Windows 8 Impressions

[Roxane]

I'll prolly keep Win7 as my Bootcamp OS. As for my job (I'm a CAD drafter) my company spent already a lot of money to switch from XP to Win7 that it'll stretch it for as long as possible, as they did for XP.

[Drowsy Emperor]

I'm sticking with XP for as long as it makes sense to do so. In my case that means, I'll switch to 7 when I get a new graphics card and that's not going to happen any time soon.

 

Good thing most games that are going to be worth playing are about 2 years away.

[anubite]

XP is already defunct if you're using programs that 'require' multi-threading.

 

I'll be sticking with W7 until it is no longer feasible. Windows 8 is making the experience I like (desktop OS) into a tablet experience. I don't like where this is heading at all.

 

I will probably be switching to Linux over the next few years, especially if Valve (and by extension, Kickstarter and Indie organizations) is successful in 'igniting' Linux gaming.

[Rostere]

Not unless you have a touch screen. Windows 8 is practically built for touch. Right now I'm streaming my computer screen to my ipad using splashtop - http://www.splashtop.com/win8 , and operating it with the win8 touch controls and gestures, it's a really fun way to use the os, and possibly a wave of the future, being able to use a tablet that is backed by advanced desktop hardware

Streaming from a local stationary computer is probably the future, yes

[Bokishi]

I'll be sticking with W7 until it is no longer feasible. Windows 8 is making the experience I like (desktop OS) into a tablet experience. I don't like where this is heading at all.

 

I really don't see a problem with tablet integration into windows. I have been streaming games from my pc to my ipad 3 for the past week and its been really fun (you do need have a wireless 360 controller hooked to the computer as well)

 

[kirottu]

Why would you like to stream your pc games to a tablet? Doesn't your pc have like three screens?

[anubite]

I don't have a tablet nor do I want to be forced to purchase one to run a PC.

 

The tablet doesn't enhance my experience. It simply makes my games harder to play, my productivity reduced... there's a ****ing reason I'm using a desktop and not a tablet right now. Keyboard and mouse > touch screen. Claustrophobic start touch-screen thing < Normal desktop

 

I /hate/ tablets. If I want one, I'll get one. Yet this is going to be forced down my throat. It won't be long until operating systems are no different from microwaves - appliances for the computer illiterate. Windows 8 is designed for a generation of children who have grown up only using smart phones.

 

It's why experienced computer users are now being forced to move to Linux. Or will be, if my predictions are correct.

 

Maybe that's fine for you. Maybe you're their target audience. They're missing me by a wide mile though.

Edited November 6, 2012 by anubite

[mr.Ermac]

Going by the Windows suckage pattern, I think I'll skip this one and wait for win 9. I've seen a couple of videos and read up on a couple of sites, and what I'm seeing does not excite me at all. It actually annoys me to the point where I just might never upgrade from WinXP. Though Win7 is alright too I guess...

[LadyCrimson]

I have no personal desire to play my PC games on a little tablet, whether in another room across the house or on a train/plane or in a park. There's such a thing as being too plugged in, and possibly, too integrated. I like separation.

[Humodour]

In other news, nVidia and Valve are accelerating their work on Linux. Steam for Linux is expected to come out for the public early next year, opening with over 20 games.

 

I've been using Ubuntu 12.10 for 2 weeks or so now and it has been running flawlessly. When I dual-boot to Windows 7 to play a Steam game these days, I notice how slow and unresponsive Win 7 is. I didn't think I would.

[LadyCrimson]

Excellent. By the time I really need to switch, the Steam Linux library should be quite acceptable.

 

And Window's has been bloated for a while now. Altho it does depend a little bit, in my limited experience, what kind of stuff you have on it. My HDD Win7 boot time is still quite fast, but that's because I have almost nothing that runs on bootup except the basic required system things.

[Hormalakh]

So what you're telling me is that this is Vista V2.0? I remember the last time I had Vista, I went crazy and bought a Mac. After I calmed down a little, 2 years later, I finally switched back to Win 7. I love Linux and everything, but it's just way too much work for me. Last time I used Ubuntu, I had to code my own drivers or something.

[Humodour]

Last time I used Ubuntu, I had to code my own drivers or something.

 

No, you really didn't. When did you last use Linux? If it was 2 years ago or more, you should take another look, just as Valve has with Steam.

