What Comes Next After Windows 8.1?

Because Bringing the phone and PC closer together the last time Worked SO WELL...:rolleyes:
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Because Bringing the phone and PC closer together the last time Worked SO WELL...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Of course, if you are Apple, I guess it is ok and revolutionary then.......:rolleyes: Because, slowly, they are bringing their phones, tablets and computers closer together. Oh, and Microsoft is NOT getting rid of the desktop, contrary to what Microsoft haters would have us believe.
 
ManofGod said:
I mean, WTH, we should still have crank starters and clutches on the steering column. What is with all this new fangled stuff you young ones are trying to get us to use. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Adorable that you tried to run with the car analogy but a little nonsensical. A better analogy to come in with might have been Metro being the equivalent of a touchscreen replacing the steering wheel. Which of course would be totally absurd.

I understand and appreciate that Microsoft has financial goals tied to trying to make Metro get the new locked down app ecosystem forced onto everyone, under the misguided notion of a grand platform unification scheme with disparate devices that have no business or sense being unified (desktops and mobile devices). Even Apple understands this and have avoided this trap. It's just too bad Microsoft's hamfisted decisions in that regard have left most people alienated.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Because Bringing the phone and PC closer together the last time Worked SO WELL...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Nothing quite like Windows 8 has been attempted before. Maybe the complaints about it is why but we are about to see now for real if 8 has a future as the hardware is much improved with much better pricing on the low end. 8" full 8.1 devices starting at $300, pretty competitive.
 
DPI said:
I'm constantly amazed by how automobile manufacturers are adamant about "clinging to" the steering wheel. Oh that's right, because IT JUST WORKS.

See what I did there?
Click to expand...

You made an awful, tired computer to car analogy that makes no sense. Yes, I see what you did there.

By the way, the Start Menu was an amazingly awful UI concept. It did not present system functions in an internally consistent, logical manner, and more often obscured than enabled function. Not that the Start Screen is better, but in terms of function, it is literally a full screen Start Menu. That's the irony of these unending Windows 8 threads; the argument is between two UI paradigms that are functionally equivalent. The Start Menu is preferred because people are used to it, that's all. In 10 years, there will be threads complaining about the Start Screen being phased out for something else, because posters then will be familiar and comfortable with the Start Screen, having used it (and perhaps even grown up with it) for years.

DPI said:
And you see no problem with Microsoft holding DX improvements hostage behind a Windows upgrade paywall? Then you're part of the problem if not an employee or investor. Do tell.
Click to expand...

More lack of sense. Where did I say I'm OK with it? I said it's happening, informing the poster whom I replied to of a phenomenon his post indicated he was not aware. Nowhere in any of my posts was an endorsement of this, just an acknowledgement that it's happening.

One more time: if gaming is your #1 focus on the PC, then you should be on Windows 8 already, and preparing to upgrade to 8.1 tomorrow.
 
Terpfen said:
I'm constantly amazed by how people on a forum dedicated to pushing technology, always clamoring for something new, are adamant about using the exact same operating system into perpetuity.
Click to expand...

Terpfen said:
I say this as someone who thinks Windows is generally a junk OS and uses OS X as his primary OS.
Click to expand...

So I assume then that you're still running (OS X) Cheetah then, since all the other ones didn't change that much and the UI largely remains the same - right? :p

The issue is that I prefer Windows the way it was, not the way it is.
Note that I didn't say that 8 doesn't work, or can't do it's job - I said my preference is the way 7 is.

I would install 8 and tweak the hell out of it to make it work - but then it'd be just like 7, which needs no tweaking to make it the way I like it.

Hey, you like the new stuff...good for you. I guess you also buy every Mac service pack that comes out too, since (judging by your comment) you are NOT adamant about using the exact same operating system into perpetuity.

Terpfen said:
So again, if gaming is your #1 priority—and around here it certainly should be—then there's no reason not to be on 8 right now and 8.1 tomorrow afternoon.
Click to expand...

