Windows 8 RTM Build 8500

[George P Global Moderator]

I've been using Windows 8 for a couple of weeks now and I've pretty much adjusted to it. For me, It's a step backwards due to the removal/changes to Previous Versions and Disk Imaging. Previous Versions is now called FIle History and now requires a separate drive and is no longer accessible via right-click. They appear to have removed the ability to image you drive and dumbed it down to a more feature complete version of System Restore. I'm all adding features, but both of these changes were for the worse and diminish the value of the package. Although I'm adjusted, Metro is still crap in my book.

If they plan on speeding up the release schedule for Windows to the point of seeing new versions every year, then they better also think about reducing the price significantly. As it stands, Windows 8 is worth less too me than 7 for messing with the two above features alone, nevermind forcing me to use Metro. That being said, I have to update to stay familiar because its part of my job.

Well, lets be fair here, what good is a feature like File History if it just stores copies of files on the same drive? Sure at first it sounds fine but if the drive itself goes poof what good is it? Also if you don't want to use an external you can use a network share as well, which might make more sense. One thing I just read, when looking into this, it does keep a small cache on your main drive though, for when the external or network share isn't online. It seems the default cache is 5% but you can change it.

I'll give you the right click bit, that's a shame but it seems that once you're in the folder of the files you want to get back you can just hit the History icon on the ribbon instead of digging through the file history interface window from the top.

[Grinch]

Canouna is a joke, he changes his story with every leak on info, didn't he first state that 8500 was the RTM ?

Not just that but I have seen so many times he backtracks things he was so sure about just days before

He did not contradict the fact that 8500 was RTM, do you think Microsoft just stops developing Windows when it RTM's, gives everyone a high-five and send them home for a few months? No. They continue to work.

Whether or not 8500 IS RTM or not we will not know for a bit. :p

[Detection]

He did not contradict the fact that 8500 was RTM, do you think Microsoft just stops developing Windows when it RTM's, gives everyone a high-five and send them home for a few months? No. They continue to work.

Whether or not 8500 IS RTM or not we will not know for a bit. :p

I know that lol

I don't want to get into a discussion about Mr C, it never ends well when I do :p

[Anthonyd]

Canouna is a joke, he changes his story with every leak on info, didn't he first state that 8500 was the RTM ?

Not just that but I have seen so many times he backtracks things he was so sure about just days before

People still believe/follow Canouna ? He is so full of crap :/

[xendrome]

Pretty sure I saw somewhere the RTM build was going to be rounded up to 8600 once signed off on totally...

[Detection]

People still believe/follow Canouna ? He is so full of crap :/

Yea this is my opinion too ^^

Seems the vast majority are suckers to him unfortunately though

[Detection]

Pretty sure I saw somewhere the RTM build was going to be rounded up to 8600 once signed off on totally...

I was surprised when I heard 8500 was to be the RTM

[xendrome]

https://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-rtm-build-to-be-8600-new-images-surface

[JustGeorge]

Well, lets be fair here, what good is a feature like File History if it just stores copies of files on the same drive? Sure at first it sounds fine but if the drive itself goes poof what good is it? Also if you don't want to use an external you can use a network share as well, which might make more sense. One thing I just read, when looking into this, it does keep a small cache on your main drive though, for when the external or network share isn't online. It seems the default cache is 5% but you can change it.

I'll give you the right click bit, that's a shame but it seems that once you're in the folder of the files you want to get back you can just hit the History icon on the ribbon instead of digging through the file history interface window from the top.

I would never condone relying on backups stored on the same drive. For me, Previous Versions was a nice safety net that could be accessed quickly in the event that I or someone else did something stupid. It was much quicker to right-click -> browse -> restore than firing up the external USB drive and coping back over. They should've expanded the feature with what they've done in Windows 8 along with giving the user the choice of how it behaved. File History is only going to be noticed by the power user, like you and I, just like Previous Versions. If Microsoft removed the feature because it wasn't being utilized, then the same problem exists here and they should advertise the feature to make people aware. Most people I've helped didn't even know the feature existed in 7.

[syobon999]

when can we (probably) see the images on msdnn ?

[Dot Matrix]

Except Windows isn't facing OS X alone. Within the tablet space it's also directly competing with iOS which does see annual free updates and is currently market leader. Holding on to a three-year cycle could mean Microsoft is unable to respond quickly enough to new developments. Something we've seen happening the last few years.

Rapid update those those OSs mean nothing. Look at Android fragmentation, for example. Next to no one is on ICS. A 3 year development cycle is a good timeframe to keep. Especially for the business world.

[scumdogmillionaire]

when can we (probably) see the images on msdnn ?

Probably about 2 weeks after RTM announcement. That's how it's been in the past.

Of course, they might try to get Windows 8 on MSDN quicker than usual so developers can get the biggest head start possible to get apps up and running for retail release.

[contextfree]

I would never condone relying on backups stored on the same drive. For me, Previous Versions was a nice safety net that could be accessed quickly in the event that I or someone else did something stupid. It was much quicker to right-click -> browse -> restore than firing up the external USB drive and coping back over. They should've expanded the feature with what they've done in Windows 8 along with giving the user the choice of how it behaved. File History is only going to be noticed by the power user, like you and I, just like Previous Versions. If Microsoft removed the feature because it wasn't being utilized, then the same problem exists here and they should advertise the feature to make people aware. Most people I've helped didn't even know the feature existed in 7.

Yep. Previous Versions saved my from disaster on a couple of occasions.

[Anthonyd]

Yep. Previous Versions saved my from disaster on a couple of occasions.

Now you need 2 hdd to have it :/

[xendrome]

Now you need 2 hdd to have it :/

Huh?

[George P Global Moderator]

Now you need 2 hdd to have it :/

To get started with it you do, but as I pointed out there's still the "offline cache" option which stores a part of the files on your C drive. The default setting for this is 5% of your total C, you can set it higher and it'll store more on C for when you can't access that external hdd or that network share you had set.

[Anthonyd]

How do you access to that cache in Windows 8?

[George P Global Moderator]

How do you access to that cache in Windows 8?

It's just there, I dunno where Windows 8 actually stores the cache files but setup File History, say to an external, then at some point don't attach the external and try to use file history anyways. The OS should fallback to the offline cache and still work. Check the advanced settings for File History, there you can set how much of your C drive the offline mode will use, default is 5%. Technically since it uses your system drive if that 5% default space is bigger than the external space being used then everything should show up in both places I'd wager.

[FaiKee]

http://mobilitydigest.com/microsoft-confirms-silverlight-6-in-a-windows-8-binary/

[FaiKee]

From WZOR:

[Zook]

Can't wait to see where everything is headed with Windows 8 to be honest.

[giannisgx89]

[bogas04]

Looks like a bad windows 7 theme for linux :p

PS : The build is 8432 , built on 12 june , apparently.

[anidais]

Looks like a bad windows 7 theme for linux :p

PS : The build is 8432 , built on 12 june , apparently.

Doesn't look that bad. I like it. Simple and clean. I see there are some aero parts that need to be updated. And the icons... at this point I am doubting MS will even update those. So much for Windows reimagined, except the glossy Vista-era icons...

[BajiRav]

"Your name is Word, Why are you a window/door?" :p

ref: http://windowsteambl...ndows-logo.aspx

Looks like a bad windows 7 theme for linux :p

PS : The build is 8432 , built on 12 june , apparently.

won't that be June 11th actually? (120611) unless it's an year old screenshot!

by the sounds of things im in the minority but i dont mind the new office icons

I like them too :)