wasn't trying to start a debate.

aww well..i was wrong.

[George P Global Moderator]

Anything Microsoft release will sell regardless of bad press as it comes pre installed on the majority of new PC's sold, nothing was really wrong with Vista anyway. OEM's just put it on PC's with 512mb of ram, full of bloat and expected it to run quicker than an older XP machine.

Sure, but I think Win8s impact will be on newer mobile devices like tablets and hybrids like the surface, devices that aren't seen in the same light as traditional PCs or Laptops.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Well..i was expecting at least some of the members to ask me why i think metro is good for pc. Wasn't trying to start a debate.

Well normally when someone writes a post they include as much information as possible, they don't wait to be asked.

However, what with my dislike of Metro, especially on the PC, I'll bite. Why do you think Metro is good for the PC?

EDIT: Maybe the mods should merge this thread with one of the numerous other ones on the same subject?

[RossDundas Veteran]

Windows 8 is a car crash of an operating system in the current hardware ecosystem and i can only really see it taking off with new form factors such as MS surface and others which we may not be aware of at this stage.

Certainly at work I just cant see businesses using it outside of tablets and meeting rooms. Most of the clients i'm working with at the moment are just rolling out Windows 7 from XP never mind Windows 8!

[siah1214]

So true, just let the market decide in the end, though if it's a "flop" or not seems to be up in the air, for all the negative press and "flop" tags Vista got it did hit ~20% or so of the PC market until Windows 7 came, I wouldn't really call that a flop but oh well.

It's funny because Microsoft's "biggest disaster", still has more marketshare than Mac OS X. And somehow it's a "failure". If that's the case, I bet Apple wishes they failed more :)

[Colin McGregor]

Well..i was expecting at least some of the members to ask me why i think metro is good for pc. Wasn't trying to start a debate.

aww well..i was wrong.

Metro is good for sure but you should try on a real tech site for responses though, this one still has quite a few new users that use the start menu even in vista or win7 so they can't use metro.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

this one still has quite a few new users that use the start menu even in vista or win7 so they can't use metro.

No, we're technically the old users who are used to the way things were/are done, and dislike the idea of changing our workflow to something that will make us less productive (I'm referring to Metro's screen hogging, not the search ability which I agree has improved over the years).

[Noir Angel]

If Windows 8 works for you, that's good :)

[Matthew_Thepc]

Because:

1) It's free of DRM, artificial restriccions and malfeatures (there's no way to know what the ex-convict and the mirrorhead nutjob that runs Microsoft have maliciously embedded in the guts of Windoze).

2) It's open source (again I don't know if the MS CEO's have planted bombs within the guts of Windoze, with Linux OTOH I can study and audit the guts of the OS AND APPS that run on it, which means that if there were any malfeatures I (or any of the thousands of coders working with Linux) would have spoted it and screamed bloody murder).

3) It's very customizable OOTB.

4) It's very consistent (GTK3. GTK2 and QT4 apps (which are the bulk of the stuff you'll find in Linux) look similar, use the visual style you set, put their menus were the DE defines, share the clipboard, allow drag & drop between them, use the same keybindings, their menu layouts are consistent among all of them, they all take advantage of all the features present in the OS nativelly, etc). Compare that with the hodgepodge of ways windoze apps look like (they never use the native controls) and the fact that each app implement it's unique keybindings, menu layouts, etc. It's an ugly mess.

5) Software installation management. Want a bunch of programs. Go to the software Center, search the ones you want, select them all and then click the apply button. Want to uninstall something. Search it in the Software Center, select for uninstallation, click apply (Heck, you can schedule several install and uninstall operations and carry them out in one go). No registry mess, no leftovers from uninstalled software, no crapware, no unwanted add-ons. No need to hunt down shoddy websites and cracks.

6) Supports a wide variety of robust filesystems and partition tables (My laptop uses a classic Phoenix non-UEFI BIOS and I have OSX86, one Linux distro and FreeBSD all running off a gpt partitioned HDD, Windoze can't boot off gpt in a non-UEFI BIOS, but OSX86, Linux and BSD can).

And I can count quite a lot more reasons why I prefer Linux (and OSX86 and BSD) over Windoze.

Now, out of curiosity. Why you, after having used Linux you chose Windoze and it's bugs and viruses?