And why is that? Precisely what does 8 offer that isn't in 7 other than a dot update on DirectX and a bunch of tacked on Xbox 360 related crap that I don't care about?
 
zero2dash said:
So I assume then that you're still running (OS X) Cheetah then, since all the other ones didn't change that much and the UI largely remains the same - right? :p
Click to expand...

I guess you're not reading my posts very closely.

Hey, you like the new stuff…good for you. I guess you also buy every Mac service pack that comes out too, since (judging by your comment) you are NOT adamant about using the exact same operating system into perpetuity.
Click to expand...

Yep, you definitely are not.

And why is that? Precisely what does 8 offer that isn't in 7 other than a dot update on DirectX and a bunch of tacked on Xbox 360 related crap that I don't care about?
Click to expand...

Ah, the dismissal of 11.1 as a "dot update". There it is. Took longer than I thought it would, but it eventually showed up.

Anyway, ask people who played the BF4 beta about DirectX 11.1 and Windows 8. Or just ask DICE. With new consoles finally coming out, PC spec requirements are going to jump up. That includes the underlying APIs.
 
ManofGod said:
Also, I do not know where you get that info that people are willing to pay a premium for Mac Books because, from where I sit in this industry, I see more or less the exact opposite.
Click to expand...
MacBooks are actually among the best-selling notebooks. The Air, for instance, is currently fifth on Amazon's best sellers list, amidst a number of low-cost Chromebooks.
 
ManofGod said:
Mac Mini's are no where near enticing unless you like a computer with no keyboard, monitor or mouse. Also, I do not know where you get that info that people are willing to pay a premium for Mac Books because, from where I sit in this industry, I see more or less the exact opposite.
Click to expand...

I'm based out of Silicon Valley and this is precisely what I'm seeing. I'm more likely to see a Macbook or iPad in public than I am a Dell laptop or a Surface/Android tablet.
 
Terpfen said:
I guess you're not reading my posts very closely.



Yep, you definitely are not.
Click to expand...

No, I completely get it.
Just because someone is a power user that likes to play with hardware, certainly they also like to learn new OS stuff....just because.

Totally got it. :rolleyes:

Terpfen said:
Ah, the dismissal of 11.1 as a "dot update". There it is. Took longer than I thought it would, but it eventually showed up.
Click to expand...

Glad to help you out bro.

Terpfen said:
Anyway, ask people who played the BF4 beta about DirectX 11.1 and Windows 8. Or just ask DICE. With new consoles finally coming out, PC spec requirements are going to jump up. That includes the underlying APIs.
Click to expand...

smiley-laughing013.gif

Sure, for people trying to play games on cheap prebuilts.

And I don't really care about BF4 because (I would assume) they're still going with the "Origin only" requirement in addition to all those newfangled other spec requirements that you're talking about.
 
shade91 said:
Gaming and desktop operating systems are two entirely different worlds that should never be compared. I give him credit for taking a risk on something like SteamOS. He sees something that is wide open for the taking and is placing his bet accordingly.
Click to expand...
I find it unlikely they would introduce an OS that renders a high end ($$$) computer useless for anything but gaming. A large portion of Windows is Enterprise crap that it either overkill or entirely not used in the home. Yet home users get to pay for it.
 
zero2dash said:
And I don't really care about BF4 because (I would assume) they're still going with the "Origin only" requirement in addition to all those newfangled other spec requirements that you're talking about.
Click to expand...

You've missed about four different points in one post, and this is a perfect encapsulation of how you've done that. You actually thought the purpose of my posting is to essentially say "BF4 good, need Windows 8 now!"

My posts actually say "rising hardware and software requirements, kick-started by new products coming out soon, are going to force some new technologies to market. BF4's recommendation of Windows 8 (DirectX 11.1) is the herald of this change. If you're going to allow something like a new user interface—that is not functionally different from the one you're using right now—to restrict you from hopping on board, then you have only yourself to blame."

Or, in other words: if gaming is your #1 priority on the PC, then you should already have Windows 8 and be preparing to get 8.1.

