Who plans on going to Windows 8 and who's sticking with Windows 7?

[heatlesssun]

Yep....that's all I'm asking for. Give me the option to kill Metro entirely.

It would make more sense for Microsoft to have created a separate mobile OS than to do this. If Microsoft built in the option to kill Metro it would send a clear signal that Microsoft had no confidence in Metro and a lot fewer app developers would be interested in Metro because they would have no confidence that every Windows 8 machine could even run their apps.

As I have said many times, its clear that Microsoft is leveraging its desktop dominance to gain entry into tablets and it's probably the best strategy available to them at this point. The desktop market isn't growing. OS X can only take so much market share because of Mac pricing and if Linux at this point hasn't been a significant player in the desktop arena I don't see why Windows 8 would make that happen now. And it's not like either OS X or any Linux distro is anywhere near as Windows compatible as Windows 8.

Microsoft is simply in trouble and it's forced to take more risk at this point. The desktop isn't going away but it's not the center of the digital world anymore. Heck, even Apple has said that iPads have affected sales of Macs. If Windows can't successfully incorporate touch and tablet features then the future of Windows is one of irrelevance in the consumer market. I think that many Windows 8 haters actually don't care if this did happen. There's a lot of disdain of average folks by Windows 8 haters.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

Yep....that's all I'm asking for. Give me the option to kill Metro entirely.

Me, I'd like Windows 8 to give me the option to print out $100 bills. However, I'm about as likely to get my wish as you are yours.

Here's an idea: why don't we stay in reality and discuss Windows 8 as it is rather than sighing and whining for what will never be?

 

[Greggy_D]

Haven't seen any whining. Funny how some of you on this board get all flippant and tend to personalize legitimate criticisms of the OS.

The original question was who is upgrading to Windows 8. I'm not because of how integrated Metro is.

I would upgrade if I could remove or disable Metro.

 

[heatlesssun]

Haven't seen any whining. Funny how some of you on this board get all flippant and tend to personalize legitimate criticisms of the OS.

Of course Windows 8 isn't perfect and things can be improved but I don't think that every criticism made of it is necessarily significant. The best example of this that I see bought up constantly is booting to the Start Screen instead of the desktop. One may not like it but how does this really change anything? The first thing that virtually anyone will do when they startup their computer is launch a program from the desktop and that can be done on the Start Screen. And how often does a person really restart a machine these days?

A lot of the criticism of Windows 8 is based on the idea that some things are different from Windows 7 and has little to do with any practical differences are true loss of efficiency.

 

[dr.stevil]

A lot of the criticism of Windows 8 is based on the idea that some things are different from Windows 7 and has little to do with any practical differences are true loss of efficiency.

Not just Windows 7, but Windows period. Windows 8 operates, looks and feels so completely different than their previous OS's, it shouldn't surprise anyone that there would be a backlash from some of their users, considering how long most people have been using Windows at this point. Hell, Android and iOS are more windows like at this point than Windows 8 (especially RT) is.

As for efficiency, it's completely subjective. Everyone has different workflows, skill levels and preferences. Windows 8, doesn't allow for too much flexibility so it's a completely legitimate complaint.

 

[Tsumi]

Not just Windows 7, but Windows period. Windows 8 operates, looks and feels so completely different than their previous OS's, it shouldn't surprise anyone that there would be a backlash from some of their users, considering how long most people have been using Windows at this point. Hell, Android and iOS are more windows like at this point than Windows 8 (especially RT) is.

As for efficiency, it's completely subjective. Everyone has different workflows, skill levels and preferences. Windows 8, doesn't allow for too much flexibility so it's a completely legitimate complaint.

How is it completely different? Start Screen to start applications, work in desktop. No different from Start menu to start applications, work in desktop. You're just over-exaggerating.

 

[heatlesssun]

Not just Windows 7, but Windows period. Windows 8 operates, looks and feels so completely different than their previous OS's, it shouldn't surprise anyone that there would be a backlash from some of their users, considering how long most people have been using Windows at this point. Hell, Android and iOS are more windows like at this point than Windows 8 (especially RT) is.

