Jump to content

Photo

Windows 8: My thoughts so far


  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

#16 Ventus

Ventus

    Legend

  • Members

Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:50 PM

QUOTE(Hergiswi @ Nov 2 2012, 05:33 PM) View Post

So wait, I don't get it. What exactly has improved between Windows 7 and 8?

Plenty of things has improved, Mainly the Ram management is better then 7's was. Which means it use's less resource's to run.
The Windows explorer has received some updates that makes everything move a lot faster.
And faster boot times. My computer takes only 10 seconds to boot up. Mainly the desktop is not loaded into the memory. Instead the Windows 8 Start screen is loaded at first. which means faster boot times thus for mean you get to use your computer faster.

#17 Vinyl Scratch

Vinyl Scratch

  • Members

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:00 PM

QUOTE(MoscowModder @ Nov 2 2012, 06:16 PM) View Post


1. Faster Startup.
Okay. I can see why this would be a good thing. Faster start up, faster getting to work. Solid reason.

2. Whole New World of Apps ™
I...guess this could be useful. But I'm really doubtful any of the apps will stray too far from Temple Run and Angry birds.

3. SkyDrive Integration
Dropbox. Ubuntu One.

4. Better Security
Okay so you've made it harder for a cheap bastard running pirated Windows 7 Ultimate like me to pirate Windows 8 Pro.

Also I REALLY DOUBT INTERNET EXPLORER TEN IS AS GOOD AS THEY SAY IT IS.

5. Touch Screen
Yes!!! I've always wanted to access the None-Existent touch screen of my laptop!
---------------------------
Note: I'm just confused as to how these are helpful at all.
---------------------------

Honestly, 2 seems not great, 3 seems like you can do it with other things, 4 seems to be a little too generous, and 5 is completely useless. Unless this is a "Why You Should Get a Surface" article instead of a "Why You Should Upgrade" article like it's advertised as.

QUOTE

The Windows explorer has received some updates that makes everything move a lot faster.

How? By adding a completely pointless ribbon?

----------------------------
Now, don't get me wrong. I'd like to get Windows 8. I really would. I'm just concerned it will break my Linux installation.

Edited by Vinyl Scratch, 02 November 2012 - 07:05 PM.


#18 Russ

Russ

    Caelan, the Encouraging

  • Administrators
  • Location:Washington

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:03 PM

QUOTE(Ventus @ Nov 2 2012, 04:50 PM) View Post

Mainly the desktop is not loaded into the memory. Instead the Windows 8 Start screen is loaded at first. which means faster boot times thus for mean you get to use your computer faster.

Unless you want to use the desktop...

Here's the thing. Even assuming you like Metro (personally, having seen it in action, I hate it), it's a very schizophrenic OS. The Desktop and Metro are completely segregated. If you open a Metro app, then pop into the desktop for something, you might as well have switched computers. The Metro app won't show up in the desktop, so you gotta switch out of desktop and back to Metro to use it. But now all your desktop apps aren't available; you have to switch back to Desktop. It's a pain. And multitasking with Metro apps is a pain, much more difficult then with the desktop programs. It's just... it's bad design, plain and simple.

And let's not forget, as it's been brought up before, Microsoft appears to be trying to get rid of "Legacy" applications and moving towards a closed platform (something Windows RT, the tablet version of Windows 8, has already done). I shouldn't even need to explain why this is a bad thing.

#19 Ventus

Ventus

    Legend

  • Members

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:16 PM

QUOTE(Vinyl Scratch @ Nov 2 2012, 07:00 PM) View Post

How? By adding a completely pointless ribbon?

No, They fixed the File copy transfer speed, It hard to say what they fixed. But I know it does run faster then's 7 explorer.

QUOTE(Russ @ Nov 2 2012, 07:03 PM) View Post

Here's the thing. Even assuming you like Metro (personally, having seen it in action, I hate it), it's a very schizophrenic OS. The Desktop and Metro are completely segregated. If you open a Metro app, then pop into the desktop for something, you might as well have switched computers. The Metro app won't show up in the desktop, so you gotta switch out of desktop and back to Metro to use it. But now all your desktop apps aren't available; you have to switch back to Desktop. It's a pain. And multitasking with Metro apps is a pain, much more difficult then with the desktop programs. It's just... it's bad design, plain and simple.

Well sometimes I can see how some might say that. Now I've haven't had a problem multitasking with 8 and the Start screen (Formally Metro).
I've already mastered using 8. I can do all the same stuff I did on the other windows systems like there was nothing different. It just takes some time to get used to it.
I just don't think its bad design anymore though, It seems like some good design to me. after using it for awhile I don't think I can go back to any of the old systems...

QUOTE(Russ @ Nov 2 2012, 07:03 PM) View Post

And let's not forget, as it's been brought up before, Microsoft appears to be trying to get rid of "Legacy" applications and moving towards a closed platform (something Windows RT, the tablet version of Windows 8, has already done). I shouldn't even need to explain why this is a bad thing.