But hey, why talk about the actual content of posts and their underlying points when rolleyes emoticons are so much easier?
 
zero2dash said:
I would install 8 and tweak the hell out of it to make it work - but then it'd be just like 7, which needs no tweaking to make it the way I like it.
Click to expand...
You could do that — or simply leave it alone. That's not to say that you should buy Windows 8 if you have no compelling reason to do so, but the notion that a person simply must jump through all of these hoops to make it just like Windows 7 has been so grossly overplayed. In terms of how far both OSes are from perfection, they're both pretty much equidistant: both too far from it to worry unnecessarily about how large the sliver of the distance is between the two.

It's a big, annoying Start Menu and hot corner weirdness. It isn't that big of a deal.
 
Terpfen said:
My posts actually say "rising hardware and software requirements, kick-started by new products coming out soon, are going to force some new technologies to market. BF4's recommendation of Windows 8 (DirectX 11.1) is the herald of this change. If you're going to allow something like a new user interface—that is not functionally different from the one you're using right now—to restrict you from hopping on board, then you have only yourself to blame."
Click to expand...

I think it's great that they're doing new things with the new technology. [no sarcasm]

And yes, sure, if I don't have 8 or 8.1, I'm missing out (of my own fault) because my OS of choice is missing those features. No problem there.

Terpfen said:
Or, in other words: if gaming is your #1 priority on the PC, then you should already have Windows 8 and be preparing to get 8.1.
Click to expand...

If all you do on a PC is game and nothing else, maybe.

I know where I need to go in 7, things are where I'm used to...therefore, I keep what works. My PC earns me money; it's not a 'free time waster'. If I have to play around and spend time on Google to figure out where shit is in 8, then I'm not upgrading to 8.

Terpfen said:
But hey, why talk about the actual content of posts and their underlying points when rolleyes emoticons are so much easier?
Click to expand...

Ah but sometimes said content and underlying points is skewed in ways one does not understand. :D

wonderfield said:
You could do that — or simply leave it alone. That's not to say that you should buy Windows 8 if you have no compelling reason to do so, but the notion that a person simply must jump through all of these hoops to make it just like Windows 7 has been so grossly overplayed. In terms of how far both OSes are from perfection, they're both pretty much equidistant: both too far from it to worry unnecessarily about how large the sliver of the distance is between the two.

It's a big, annoying Start Menu and hot corner weirdness. It isn't that big of a deal.
Click to expand...

  1. Install ClassicShell
  2. Reboot
  3. Profit?

Yes, it's easy.
However, that glosses over 1 thing that is wrong with the OS (IMHO). That doesn't automagically make things move around to where they used to be, or cause the rest of the OS to function at the same level as all the Windows iterations before it.

For instance - why all the sudden can I not rename 'Network 2' or 'Network 3' or 'Network 102' to simply 'Network' anymore without having to go into the Registry? Why, in Windows 7, that's a 60 second job (tops) that takes rooting around in literally 3 screens with 3 clicks to do. Why was that made so difficult in 8?

I like how fast 8 boots. I like the (reported) under the hood stuff. I like the new task manager, I like the ribbon additions to Explorer. All good stuff.

Everything else - don't want it. Sorry. If they took 8, stripped out all the 'app' nonsense (on the desktop), removed any and all traces of Metro, moved all the stuff back the way it was in 7 but kept the new additions and the new flat UI and called it 8.1 - I'd install 8.1 tomorrow.
 
8.2. After that, 9. Personally I think 8 is a fine OS, though not as good as 7 was when it came out. And all you idiots out there think 9 will suck just like 8 (even though 8 doesnt suck), well it won't. Remember Vista, ME, 95? Bad, good, bad, good. ME, XP, Vista, 7, 8.
 
Vista wasn't a bad OS at all. It had 'issues' pre-SP1 but has turned into a mature worthwhile OS. In that regard, I can see where 8 fans will probably say the same thing once 9's released, substituting Vista and 'pre-SP1' (in the discussion) for '8' and '8.1'.