As for efficiency, it's completely subjective. Everyone has different workflows, skill levels and preferences. Windows 8, doesn't allow for too much flexibility so it's a completely legitimate complaint.

I agree with some of what you're saying but really, Android and iOS more Windows like than Windows 8? So where the mouse support in iOS? How many monitors does Android support? How many GPUs can you put in a iPad or Android tablet? How many Windows programs can you run natively on iOS and Android? And as for flexibility Windows 8 can run better across of range of devices and input devices than any prior version of Windows.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

Haven't seen any whining. Funny how some of you on this board get all flippant and tend to personalize legitimate criticisms of the OS.

"Give me the option to kill Metro entirely" isn't whining? That's your idea of legitimate criticism? Just how likely do you think it is that Microsoft will rewrite the OS from scratch to make you happy?

I would upgrade if I could remove or disable Metro.

Have fun with Windows 7. It's an excellent OS. I used it for years and was quite happy with it. I'm sure it has many more years of use left in it.

 

[Gorankar]

Actually, it's not whining, it's called giving a condition for sale. If you want me to buy, you have to do X.
Also, I really hope we are not pretending an OS rewrite from scratch is required to restore the Win7 start menu or to plop a setting in the control panel to bypass Metro at start up.
Third party apps can already do those things to one degree or another, and assuming MS does nothing to prevent it, those apps will only get better at fixing WIn8.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

Actually, it's not whining, it's called giving a condition for sale. If you want me to buy, you have to do X.

Making an absurd demand is not "giving a condition for sale." It is whining. "Give me the option to kill Metro entirely" is an absurd demand. There is simply no way Microsoft is going to release a version of Windows 8 without Modern UI. It would no longer be Windows 8. If that is a deal breaker for you, fine. But petulantly insisting on something that isn't going to happen is childish.

Also, I really hope we are not pretending an OS rewrite from scratch is required to restore the Win7 start menu or to plop a setting in the control panel to bypass Metro at start up.

I don't think Microsoft dropped the Start Menu just to be spiteful. Why would they do that? Instead I'm pretty sure the Start Menu was dropped as it was no longer a viable tool for doing what is needed to properly display Modern UI apps. I'm not a programmer myself, but I would be very surprised if the Windows 7 Start Menu was able to do the things the Windows 8 Start Screen does. I'm pretty sure it would indeed need a significant rewrite to do so, and when you were done with that rewrite it would end up looking pretty much like the Start Screen does anyhow. In fact one could almost say that Microsoft already did rewrite the OS from scratch and that the Start Screen was the result.

Third party apps can already do those things to one degree or another, and assuming MS does nothing to prevent it, those apps will only get better at fixing WIn8.

If third party apps fill the gap then why are people still whining about the issue? I have not used any myself. If you have experience with them, may I ask if they properly display Modern UI apps? Do they allow you to access the Windows Store? Do they have live tiles that update? If you have more than a handful of Modern UI apps, how well do the third party apps work with them? At what point does the inclusion of the Modern UI apps in the third party solution end up with the third party Start Menu blocking out the entire desktop when it is opened?

 

[Gorankar]

Petulantly insisting someone is being childish for being vocal about not excepting a product that does not suit their tastes is any better?

No they are not doing it to be spiteful, but they are not doing for your stated reasons either. They are doing it to push the app store, to try to force obsolescence of non Metro programs so they can make more money. Which is absolutely fine. The pretense that is is something other than that, is not. What doesn't the start menu do that the start screen does do on a desk top PC? Understand, I am not against Metro existing, I am against the intentional removal of the Win7 style start menu for desk top and laptop use. They actively removed the start menu from the earlier betas.

We should not have to go to third party apps and hope MS does not break them, unintentionally, or otherwise.

 

[heatlesssun]

Also, I really hope we are not pretending an OS rewrite from scratch is required to restore the Win7 start menu or to plop a setting in the control panel to bypass Metro at start up. Third party apps can already do those things to one degree or another, and assuming MS does nothing to prevent it, those apps will only get better at fixing WIn8.