I've just felt that (as a consumer OS) it's a lot better as an overall OS. I've never had an install of Linux that worked on the first try...but I've never had an install on Windows that didn't work on the first try (excluding where hardware doesn't support it/etc.). When I want to install an app I don't have to think about whether I should get it from the package manager/software center or download it off of the company's website. If I want to open Netflix, I don't have to run Windows in a VM :) I personally like installing/uninstalling software than dealing with packages and stuff. I've never had to deal with a bad registry (though I do acknowledge that other people have had to, I'm just saying that I've never had to, and I install/uninstall programs daily or weekly), and with Metro apps in Windows 8 it's now as easy (if not easier) to install apps than with the package manager/software center - open up the Store, press Install. When you want to uninstall, right click the app and press "uninstall."

1) It's free of DRM, artificial restriccions and malfeatures (there's no way to know what the ex-convict and the mirrorhead nutjob that runs Microsoft have maliciously embedded in the guts of Windoze).

as for DRM, I totally agree with you (except for the fact that it blocks Netflix because it doesn't have DRM :p). As for what the "ex-convict/mirrorhead nutjob that runs Microsoft" - it's not like nobody ever sees the Windows source code, Microsoft provides (through the SSI http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sharedsource/default.aspx) their product's source code to eligible companies, OEMs, Microsoft MVPs, and governments for multiple reasons (including making sure that no "ex-convict/mirrorhead nutjob that runs Microsoft [has] maliciously embedded [something] in the guts of Windoze")

2) It's open source (again I don't know if the MS CEO's have planted bombs within the guts of Windoze, with Linux OTOH I can study and audit the guts of the OS AND APPS that run on it, which means that if there were any malfeatures I (or any of the thousands of coders working with Linux) would have spoted it and screamed bloody murder).

fair enough, seeing as though you yourself have looked through all the source code (or at least parts of it). But then we get to the question - if nutjobs in Microsoft are able to hide malicious code from governments, OEMs, MVPs, etc, how would we know if they hid some malicious code in the guts of Linux? http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2166123/microsoft-contributed-code-canonical-linux-2632 <conspiracy theorist>I mean, why would Microsoft contribute to Linux if they weren't involved in a huge conspiracy with other Apple and BSD to destroy Linux?!?! </conspiracy theorist>. the point is, if microsoft is able to hide code in Windows so that people can't find it when they look over it, who's to say that they haven't hidden something in linux that people can't find when they look over it?

3) It's very customizable OOTB.

true that, complete true :p

4) It's very consistent (GTK3. GTK2 and QT4 apps (which are the bulk of the stuff you'll find in Linux) look similar, use the visual style you set, put their menus were the DE defines, share the clipboard, allow drag & drop between them, use the same keybindings, their menu layouts are consistent among all of them, they all take advantage of all the features present in the OS nativelly, etc). Compare that with the hodgepodge of ways windoze apps look like (they never use the native controls) and the fact that each app implement it's unique keybindings, menu layouts, etc. It's an ugly mess.

true, until you consider Metro apps (which exhibit all of the qualities you listed).

5) Software installation management. Want a bunch of programs. Go to the software Center, search the ones you want, select them all and then click the apply button. Want to uninstall something. Search it in the Software Center, select for uninstallation, click apply (Heck, you can schedule several install and uninstall operations and carry them out in one go). No registry mess, no leftovers from uninstalled software, no crapware, no unwanted add-ons. No need to hunt down shoddy websites and cracks.

I do <3 the "install as many programs as you want at a time" mentality, but I still prefer regular installations with an install wizard that can walk users through the steps of installing the program, and give them options along the way. I also like how in Windows everything is installed in the same place - C:\Program Files or C:\Program Files (x86), and settings are either baked into the app (in the case of .NET apps), done through the registry (in the case of most older or win32 based apps), or stored in the user's roaming settings (in the case of Metro apps) which provides a fair amount of consistency if something goes wrong and I want to find the app itself.

6) Supports a wide variety of robust filesystems and partition tables (My laptop uses a classic Phoenix non-UEFI BIOS and I have OSX86, one Linux distro and FreeBSD all running off a gpt partitioned HDD, Windoze can't boot off gpt in a non-UEFI BIOS, but OSX86, Linux and BSD can).

true, but I've never really had to use a non-windows-supported filesystem/partition table o.o

And I can count quite a lot more reasons why I prefer Linux (and OSX86 and BSD) over Windoze.