8 and 8.1 have promise. I'd never say 8 was a horrible or even a bad OS. It works. Some of the stuff is bass-ackwards, but it works. But I have a hard time justifying a format c: and install of 8 or 8.1 when 7 is where it's at now.
 
PCunicorn said:
8.2. After that, 9. Personally I think 8 is a fine OS, though not as good as 7 was when it came out. And all you idiots out there think 9 will suck just like 8 (even though 8 doesnt suck), well it won't. Remember Vista, ME, 95? Bad, good, bad, good. ME, XP, Vista, 7, 8.
Click to expand...

My guess is that 9 will be more configurable to allow it to be more palatable to desktop users but will remain a hybrid. I think Microsoft made that choice and decided that that's how it would be and that they weren't going back which is where a lot of the heat comes from with the not listening to people that don't like the approach and are hoping that it fails. It was a certainly a rough last year but the new hardware coming out does look promising on the touch and tablet side, particularly these 8" 8.1 Bay Trail devices starting at $300. Lenovo just announced theirs today which brings the total to 3 new 8" 8.1 devices coming out this fall.
 
I am getting damn tired of these Direct X versions being tied to specific Windows versions. I'm not leaving Win 7 just to get DX 11.2. If MS doesn't get it together in that regard I'm just going to start using something else. I have 4 PCs in my house and the cost alone of keeping up on licenses is getting stupid. Even Apple doesn't charge that much for an OS. The only thing keeping me with MS is games. That's it. I could care less about what the UI looks like or how it functions I just want to be guaranteed a certain number of years worth of upgrades. To spend $100 to $130 for an OS and then get shafted on the next DX version is inane. I know they aren't making money after that purchase but Linux distros don't make a single dime in most cases from the end user and they continue to provide upgrades as long as they can without throwing up an artificial pay-wall for their users.

Times are changing MS put your meat on the seat or put your feet on the street.
 
hpglow said:
I am getting damn tired of these Direct X versions being tied to specific Windows versions. I'm not leaving Win 7 just to get DX 11.2. If MS doesn't get it together in that regard I'm just going to start using something else. I have 4 PCs in my house and the cost alone of keeping up on licenses is getting stupid. Even Apple doesn't charge that much for an OS. The only thing keeping me with MS is games. That's it. I could care less about what the UI looks like or how it functions I just want to be guaranteed a certain number of years worth of upgrades. To spend $100 to $130 for an OS and then get shafted on the next DX version is inane. I know they aren't making money after that purchase but Linux distros don't make a single dime in most cases from the end user and they continue to provide upgrades as long as they can without throwing up an artificial pay-wall for their users.

Times are changing MS put your meat on the seat or put your feet on the street.
Click to expand...

Many longtime (multi-decade) Windows users feel the same, I certainly do, that Microsoft has forgotten what made Windows great and why, alienating longtime hardware and software partners along with corporations and end users and flushing it all down the toilet. That's why I seriously hope SteamOS takes off.
 
ManofGod said:
Mac Mini's are no where near enticing unless you like a computer with no keyboard, monitor or mouse. Also, I do not know where you get that info that people are willing to pay a premium for Mac Books because, from where I sit in this industry, I see more or less the exact opposite.
Click to expand...

MacBooks are the number one selling laptops and have been for a long while.
Outside of Lenovo, Apple is one of the few PC manufacturers selling a lot of product
 
zero2dash said:
A lot of wrech0 vs heatlesssun pissing contests.

AFAIC until they return the desktop to the same desktop that was prevalent from 95 through 7, they can do whatever else they want....IMHO 7 is damn near perfect; if they gave it a few of the better bells and whistles out of 8 like the task manager, faster boot, better defense....call it 9, I'm on board on day 1.

If they stick with the touchscreen stuff for people who don't own touchscreens - no thanks.
Click to expand...

You are aware the touchscreen stuff is optional right?