I don't think Microsoft dropped the Start Menu just to be spiteful. Why would they do that? Instead I'm pretty sure the Start Menu was dropped as it was no longer a viable tool for doing what is needed to properly display Modern UI apps. I'm not a programmer myself, but I would be very surprised if the Windows 7 Start Menu was able to do the things the Windows 8 Start Screen does. I'm pretty sure it would indeed need a significant rewrite to do so, and when you were done with that rewrite it would end up looking pretty much like the Start Screen does anyhow. In fact one could almost say that Microsoft already did rewrite the OS from scratch and that the Start Screen was the result.

The main purpose of the Start Screen I think was to simply provide a input agnostic way to launch apps as well as provide a notification system across any type of device and overall the Start Screen succeeds as this. The Start Menu is simply a list of static icons that provided a way to search for local files and if you think the Start Screen doesn't work well with keyboards and mice, the Start Menu is 10x worse with touch.

I was just on the couch using my Samsung Series 7 Slate using touch to navigate the Start Screen and launch apps. Now I'm on my dual screen desktop using a keyboard and mouse to navigate the Start Screen and launch apps. The Start Menu wouldn't make that task any easier or faster even with a keyboard and mouse yet the Start Screen makes it enormously easier with touch.

I won't say that they aren't ever any advantages to the Start Menu but as more and more Windows users start using tablets and touch devices and at the same time use keyboards and mice, why have two different ways to do it? A lot of people that don't like Windows 8 seem to refuse to accept the emergence of touch and tablets for various reasons and that's just something Microsoft can no longer afford to do if Windows is to remain a popular and mainstream OS.

 

[Tsumi]

Petulantly insisting someone is being childish for being vocal about not excepting a product that does not suit their tastes is any better?

No they are not doing it to be spiteful, but they are not doing for your stated reasons either. They are doing it to push the app store, to try to force obsolescence of non Metro programs so they can make more money. Which is absolutely fine. The pretense that is is something other than that, is not. What doesn't the start menu do that the start screen does do on a desk top PC? Understand, I am not against Metro existing, I am against the intentional removal of the Win7 style start menu for desk top and laptop use. They actively removed the start menu from the earlier betas.

We should not have to go to third party apps and hope MS does not break them, unintentionally, or otherwise.

Unlike what Eman was saying, Windows 8 was NOT built from the ground up. Windows 8 was built on Windows 7, and the old UI probably only existed in the beta to troubleshoot problems with the new UI. It doesn't matter if it was included in the beta, because a beta is exactly that, an unfinished product. If it was in the final product and they removed it afterwards, then you might have some grounds to stand on, but you don't.

And I'm pretty sure Microsoft could easily block and break third party apps like Rainmeter and Classic Shell if they wanted to. It is their OS after all. The fact that they haven't makes your views more of an irrational fear than anything else.

And do we really have to go back to the third party program debate again? As I've repeated multiple times now, if Microsoft did that, it would break compatibility with custom proprietary programs, which the business and enterprise sector heavily rely on.

 

[heatlesssun]

They are doing it to push the app store, to try to force obsolescence of non Metro programs so they can make more money. Which is absolutely fine. The pretense that is is something other than that, is not. What doesn't the start menu do that the start screen does do on a desk top PC? Understand, I am not against Metro existing, I am against the intentional removal of the Win7 style start menu for desk top and laptop use. They actively removed the start menu from the earlier betas.

The purpose of the Start Screen is more basic than this. As I said above, it's simply single method that works across multiple input methods. As more and more people acquire Windows 8 tablets, many will also use them with keyboards and mice and even external monitors. Android tablets and iPads really aren't designed for that. It just makes sense to have a single way out of the box to do it that works with whatever input method on is using at the time.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

Petulantly insisting someone is being childish for being vocal about not excepting a product that does not suit their tastes is any better?

There are ways to be vocal without being childish. Railing about things that cannot be changed is not one of them.

No they are not doing it to be spiteful, but they are not doing for your stated reasons either. They are doing it to push the app store, to try to force obsolescence of non Metro programs so they can make more money. Which is absolutely fine.

I'll candidly admit that I am speculating as to why things are the way they are. However, your saying I am wrong and you are right based on no more than your assertion is hardly persuasive. Have you any authority to back up your claims you could share with the board? If not, then why is my guess less valid than yours?