I'm sure you can, but what I meant to ask was, is there anything big feature-wise (not just like the experience or how it's developed, but in the capabilities of apps that run on the platform, or something superior that would make it a better OS for a consumer) that's better? now, don't get me wrong, I love Linux (in fact, I'm posting this from openSUSE 12.1 with the Holo theme installed), but I sincerely fail to see really why most people would need to use Linux over Windows for daily tasks (especially when Windows doesn't require you to edit a config file just to get networking to work right :p)

[Detection]

I wonder what the opinions would be if windows had always had Metro, and now Windows 8 was about to be the first without Metro and with the Start Menu

[Dot Matrix]

I voted "Doesn't bother" because I don't use Windoze. I use OSX86, Linux or BSD these days.

What's "Windoze"? Is that like some cheap Chinese knockoff or something?

[Dot Matrix]

Because:

1) It's free of DRM, artificial restriccions and malfeatures (there's no way to know what the ex-convict and the mirrorhead nutjob that runs Microsoft have maliciously embedded in the guts of Windoze).

2) It's open source (again I don't know if the MS CEO's have planted bombs within the guts of Windoze, with Linux OTOH I can study and audit the guts of the OS AND APPS that run on it, which means that if there were any malfeatures I (or any of the thousands of coders working with Linux) would have spoted it and screamed bloody murder).

3) It's very customizable OOTB.

4) It's very consistent (GTK3. GTK2 and QT4 apps (which are the bulk of the stuff you'll find in Linux) look similar, use the visual style you set, put their menus were the DE defines, share the clipboard, allow drag & drop between them, use the same keybindings, their menu layouts are consistent among all of them, they all take advantage of all the features present in the OS nativelly, etc). Compare that with the hodgepodge of ways windoze apps look like (they never use the native controls) and the fact that each app implement it's unique keybindings, menu layouts, etc. It's an ugly mess.

5) Software installation management. Want a bunch of programs. Go to the software Center, search the ones you want, select them all and then click the apply button. Want to uninstall something. Search it in the Software Center, select for uninstallation, click apply (Heck, you can schedule several install and uninstall operations and carry them out in one go). No registry mess, no leftovers from uninstalled software, no crapware, no unwanted add-ons. No need to hunt down shoddy websites and cracks.

6) Supports a wide variety of robust filesystems and partition tables (My laptop uses a classic Phoenix non-UEFI BIOS and I have OSX86, one Linux distro and FreeBSD all running off a gpt partitioned HDD, Windoze can't boot off gpt in a non-UEFI BIOS, but OSX86, Linux and BSD can).

And I can count quite a lot more reasons why I prefer Linux (and OSX86 and BSD) over Windoze.

Now, out of curiosity. Why you, after having used Linux you chose Windoze and it's bugs and viruses?

Going by this post alone, why should we take you seriously, when you reply? You have so much mis information here, it's not even funny. It's almost as if you haven't used Windows since the 90's.

[Kelxin]

What's "Windoze"? Is that like some cheap Chinese knockoff or something?

You must be a younger PC user Dotty. That's the old unix / linux admin users "mocking" name for Windows.

I must admin though, Windows 8 has started growing on me, and I'm not even using it. I heard they added a "feature" that it kills your network card driver for no reason. Totally awesome. :laugh:

[+Eternal Tempest MVC]

I dislike the metro interface on the desktop (like it on Tablet / Phone), will try it out.

The "flipping" between Metro / Desktop is annoying to me / makes it seem dis jolted.

I do like the core improvements to the OS, copy dialogue wizards, faster boot up, less system requirements.

If I didn't have an extensive pc game collection, some non-game, that prevent me going from linux.

[Matthew_Thepc]

I heard they added a "feature" that it kills your network card driver for no reason. Totally awesome. :laugh:

(unless it's some kind of joke that I'm not getting), where did you hear that it kills your network card driver? I've not had any problems with mine so far...

[Kelxin]

There's another thread that Dot just lost full network / internet access and can't figure out how to get it working again.

https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1089367-windows-8-network-adapter-troubles/page__p__594983937#entry594983937

[Dot Matrix]

(unless it's some kind of joke that I'm not getting), where did you hear that it kills your network card driver? I've not had any problems with mine so far...