 

Currently, Ubuntu has its own open source drivers and if you've got integrated Intel graphics then from memory those drivers are really good and open source. But if you want the full capability of your discrete graphics processor, it's best to use the drivers which nVidia and AMD supply for Linux. To use these drivers all you do is select a checkbox in Ubuntu.

 

 

Excellent. By the time I really need to switch, the Steam Linux library should be quite acceptable.

 

And Window's has been bloated for a while now. Altho it does depend a little bit, in my limited experience, what kind of stuff you have on it. My HDD Win7 boot time is still quite fast, but that's because I have almost nothing that runs on bootup except the basic required system things.

 

Windows 7 is still fast - heck it ought to be, as I have an SSD and a sex-core computer. Still, there is latency when I open folders and files and applications and web sites and such. Latency that doesn't seem to exist on Ubuntu. Which is curious because one of the reasons I upgraded to an SSD was precisely to see if the I/O bottleneck was response for the latency. It was a bit. But Windows seems to be just slow by nature.

 

Where 'slow' still means "pretty damn fast, but not visibly immediate".

Edited November 8, 2012 by Krezack

[Gorth]

a sex-core computer.

 

Kinky

 

Let's just say, the feedback from people whose opinion I trust on such matters has been pretty 'meh' so far. Windows 7 may not be one of the 7 wonders of the world, but I think I'm going to stick with it until Windows 9. Might check out the current crop of Linux distributions in the meantime. Virtual machines are such a nice thing

[Humodour]

a sex-core computer.

 

Kinky

 

lol. Should that be sexa-? Or hex-?

 

Let's just say, the feedback from people whose opinion I trust on such matters has been pretty 'meh' so far. Windows 7 may not be one of the 7 wonders of the world, but I think I'm going to stick with it until Windows 9. Might check out the current crop of Linux distributions in the meantime. Virtual machines are such a nice thing

 

Just keep in mind that Windows doesn't perform as well under virtualisation as it does when run natively. I imagine this is also true for Linux.

 

A better idea, Gorth, would be to download the Ubuntu 12.10 .iso file (which you'll need to do either way): http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop

 

And then use this simple programme to make a bootable USB stick (with some persistent storage if you desire): http://www.ubuntu.com/download/help/create-a-usb-stick-on-windows

 

This way, you can try out Ubuntu natively from the USB, and then even install it as a dual-boot if you like what you see. Obviously USB 2.0 is much slower than internal SATA, but it should be better than virtualisation. Maybe.

 

Again, I note that installing Ubuntu as a dual-boot on a separate partition does NOT damage or modify your Windows install in any way, even when you're turning your single Windows partition into 2 partitions (one for Windows, one for Ubuntu). Still, always good to do a backup when dealing with partition tables on a hard drive you care about. I never do, though.

[Gorth]

a sex-core computer.

 

Kinky

 

lol. Should that be sexa-? Or hex-?

 

Six-core?

 

Just keep in mind that Windows doesn't perform as well under virtualisation as it does when run natively. I imagine this is also true for Linux.

 

A better idea, Gorth, would be to download the Ubuntu 12.10 .iso file (which you'll need to do either way): http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop

 

And then use this simple programme to make a bootable USB stick (with some persistent storage if you desire): http://www.ubuntu.co...tick-on-windows

 

This way, you can try out Ubuntu natively from the USB, and then even install it as a dual-boot if you like what you see. Obviously USB 2.0 is much slower than internal SATA, but it should be better than virtualisation. Maybe.

 

Again, I note that installing Ubuntu as a dual-boot on a separate partition does NOT damage or modify your Windows install in any way, even when you're turning your single Windows partition into 2 partitions (one for Windows, one for Ubuntu). Still, always good to do a backup when dealing with partition tables on a hard drive you care about. I never do, though.

 

I'll give the Ubuntu link a shot, thanks. Last time I seriously spent time Linux it was Red Hat that was all the rage. I like virtual machines because they are easily disposable and easily replaceable if you end up in a state of fubar of your installation.

[kirottu]

 

Using Win 8 under the influence.

[Janmanden]

I just switched to Windows 8 Pro 64 bit instead of that 32 bit version I installed online. Setting up the system a second time is quite easy. I wonder if I could simply make a script to do it, hmmm... And if I could why wasn't it done like that..