The pretense that is is something other than that, is not. What doesn't the start menu do that the start screen does do on a desk top PC?

Can the Start Menu show tiles? Allow for live updating? Be usable with touch input? I'm not a programmer so I couldn't explain the in or outs of why this is, but I can't imagine Microsoft would have gone to all the trouble of creating the Start Screen if the Start Menu was a viable alternative.

Understand, I am not against Metro existing,

But others do seem to be against Modern UI existing, and are not particularly mature about letting their feelings be known.

I am against the intentional removal of the Win7 style start menu for desk top and laptop use. They actively removed the start menu from the earlier betas.

I'm sure Microsoft is continually removing obsolete code from Windows as it evolves. Does this surprise you? Let me ask you some questions: What does the Start Menu do that is missing in Windows 8? What programs can't you run because the Start Menu has evolved into the Start Screen?

We should not have to go to third party apps and hope MS does not break them, unintentionally, or otherwise.

You don't have to, Windows 8 works just fine right out of the box!

 

[Gorankar]

You keep saying it, but it still sounds like marketing talk, while getting hugely profitable Android/iOS style apps onto the PC, seems the more realistic answer.
Otherwise they would not try to cold turkey the start menu.

Again, no problem with the profits. I like when MS makes a profit. I like it a lot. I don't like their decision to kill the start menu in favor of the start screen. I have almost no use for touch devices outside of my phone and it is Android, and likely to stay that way. If for no other reason than that I have a lot of payed Android apps.

 

[Tsumi]

You keep saying it, but it still sounds like marketing talk, while getting hugely profitable Android/iOS style apps onto the PC, seems the more realistic answer.
Otherwise they would not try to cold turkey the start menu.

Again, no problem with the profits. I like when MS makes a profit. I like it a lot. I don't like their decision to kill the start menu in favor of the start screen. I have almost no use for touch devices outside of my phone and it is Android, and likely to stay that way. If for no other reason than that I have a lot of payed Android apps.

So, what part of providing a unified experience across phone, tablet, laptop, and desktop do you not understand?

 

[Wrench00]

Unifying what? What are they unifying?
Tablets that don't exist?
Phones that have been a general failure?

I would understand if 1. Microsoft had a Tablet OS that they wanted to integrate in to the desktop environment 2. Have a successful Smart Phone.

If they wanted to unify anything they should have made IOS or andriod interface into Windows.

 

[heatlesssun]

Unifying what? What are they unifying?
Tablets that don't exist?

Odd how you and have tablets that don't exist. The numbers are small currently because prior versions of Windows had poor touch support, that's changed. And just how many Windows 8 touch tablets, hybrids and convertibles have been announced already and that will go on sale next week?

I understand that you don't like Windows 8 but the inaccurate hype doesn't really prove anything.

 

[Gorankar]

There are ways to be vocal without being childish. Railing about things that cannot be changed is not one of them.

Indeed. lol This can be changed. We are simply going to have some one other than MS do the changing.

I'll candidly admit that I am speculating as to why things are the way they are. However, your saying I am wrong and you are right based on no more than your assertion is hardly persuasive. Have you any authority to back up your claims you could share with the board? If not, then why is my guess less valid than yours?
Can the Start Menu show tiles? Allow for live updating? Be usable with touch input? I'm not a programmer so I couldn't explain the in or outs of why this is, but I can't imagine Microsoft would have gone to all the trouble of creating the Start Screen if the Start Menu was a viable alternative.

They removed it from earlier builds. It was working, and the only reason I can see to do so is to push the Metro UI, and the apps and app store that go with it. The contention that both can't coexist, when they have coexisted already in earlier builds, strains belief. None of that other stuff you are talking about has much use to me on a desktop. Also, it is a fact that you can create a shortcut to a metro app, and have it start right up when clicked, even if you put the shortcut in one of those third party start menus. If I want live updating or tiles on my desktop, there are numerous widgets that could do that. I will just accept we will not see eye to eye on this.

But others do seem to be against Modern UI existing, and are not particularly mature about letting their feelings be known.

Yeah, some people do want it to diaf. I could care less if it is there as an option for desktops. But the Metro start screen just does not offer me anything I want, but did not have before on a desktop.