I had a drive error which killed my Windows 8 installation.

[Matthew_Thepc]

There's another thread that Dot just lost full network / internet access and can't figure out how to get it working again.

http://www.neowin.ne...#entry594983937

oh, i get it now :D

[PGHammer]

Windows 8 is a car crash of an operating system in the current hardware ecosystem and i can only really see it taking off with new form factors such as MS surface and others which we may not be aware of at this stage.

Certainly at work I just cant see businesses using it outside of tablets and meeting rooms. Most of the clients i'm working with at the moment are just rolling out Windows 7 from XP never mind Windows 8!

I've stated quite plainly that 8 is not geared toward general business usage (for the simple reason that a new UI - that Windows 8 has - will call for employee retraining). Training dollars are scarce - and for that reason, large businesses will largely pass.

One thing that threads like this are proving that IT in general remains heavily change-averse - the addition of WinRT (and subtraction of the Start menu) has caused about the same reaction as a Barack Obama sighting at the NRA Annual Convention (or an Ann Romney sighting at the annual convention at the National Organization for Women). The reaction is very volatile and visceral - and has absolutely nothing to do with logic.

[Kelxin]

and has absolutely nothing to do with logic.

LOL. I still have some of my 70+ year old business owners asking me where the "start button" is. I'm not even going to attempt to explain the invisible charms menu hot spot. There's plenty of logic that defeats what Microsoft is doing with Windows 8, and comparing it to politics doesn't make it any more or less logical (considering politics themselves are completely illogical).

[Matthew_Thepc]

I've stated quite plainly that 8 is not geared toward general business usage (for the simple reason that a new UI - that Windows 8 has - will call for employee retraining). Training dollars are scarce - and for that reason, large businesses will largely pass.

One thing that threads like this are proving that IT in general remains heavily change-averse - the addition of WinRT (and subtraction of the Start menu) has caused about the same reaction as a Barack Obama sighting at the NRA Annual Convention (or an Ann Romney sighting at the annual convention at the National Organization for Women). The reaction is very volatile and visceral - and has absolutely nothing to do with logic.

here, here! this is the major reason I could see Windows 8 failing in the business environment (and the major reason I could see Windows 9 winning in the business environment - after everyone's comfortable with the Start Menu, companies won't need to retrain their employees on it)

[KRazpopov]

I neither like it nor hate it. I like the look of the whole Metro UI, but the start screen is just bugging me, probably because I've gotten used to the start menu. I'll probably get used to the start screen as well if I use Windows 8 for a longer period of time.

The improvements in boot time, copy/paste dialogs and such are to my liking, but the new Explorer isn't, mainly its' ribbon, but I can just hide that, so no biggy.

What's kind of unfortunate though is that the built in metro apps don't feature a mouse-friendly UX. I really like the functionality of some of them and the way they integrate into Microsoft's services, not to mention their UI, but I just wish that they were able to tell if I was using a tablet or a regular desktop, and scale down some elements of the interface if I were on a desktop.

Note that the latest version of Windows 8 I've used is the Consumer Preview, so I don't know if they've done any changes between then and now.

[Defcon]

After using Win 8 CP and RP for months, I've come to the conclusion that its a much faster OS with lots of nice touches that were overdue, yet it still suffers from typical shortcomings -

- not updating all the legacy apps, icons to match the new style. Simply no excuse

- Metro is best left unused, its a big productivity drain when I'm forced to use it. The Metro search in particular is a pain to us

It's clear Microsoft are going to ignore the Metro on desktop issue and not even bother with a blog post which addresses the common complaints. I don't see a big future for serious Metro apps, there is simply too much wasted screen space.

In the end, this is an OS I'd be very hesitant to recommend to non-techies, its completely unintuitive, hard to use and frustrating in its present form. It's an easy upgrade for those who know their way around since it is much faster.

[Dashel]

I still disagree with that in general Defcon. Its the iPod weaned n00bs that are the focus of Metro touchiness, us old hats are supposed to adapt or die remember. ;) On that point I think it has succeeded and as VDI adoption increased, will lead to an easier end user experience.

Day 32: ...another day avoiding Metro, its like playing shock the monkey! I never know when it will pop up!