This is what I don't get about the bitching in regards to Windows 8. Desktop mode is exactly the same as Windows 7. Well minus the start button, but I guess I'm the only one who hasn't used a start button in years. It was and remains inefficient, slow, and basically pointless so I haven't missed it in 8.
 
zero2dash said:
For instance - why all the sudden can I not rename 'Network 2' or 'Network 3' or 'Network 102' to simply 'Network' anymore without having to go into the Registry? Why, in Windows 7, that's a 60 second job (tops) that takes rooting around in literally 3 screens with 3 clicks to do. Why was that made so difficult in 8?
Click to expand...

Not sure wth you are talking about. All you need to do is click "rename this connection" This takes literally 5 seconds to get to and do.

I like how fast 8 boots. I like the (reported) under the hood stuff. I like the new task manager, I like the ribbon additions to Explorer. All good stuff.

Everything else - don't want it. Sorry. If they took 8, stripped out all the 'app' nonsense (on the desktop), removed any and all traces of Metro, moved all the stuff back the way it was in 7 but kept the new additions and the new flat UI and called it 8.1 - I'd install 8.1 tomorrow.
Click to expand...

You know you don't have to use metro or any of the apps? That is all optional.

Guess it is just easier to bitch about stuff then to actually use it.
 
Terpfen said:
I'm constantly amazed by how people on a forum dedicated to pushing technology, always clamoring for something new, are adamant about using the exact same operating system into perpetuity.
Click to expand...
Not everything that's new is better. People really need to understand this.

When Intel introduced the Pentium 4, it wasn't better then their Pentium III's. At least not the early models anyway. The Geforce FX graphic cards weren't better then Geforce 4 Ti's, but were certainly noisier. AMD's new Bulldozer chips don't outperform Phentom II X6's.

When Pentium 4's sucked, Athlon XP's took their place. When Geforce FX chips sucked, everyone bought Radeon 9700's. When Bulldozer was released, everyone ignored it. When Windows 8 was released, people will continue to use Windows 7, or maybe even go Linux.
 
Climber said:
Not sure wth you are talking about. All you need to do is click "rename this connection" This takes literally 5 seconds to get to and do.



You know you don't have to use metro or any of the apps? That is all optional.

Guess it is just easier to bitch about stuff then to actually use it.
Click to expand...

Everything about Windows is enjoyable, the only thing I wish they didn't do was split the desktop and metro. Just about every major gripe I had they are fixing in the update.
But if they combined the desktop and live tiles I would be supper giddy.
 
It's funny how people keep making out that Windows 8.1 is a 'major' new version of Windows... Come on, it's fucking Vista still! Vista has turned into Microsoft's most successful version of Windows EVER!

It's so funny that no tech 'journalists' have ever made the connection.

Personally, I think Microsoft got lazy and greedy. I truly wonder if MS is CAPABLE of making a NEW version of Windows. I fully expect the next release to be still based on Vista, I really hope that I'm wrong.
 
Terpfen said:
You've missed about four different points in one post, and this is a perfect encapsulation of how you've done that. You actually thought the purpose of my posting is to essentially say "BF4 good, need Windows 8 now!"

My posts actually say "rising hardware and software requirements, kick-started by new products coming out soon, are going to force some new technologies to market. BF4's recommendation of Windows 8 (DirectX 11.1) is the herald of this change. If you're going to allow something like a new user interface—that is not functionally different from the one you're using right now—to restrict you from hopping on board, then you have only yourself to blame."

Or, in other words: if gaming is your #1 priority on the PC, then you should already have Windows 8 and be preparing to get 8.1.

But hey, why talk about the actual content of posts and their underlying points when rolleyes emoticons are so much easier?
Click to expand...
We use to have a major DirectX revision once or twice a year, then Microsoft came out with their Xbox and we had DirectX 9 for 8 years. DirectX 11 & 11.1 may contain improvements but I have no doubt they contain primarily an alignment to Xbox One. Unless DirectX 12 contains further alignments you won't see DirectX 12 for another 8 years. Competition with SteamOS or Mantle might be the only thing to chang that. But bringing out technical improvements to the PC purely for the sake of it won't be the reason.
 
Terpfen said:
Windows 7 is popular because its usability wasn't a radical departure from XP, which is somehow held in warm regard and still used by a significant number. And yet, 8 is not fundamentally different from 7 once you get to the desktop.