I think they are trying to make legacy applications not run on their tablets only. I mean why would they ditch Legacy apps for desktop's that would be complete and udder stupidity.
If they did do it in the future. I'm sure it couldn't be too bad?

#20 Vinyl Scratch

Vinyl Scratch

  • Members

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:20 PM

QUOTE(Russ @ Nov 2 2012, 07:03 PM) View Post

And let's not forget, as it's been brought up before, Microsoft appears to be trying to get rid of "Legacy" applications and moving towards a closed platform (something Windows RT, the tablet version of Windows 8, has already done). I shouldn't even need to explain why this is a bad thing.

YOU'RE ALL LATE TO THE LINUX PARTY!

QUOTE
If they did do it in the future. I'm sure it couldn't be too bad?


Yes, it would be that bad. Do some googling on what legacy applications are. And yes, they are trying to move completely away from legacy applications.

#21 Russ

Russ

    Caelan, the Encouraging

  • Administrators
  • Location:Washington

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:22 PM

QUOTE(Ventus @ Nov 2 2012, 05:16 PM) View Post

I think they are trying to make legacy applications not run on their tablets only. I mean why would they ditch Legacy apps for desktop's that would be complete and udder stupidity.

Why would they ditch Legacy apps for the tablets? That seems equally stupid to me. But it looks like they are, and I'm not the only one who thinks so. Just looks up Markus Persson's (Minecraft's creator) or Gabe Newall's (head of Valve) views on the OS.

QUOTE
If they did do it in the future. I'm sure it couldn't be too bad?

You're on the fansite for ZC, a program which would literally become impossible to use if this were to happen, and you're saying it couldn't be too bad? Face it Ventus: you're not thinking this all the way through. You like Windows 8, fine. But saying that ditching Legacy apps couldn't be too bad? You're not thinking this through. I can't speak for you, but nearly every single program I use on a day-to-day basis is a Legacy app. Getting rid of them would make Windows practically worthless for me.

Edit:
QUOTE
YOU'RE ALL LATE TO THE LINUX PARTY!

I'm sticking with Windows 7 for as long as I can, but I'm slowly inching my ways towards that party. icon_razz.gif

#22 Ventus

Ventus

    Legend

  • Members

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:32 PM

QUOTE(Russ @ Nov 2 2012, 07:22 PM) View Post

You're on the fansite for ZC, a program which would literally become impossible to use if this were to happen, and you're saying it couldn't be too bad? Face it Ventus: you're not thinking this all the way through. You like Windows 8, fine. But saying that ditching Legacy apps couldn't be too bad? You're not thinking this through. I can't speak for you, but nearly every single program I use on a day-to-day basis is a Legacy app. Getting rid of them would make Windows practically worthless for me.

I'm thinking this through just fine. I just think that they won't drop legacy apps. The most I see Microsoft doing is stop making 32 bit operating systems. since 32 bit is quite a old CPU type.
So I believe 100% that windows will not drop Legacy apps. "If" they ever did. I'm sure we would adapt to it. (Which I don't think they will).


And I will say I'm never moving to a Linux OS. it is not meant to be used as a end user OS. its made for hobbyist.

#23 Vinyl Scratch

Vinyl Scratch

  • Members

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:38 PM

QUOTE(Ventus @ Nov 2 2012, 07:32 PM) View Post

I'm thinking this through just fine. I just think that they won't drop legacy apps. The most I see Microsoft doing is stop making 32 bit operating systems. since 32 bit is quite a old CPU type.
So I believe 100% that windows will not drop Legacy apps. "If" they ever did. I'm sure we would adapt to it. (Which I don't think they will).
And I will say I'm never moving to a Linux OS. it is not meant to be used as a end user OS. its made for hobbyist.

That's what they want to do and we won't adapt to it. And how exactly is Linux -made- for a hobbyist?

Edit: have this: Windows 8: The Legacy Apps Question

Edited by Vinyl Scratch, 02 November 2012 - 07:42 PM.


#24 Ventus

Ventus

    Legend

  • Members

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:53 PM

QUOTE(Vinyl Scratch @ Nov 2 2012, 07:38 PM) View Post

how exactly is Linux -made- for a hobbyist?

Its overly complicated. I mean you have to be a super nerd or something to just do some things.
I mean to install a driver for a external Modem It took more then a week to get a driver compiled and installed. Since Linux doesn't have native support for dial up modems.
I had to compile and install the drivers and then I had to change the kernal for the new driver to work... But then it caused a kernel panic and I had to re install and try again.