 

It's a bit strange to set up a system called Windows to be windows-based for a multi-tasking environment. It's just too tablet-oriented at the default settings. It feels like everything was designed just to waste space, because the.. designer.. didn't.. think thereerm, would be much to play around with anyway. Maybe I missed some key-pointer somewhere saying that you are supposed to use a 7" monitor or something, because that's what it feels like was the intended target. Even when you break up the screen to have Metro on the side, the sizes are fixed, I could easily have both, side by side, but that's not available. Sometimes I trigger the Mail App and it's not really all that bad (unfortunately any App you open keeps running in the background, have to use End Task a lot) even though I've managed to send some rather important mails where I forgot to add a subject (d'oh), that woman in the video on-top she's not very bright, but I doubt few people would be on the first use of anything..

 

I am getting used to the Edit Group Policy, but it's a really bad design that force me to use a ton of navigation and clicks to do something that could have been done with the single push of a button. Like turning of the Preview and Details pane. There is room for an extra button here, but no, I have to go through search, typing a name and click my way through 16 categories and then it's just an on/off switch, but the disabled buttons are still visible in the file explorer even though they are disabled. Enough whining, it's not really that bad, but it's a rather stupid move.

 

I wish Microsoft had made some choices in this regard, like System Profiles (Tablet-oriented or PC-oriented) because it's not really that hard to change, but it's bit of a nuisance to replace all the default tablet-oriented App associations with windows-based desktop explorer applications.. That almost broke my tongue, but it also sounded a bit poetic, somehow.. It nearly rhymed, sort of.

 

I really like the new Task Manager and the performance is great, keeping my system cool and smooth, even my AV runs faster and once I got the Classic shell menu for a Start menu and got all my toolbars setup and Windows even go straight to the desktop after login.. It's like a tremendously improved Windows XP. There are still a few things with bad or missing design that confuse me, but I am confident I'll find a solution.

 

Didn't like the new Visual Studio 2012, which is apparently kind of free or something for Windows 8. It's just too flat and full of bad choices. Had to go. Got a nice old Visual Studio Express 2008 without all the Webmatrix and SQL Server ****.. I just use Regular Expressions a lot and the way 2012 had me click the same button 15 times to get to the point.. I just find that I get really distracted by annoying interfaces and there are an increasing number of those.. Hmm..

[Gorgon]

I don't know why they have decided to do a tablet pc/ mobile device interface for the PC. One size doesn't fit all and they are really quite dense for thinking it would just IMHO.

[Gorth]

I think Windows 8 will go the way of Windows ME and Vista. It's that "inbetween" version that no one has any use for and unlucky new hardware buyers gets stuck with on their PC.

 

Rumour mills says Windows Blue (expected release mid 2013) is going the be the "real" Windows for PC's, but it comes with it's own problems, not at least the intended business model, which includes annual upgrades.

[casa]

I upgraded recently, thanks to M$ generous offer of 29€ for the Pro version. My impression so far is that it's as good and maybe even a tiny little bit better than 7 once you're on the desktop and have everything arranged in a way you're familiar with from older systems. It's perfectly solid, it's fast, it boots fast, nothing I could complain about.... if it wasn't for the totally useless Modern UI. There's nothing good I can say about it, it adds 2 extra steps to get my comp working and there's really not a single app I'm interested in. The Modern UI might be great for touchscreens, tablets and phones, but on my PC there's just no logical reason for it being there, and the problem is really not me being to stubborn to adjust, it's the problem that the modern UI is the opposite of what makes a PC a PC. More than once it was a major annoyance, e.g. I want to follow a pdf tutorial for a 3D app... but Windows 8 assumes if you're reading pdfs you don't do anything else and only opens them in fullscreen mode. Had to get an extra Adobe Reader. Just one example out of dozens, and the whole fullscreen mode thing is a major annoyance, it takes away every reason I'm using a PC and not a tablet - I want to f...ing multitask on my desktop!

 

Anyway, there are ways to get back the old 7 feel, I'd like to recommend Classic Shell which simply skips the Modern UI completely and gets you to your desktop, where it also added a convenient old Start menu for us again. That couple with auto-login makes Windows 8 perfectly useable and a good upgrade.

Anyway, I'd only recommend it to people who either haven't got Win 7 yet or those who want to legalize their old pie-rat system for cheap, because there's really nothing Windows 8 adds that 7 can't. And 7 was for me the best Windows so far. 8 is just the same for a cheap upgrade price with some annoying extras you have to get rid of.