I'm sure Microsoft is continually removing obsolete code from Windows as it evolves. Does this surprise you? Let me ask you some questions: What does the Start Menu do that is missing in Windows 8? What programs can't you run because the Start Menu has evolved into the Start Screen?

Yes, removing obsolete code is quite normal. However, the start menu is only obsolete in the minds of MS marketing. It has never been about what I can and can not do with the Metro screen over the start menu. It's about having a cludgey, cluttered Metro screen replace my nice clean desktop. It has no benefit to myself, and many others when it comes to desktops.

You don't have to, Windows 8 works just fine right out of the box!

God, the marketing speak is strong. LOL. Anyway, after a few painful weeks with the preview, I downloaded a start menu replacement and was much happier. So, no, out of the box, it does not work fine for me.

 

[Gorankar]

So, what part of providing a unified experience across phone, tablet, laptop, and desktop do you not understand?

I understand the words quite fine, but the point is lost. Apple has already proven that unifying all three is unnecessary. Oh, and that is another thing the marketers keep saying when the reality is probably much closer to what I already stated.

 

[heatlesssun]

They removed it from earlier builds. It was working, and the only reason I can see to do so is to push the Metro UI, and the apps and app store that go with it. The contention that both can't coexist, when they have coexisted already in earlier builds, strains belief. None of that other stuff you are talking about has much use to me on a desktop. Also, it is a fact that you can create a shortcut to a metro app, and have it start right up when clicked, even if you put the shortcut in one of those third party start menus. If I want live updating or tiles on my desktop, there are numerous widgets that could do that. I will just accept we will not see eye to eye on this.

Yes, there's not technical reason why the Start Menu can't still be there. But the intent was never to have it Windows 8 at least by the time it was announced last summer. While the Start Menu code was in the Released Preview is was disabled by default.

I don't deny that part of the reason for the Start Screen is for the Windows Store but I don't think that it's as profitable as you're saying. Sure, there's money to be made there but Windows 8 is a true hybrid OS. There is no desktop mode or tablet mode and that's really at the core of why Windows 8 opponents do like it. They see the desktop as one thing and tablets as another and Windows 8 completely disregards this notion. The Start Menu simply doesn't work as well as the Start Screen given the fact that Windows 8 is a hybrid.

In time as more and more people use hybrid devices with different input devices I think the Start Screen controversy will pass. I think it makes more sense in the long run to have one standard app launcher and notification center no matter the input method if a single device can have four different input methods.

 

[heatlesssun]

Apple has already proven that unifying all three is unnecessary.

They've proved nothing of the sort. They have a mobile OS driven devices and desktop OS and driven devices and are obviously hugely successful particularly with their mobile devices. But that doesn't in any way prove that a hybrid approach can't also be successful. I don't believe that this is zero sum game where a tablet can only be a tablet and a desktop/laptop can only be a desktop/laptop. Unification and convergence is an inevitable force in technology.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

Unlike what Eman was saying, Windows 8 was NOT built from the ground up.

I'm not sure I was saying Windows 8 was built from the ground up, but I will say that I know next to nothing about programming and that anything I say about how Windows works under the hood is at best speculation informed by what I've read on the internet. I have no problem at all with people correcting anything or everything I have to say about that.

However, if Windows 8 was built on Windows 7 I think more than ever that it's cool that in Windows 8 I can move the mouse cursor to the top of the desktop, watch it turn into a hand, then grab the desktop and drag it to the bottom of the screen and throw it away, and then later click on the desktop icon and have it pop back into existence with all my open programs still just sitting there.

 

[heatlesssun]

Yeah, all Microsoft OSes begin their code bases with the latest current version. I believe that Windows RT was built from a port of Windows 7 to ARM. It would be impossible even with the army of developers that Microsoft has to write something with the size and complexity of Windows 8 in only three years from scratch.

 

[Wrench00]

Odd how you and have tablets that don't exist. The numbers are small currently because prior versions of Windows had poor touch support, that's changed. And just how many Windows 8 touch tablets, hybrids and convertibles have been announced already and that will go on sale next week?

I understand that you don't like Windows 8 but the inaccurate hype doesn't really prove anything.

