What consumer operating system(s) will you be running by years end?

[Jose_49]

Windows 8 + Start8/Windows 7 Wrapper.

[Nashy]

Only a few votes in but surprised with the # of people going to have W8 as their primary systems. Even more surprised with the # of people not going to dual boot, especially at Neowin. I thought that was almost standard installation start-up procedures anymore but its early in the voting.

Why would you think that? I don't dual boot for one blaring obvious reason. I can only use one OS at a time.

[+Majesticmerc MVC]

Why would you think that? I don't dual boot for one blaring obvious reason. I can only use one OS at a time.

The same could be said about your legs :p

[PGHammer]

Why would you think that? I don't dual boot for one blaring obvious reason. I can only use one OS at a time.

I dual-boot (with Server 2012) for two reasons - in addition to evaluating Hyper-V (my current hardware is too old to evaluate Hyper-V on Windows 8 itself; however, Server 2012 has lower Hyper-V requirements) and to evaluate Server 2012 as a WHS 2011 alternative (remember, WHS 2011 is gone). The hardware costs for Server 2012 are identical to those of Windows 8 (while I can go with a non-discrete GPU, I'll still need more HDDs - also, while RAM is relatively cheap, why NOT load up a dual-role Hyper-V/storage server with 32GB?). This isn't my default configuration - and I plan on going back to running 8 Pro x64 standalone post upgrade/server build.

[Praetor]

choose windows 9x, because if it's got a 9x then it's superior to 8, right? :laugh:

also i won't dual boot; that's for geeks, geez...

Why would you think that? I don't dual boot for one blaring obvious reason. I can only use one OS at a time.

what? ever heard of VM? you know, running a OS inside a OS inside a OS...inception style.

[Nashy]

I dual-boot (with Server 2012) for two reasons - in addition to evaluating Hyper-V (my current hardware is too old to evaluate Hyper-V on Windows 8 itself; however, Server 2012 has lower Hyper-V requirements) and to evaluate Server 2012 as a WHS 2011 alternative (remember, WHS 2011 is gone). The hardware costs for Server 2012 are identical to those of Windows 8 (while I can go with a non-discrete GPU, I'll still need more HDDs - also, while RAM is relatively cheap, why NOT load up a dual-role Hyper-V/storage server with 32GB?). This isn't my default configuration - and I plan on going back to running 8 Pro x64 standalone post upgrade/server build.

Here's what I read. "Server".

Thread title states consumer.

[Dane]

Could someone buy the Windows 8 upgrade, and then dual boot it with their windows 7? For the upgrade you put in your current key so it can tell if its legit and qualifies. Would that turn your windows 7 key off, since you upgraded to 8?

[.Neo]

Mac OS X Mountain Lion v10.8.x? :shifty: :p

Fixed that for you. :p

[Astra.Xtreme]

I'll probably be using 7, but maybe I'll go back to the "fixed" (start8) version of Win 8.

[PGHammer]

Here's what I read. "Server".

Thread title states consumer.

I'm evaluating Windows Server 2012 as a home server with two roles - storage and a virtualization server (Hyper-V); meanwhile I'm also evaluating Hyper-V itself as an alternative to Oracle VirtualBox and VMware.

The very reason I'm evaluating Windows Server 2012 at all is because Windows Home Server is going away - and Server 2012 is the specifically-named successor.

Why not Linux (software costs = none)? Because Linux, while costing nothing in terms of money, is a real pain in the rear in terms of hardware support, and is much worse in the virtualization-server role out of the box compared to even Windows Server 2008, let alone WS 2012. The combination of Server Manager and Hyper-V Manager - neither of which is hard to use - means that even newbies to *Windows* server administration such as I can set up and *manage* a Hyper-V server quickly, easily, and painlessly. The only other role the server will have will be storage (which will be secondary), and will therefore cost only in terms of HDDs.

Besides, other than the cost of the hardware and the OS cost, there *are* no real server-side costs (Hyper-V is standard with Server 2012, and includes more client licenses than I need).

Lastly, as I said, the dual-boot configuration is *temporary* - when the server itself gets built, the dual-boot goes away.

[+unabatedshagie Subscriber¹]

If I could get it to install on my desktop I'd be running it on there but I can't so I'm back to using Windows 7.

[AJerman]

Windows 7 if I do use Windows, though for the first time in a long time, I'm not using a single Windows machine. Not at work (Ubuntu 11.10), not at home (OS X on MacBook, Ubuntu 12.04 on Desktop/Server).

[MikroMan]

Not sure yet... I might just stay on W7 for some more time. I'll see how W8 testing goes.

[subcld]

windows 8 no dualboot

[Rohdekill]

Windows 7 until a Win8 SP1 arrives.

[Ambroos]

Windows 7, since I absolutely dislike the disruptive flow of Windows 8 Modern to desktop back to Modern back to desktop... And not all my drivers work properly on 8.

[Nothing Here]

Windows 9. I'm time traveling into the future and getting a copy and a coming back. So by the end of the year, I will be running Win9!!!

[daniel_rh]

Windows 8 on my laptop and expecting to buy a tablet, Windows Phone 7.8 on my current phone or WP8 if I buy a new one, and Windows 7 on my old computers and work along with Windows Server 2008

[+jamwheat Subscriber²]

Win8 pro as main, and various others in VM/Hyper V (BeOS open source, Kubuntu, Win7, Vista, XP...I like to play!)

[Bad Boy Nibbler]

Windows 7 until a Win8 SP1 arrives.

This. [Even Know am a sucker for the lastest and greatest. Let them sort out any quirks.]