8 missteps when you need to interact with system functions from the desktop, namely with the hot corners and Charms bar garbage. Otherwise, the Start Screen is basically a full screen Start Menu with a Windows Phone theme, and the UI overall does not warrant the obstinance on display in every thread ever about 8. And I say this as someone who thinks Windows is generally a junk OS and uses OS X as his primary OS.
Click to expand...

Win8 is fundamentally different from Win7. Having used both I absolutely can not stand 8, mostly due to the full-screen 'start screen' which is the most inefficient use of space since the launch of the new start menu with XP (which I never use either). All I want out of a desktop OS is - shockingly - a good desktop environment. Everything which distracts from that is unneeded and possibly harmful.

As far as OS X goes, I find its window manager to be worse than the one found in Windows 95 in many ways. Resizing of windows is funky, things don't snap or resize when you expect them to, switching between individual windows of a single app is a bloody nightmare and in general it reminds me more of using Win3.x than a modern desktop OS. And yes, I use OS X on an almost daily basis (OS X 10.8, MacBook Pro) for my job as an iOS developer.

As far as I'm concerned Windows 7 is the best desktop OS at this point, followed by something like Ubuntu/Mint Linux with the KDE/Gnome WM, trailed by OS X, and dragging Win8 along :)
 
I think Microsoft needs to listen to consumer feedback, not trying to force their ideas and features that people do not want, resulting in low sales or negative reception, you think Microsoft would have learned from their past mistakes but yet keep repeating it. But whatever, its their loss.
 
Climber said:
You are aware the touchscreen stuff is optional right?

This is what I don't get about the bitching in regards to Windows 8. Desktop mode is exactly the same as Windows 7. Well minus the start button, but I guess I'm the only one who hasn't used a start button in years. It was and remains inefficient, slow, and basically pointless so I haven't missed it in 8.
Click to expand...

^^^ This. All the whiney bitches on this thread apparently are clueless about installing an alternative/aftermarket start button. Or perhaps they're just whiney bitches.

Go to a whine bar girls. Have some cheese. Chill out. :D
 
Terpfen said:
I'm constantly amazed by how people on a forum dedicated to pushing technology, always clamoring for something new, are adamant about using the exact same operating system into perpetuity.
Click to expand...

I'm not. People also recognize when you're sliding backward over a cliff.
 
I like Windows 8 the OS but not the UI. I use the OS and WindowBlinds has made it effectively just like Windows 7 UI. I'm very happy. MS should just have offered the option to have the old UI (just like every version of windows before did). I know why they didn't they wanted to try and force as many people as possible to use the new metro ui/store. I still don't use metro or the store but the OS is ok.
 
Terpfen said:
I'm constantly amazed by how people on a forum dedicated to pushing technology, always clamoring for something new, are adamant about using the exact same operating system into perpetuity.
Click to expand...

I'm not looking for the exact same OS into perpetuity. I'm looking for the same kind of OS into perpetuity, with a similar, but improving and evolving, interface that allows me to continue to use the same type of applications that I've already invested so much time, energy, money, (and brain cells learning) into.

I want Windows 7, improved with some of the best of Windows 8, and a better but still similar interface. I do not need to integrate my tablet and smart phone directly into the same interface; in fact, I do not want to do so. My phone, for example, is optimized to perform it's primary duty (calling people), and perform some extra functionality, such as light web browsing, light gaming, texting, taking photos, GPS and maps, etc. My tablet should be slightly more functional (such as providing the ability to do all of those except call and perhaps text) but provide a better browsing capability (a lightweight browser) and the ability to take music or movies on the go. If it has the ability to open documents created on my laptop or desktop, great, that's useful, but I don't really need to edit them on a 7" or even 10" tablet (and I prefer 7" tablets). My laptop needs to be a lightweight desktop, not as good at gaming or storage, but otherwise full featured. And my desktop needs to do almost everything except photos and GPS, plus heavy weight gaming, document development, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top