#25 Vinyl Scratch

Vinyl Scratch

  • Members

Posted 02 November 2012 - 08:00 PM

QUOTE(Ventus @ Nov 2 2012, 07:53 PM) View Post

Its overly complicated. I mean you have to be a super nerd or something to just do some things.
I mean to install a driver for a external Modem It took more then a week to get a driver compiled and installed. Since Linux doesn't have native support for dial up modems.
I had to compile and install the drivers and then I had to change the kernal for the new driver to work... But then it caused a kernel panic and I had to re install and try again.

It's really not unless you're using Gentoo or installing Arch Linux. You just have to search for help if you get stuck.

It offers much more flexibility than Windows ever will. (And is much better for programming than windows!)

-Redacted-
Apparently, Ubuntu is for broadband users only now If you're stuck on dial-up then I wouldn't recommend Linux. Ever. What I would recommend is an upgrade to broadband. I know not everyone can, but...if you're going to be using Linux, you really shouldn't be trying it under such a bad way to connect to the internet.

Edit: here's another link to possibly a thread that discusses using Dial-up on Ubuntu 12.04. It might not work completely:
http://ubuntuforums....d.php?t=1981550

Edited by Vinyl Scratch, 02 November 2012 - 08:06 PM.


#26 Ventus

Ventus

    Legend

  • Members

Posted 02 November 2012 - 08:40 PM

I've already had dialup working on Ubuntu 12.04. me and two friends (Both dialup user's) I met on Ubuntu forums made a patch to make the new kernel use the driver's without having to downgrade to the 2.6 kernel. it works quite well.

But gawd that took awhile for us (Mainly my friends) to get it working right. But I did have Dial up working on Linux. I have even made my own OS of it and added native dial up support.

Edited by Ventus, 02 November 2012 - 08:41 PM.


#27 Nicholas Steel

Nicholas Steel

    Hero of Time

  • Members
  • Location:Australia

Posted 03 November 2012 - 08:37 AM

Wow they fixed the file copy speed, stop the presses everybody! That by it self isn't very imprewssive and as far as memory consumption is concerned it's all to do with SuperFetch, they've probably tweaked it to be more conservative at the expense of rapid performance gains over time. Windows 7 uses under 500MB of RAM (I forget the exact amount). With regards to file copy did they fix it so copying multiple files in a single operation isn't a trillion times slower then copying the files in separate operations?

Edited by franpa, 03 November 2012 - 08:38 AM.


#28 Ventus

Ventus

    Legend

  • Members

Posted 03 November 2012 - 08:54 AM

Yes they fixed the file copy speed. in terms you can now copy a bunch of files and you don't have to wait forever for it transfer.

Last night I moved about 60+ Gigabytes of Rom's and ISO's over to bigger hard drive. and it only took 5-10 minutes. unlike in Windows 7 which took about an hour to move over 5GB of files to another driive.

#29 LinktheMaster

LinktheMaster

    Hey Listen, Kid

  • Members
  • Real Name:Matt
  • Location:United States

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:49 AM

QUOTE(Russ @ Nov 2 2012, 07:22 PM) View Post
Why would they ditch Legacy apps for the tablets? That seems equally stupid to me. But it looks like they are, and I'm not the only one who thinks so. Just looks up Markus Persson's (Minecraft's creator) or Gabe Newall's (head of Valve) views on the OS.
Eh, there's a lot of bad information going on about this.

The "tablet version" of Windows, Windows RT, is based on the ARM processor. Programs made in an x86 or x64 architecture (basically every Windows application up through Windows 7) simply is not compatible with ARM processors. That's not Microsoft's fault. It's just how it is. So it's not that Microsoft is trying to ditch Legacy apps for tablets, it's just the way things go.

Now, technically applications could be recompiled for ARM processors, and for that Microsoft is locking things down quite a bit. For Windows RT, they're trying to push the Modern UI as much as possible (since it works really well for tablets), so they want everyone to get their apps through the Windows store both to ensure that happens as well as possible and to maintain security. Basically, Microsoft is trying to ensure that for tablets, they can maintain a certain standard to ensure that touch-only devices can maintain a for that environment. Basically for this version they're trying to do what Apple currently does for their mobile devices.

Note that tablets are not limited to Windows RT. (And also Windows RT isn't limited to tablets.) There are Intel-based tablets that will be running Windows 8 x86 or x64. You will be able to run legacy apps for them just fine. Now there is a possibility that ARM-based processors will completely overrun x86 and x64 processors for even laptops and desktops, and if that were to happen, legacy apps would basically be doomed. I personally don't really see that happening, though, at least not any time soon.

#30 Saffith

Saffith

    IPv7 user

  • ZC Developers

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:28 AM

QUOTE(LinktheMaster @ Nov 3 2012, 10:49 AM) View Post
Basically for this version they're trying to do what Apple and Google currently do for their mobile devices. (Which is kind of ironic since Google has reprimanded Microsoft for this decision.)

Google hasn't done quite the same thing. They do have their own app store, but Android is the only one of the three that allows third-party stores and unrestricted sideloading.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users