I am using a windows 7 tablet with 8 on it. It can hardly be qualified as a Windows 8 device.
Microsoft is doing the "chicken before the egg" approach.
What do you think would be easier to do Apple give OSX iOS interface or at a later date give OSX and iOS add on?

 

[heatlesssun]

I am using a windows 7 tablet with 8 on it. It can hardly be qualified as a Windows 8 device.
Microsoft is doing the "chicken before the egg" approach.
What do you think would be easier to do Apple give OSX iOS interface or at a later date give OSX and iOS add on?

So Microsoft is supposed to wait for Windows 8 tablets before making Windows 8 work on tablets?

I understand you don't like the hybrid design of Windows 8 but I don't see how Microsoft is doing the "chicken before the egg" approach.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

God, the marketing speak is strong. LOL. Anyway, after a few painful weeks with the preview, I downloaded a start menu replacement and was much happier. So, no, out of the box, it does not work fine for me.

Man, I wish I could get paid for saying what I think about Windows 8. Sorry to read that you are less than satisfied with Windows 8 as is. However, if you're subjective experience is valid, then I'm going to insist that mine is too.

Do I think Windows 8 is perfect? Nope, but what is? I didn't think Windows 7 was perfect either. I did think Windows 7 was a very good OS, in fact, I still do. For me though, Windows 8 does pretty much everything Windows 7 did while giving me faster boot and shutdown times and a subjectively peppier feeling while working with it. If the Windows 7 desktop was a smoother, more polished version of the Vista desktop, then the Windows 8 desktop is a smoother, more polished iteration of Windows 7. But besides being an incremental improvement over Windows 7, Windows 8 also gives me access to an entirely new eco-system of apps. That's a trick Windows 7 will never be able to do.

So what's not to like? Windows has always been a solid workhorse for getting things done. Windows 8 still is. However, now Windows has the chance to deliver a whole new way of doing things and interacting with cyberspace. For me it's a win-win situation.

 

[96redformula]

I will switch my desktop PC over to Windows 8, HTPC and HTPCs in bedrooms to stay windows 7.

I love the fast instant startup, and I usually just leave it on the desktop, so no big deal with metro. I do get pretty missed off when it opens something and takes me to metro, but I have tried to minimize that.

 

[Flogger23m]

The first thing that virtually anyone will do when they startup their computer is launch a program from the desktop and that can be done on the Start Screen.

What about a folder? Or a .txt file? Makes sense on a desktop/laptop. Maybe not a tablet, but different machines require different interfaces.

Yes, I realize Win 8 has a desktop mode but you still must use Metro. And desktop mode looks really ugly in Win 8. Not sure why they changed that. Only thing I can think of is they made it uglier so people are more willing to switch to Metro.

 

[E^vol]

For me though, Windows 8 does pretty much everything Windows 7 did while giving me faster boot and shutdown times and a subjectively peppier feeling while working with it. If the Windows 7 desktop was a smoother, more polished version of the Vista desktop, then the Windows 8 desktop is a smoother, more polished iteration of Windows 7. But besides being an incremental improvement over Windows 7, Windows 8 also gives me access to an entirely new eco-system of apps. That's a trick Windows 7 will never be able to do.

My sentiments exactly. Well said.

 

[E^vol]

Yes, I realize Win 8 has a desktop mode but you still must use Metro. And desktop mode looks really ugly in Win 8.

I stay within the desktop environment, I DON'T use Metro. At all...
As for the "desktop is ugly" comment, well, I have to agree with you on that one, I really miss the transparent window boarders !!!!

 

[Veilrap]

What about a folder? Or a .txt file? Makes sense on a desktop/laptop. Maybe not a tablet, but different machines require different interfaces.

Yes, I realize Win 8 has a desktop mode but you still must use Metro. And desktop mode looks really ugly in Win 8. Not sure why they changed that. Only thing I can think of is they made it uglier so people are more willing to switch to Metro.

You can launch the file explorer and notepad from the start screen. Your desktop is still there if you want to store files on it and launch them from there.

I actually like the desktop look in 8. It's more streamlined.

 

[c3k]

Why I will shun Windows 8...

The Metro UI is worthless to me. I don't use a touchscreen on any of my computers. Since MS is touting Metro as something valuable W8 brings to the table, but it is worthless to me, then this argument by MS for me to upgrade is valueless.

The cost. I've spent hundreds, if not thousands, on various MS operating systems. Currently, I'm running four W7 machines and one Vista machine. They are stable and working. I _may_ upgrade the Vista to W7 so I can have an homogeneous homegroup. That'd be $99 if I do a new install, $199 if I do an in-place upgrade (It's Vista Ultimate, and the only in-place upgrade would be W7 Ultimate.).

The hassle. Installing all my apps, documents, passwords, cookies, etc., is a major PITA. Major PITA. I have invested in multiple backups JUST because the OS reinstall/install is such a majoy PITA. Patches, updates, drivers, the list goes on. This is a MAJOR investment in time and effort. Is Windows 8 so great that I should undertake this?

The benefits of Windows 8. So far, all I've heard is that it boots faster. Yeah. I don't care. I MAY reboot my machines a few times a month. That's far better than 3.1/XP. Windows Vista/7 is stable. So, Windows 8 may save me 30 seconds once a week. That's valueless to me.

The kernel. Does Windows 8 run faster than Windows 7? I don't know. Does it allocate resources more efficiently? I don't know. Currently, the brute strength of my computers (the worst one is a dual core at 2.0Ghz with 4 Gb of RAM) compensates for whatever shortcomings W7 has. Are the minimum recommended specifications for Windows 8 GREATER than the specs for W7? If so, I'd say it is NOT more efficient.

Drivers and compatibility. I know that everything I'm running on Vista/W7 works. I know that, because it is running. I don't know that the same will hold true for W8. I'll be experimenting. Why should I?

It seems to me that MS wants me to spend my money on a product that puts big colored balloons on my screen. I don't want big colored balloons on my screen. Everything else seems to be a drawback, at best a tie.

This product is a huge miss as far as I'm concerned.

If I'm wrong, then I lay the blame squarely at the feet of MS. All I've seen is a big number "8" and colored balloons in their advertisements and press releases. Oh, and I can touch it.

Big miss.

 

[THOMO]

103 people will have changed their opinion in 6months or less, lmao

 

[PGHammer]

Currently I'm Windows 7 for gaming only and expect to stay that way. I'll only load on Windows 8 if I need it for programming or whatever.

Windows 8 on all of MY hardware (desktop currently, and will augment that with a legacy laptop) for the usual reasons one upgrades an OS (better hardware compatibility, better application and game compatibility, fewer crashes).

The Laptop In Question has a trackpad (surprisingly, Windows 8 has better support for trackpads than Windows 7 OR Vista - which is what was originally on the laptop) and will be used for two things - content consumption and Office 2013.

 

[dnottis]

.... fewer crashes).

Historically yes. This time around. Fuck no. Win8 is buggy and crashes more than Win7, if you are upgrading for less crashes you are sorely uninformed.

 

[Eman D. Rahym]

Historically yes. This time around. Fuck no. Win8 is buggy and crashes more than Win7, if you are upgrading for less crashes you are sorely uninformed.

For you it seems. For me, WIndows 8 is just as solid and reliable as Windows 7 ever was.

 

[heatlesssun]

Historically yes. This time around. Fuck no. Win8 is buggy and crashes more than Win7, if you are upgrading for less crashes you are sorely uninformed.

Or you just have an unfortunate hardware setup. Windows 8 has easily been more stable overall for me on all of machines. Not that Windows 7 wasn't solid but Windows 8 does run better on my Samsung slate.

But really, every time a new version of an OS comes out you'll some people complain that it's unstable compared to the prior version and some people note that it's more stable. Luck of the draw.

 

[Wrench00]

So Microsoft is supposed to wait for Windows 8 tablets before making Windows 8 work on tablets?

I understand you don't like the hybrid design of Windows 8 but I don't see how Microsoft is doing the "chicken before the egg" approach.

I think its a pretty good idea. Since 2/3 Microsoft Revenue comes from Businesses and most of the consumer stuff has been a giant FAIL.

They are trying to generate a demand for a product that hasn't been even introduced into the market through Monopolistic tactics.