Windows 8.1 with classic shell is all anyone needs to make windows 8.1 98% like windows 7. I got windows 8.1 running on laptops from 2005-2006. Runs great. Disable driver signature if your installing legacy hardware. If 7 worked on your hardware then 8.1 will work just fine also. Got it running 64bit on turionX2 laptop. Single core turion64 though had to run 32 bit since the bios of the laptop didn't support one of the cpu features. 32 bit version runs great still. Runs smoother than 7 and 8.0 even. Memory management improvements make a difference when your running 2-4GB of ram. Could open more windows without lag with 8.1 on older hardware than on 7. All my laptops are on 8.1 now with classic shell. Not missing 7 at all. Smoother experience in 8.1 in general.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Common Windows 7 Problems and How to Fix Them
- Thread starter CommanderFrank
- Start date
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
That's cool.
The argument isn't so much that you CAN'T make 8 more like 7 with third party add-ons.
The argument is that you shouldn't HAVE to do it in the first place.
Disposed
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2010
- Messages
- 5,211
No that's your argument and it's a shitty one to begin with. "I have to install a program to make windows do what I want" is a bullshit argument to simply join the flock and hate on windows 8.
The fact is like I said before installing programs to change windows is how it's always worked.
Now unless you use stock windows and all it's apps you're just being hypocritical to join the hate parade. It never ceases to amaze me how someone can literally replace every single stock app yet at the same time pretend having to do just that is reason enough to hate 8.
"Omg I use chrome, foobar, vlc, but why the hell should I have to install something to make windows do what I want?"
Keep drinking that Kool aid. It's quite obvious you're just joining the crowd.
But then your metro screen is all cramped!
nah it auto adjusts to screen resolution so it is spaced perfectly.
On my workstation I have 53. On my gaming rig all of my games are organized similar to Steams Tile view but I have all my games on it organized by genre, over 300. On my HTPC I have a very similar setup but XBMC does a better job so that is moot.
Stardock has been around since the early 90's allowing users to customize their OS installs how they want to. I've been using their products since XP because stock windows doesn't fit my needs. Allowing options is a good thing, not sure why you think it is bad.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
How, exactly, is it shitty? And when have I ever had to install a 3rd party program that restores previously exposed UI functionality in Windows?
I could understand if I was bitching about SQL or E-mail extended partition/filesystem control or AV. Or even screensavers and backgrounds. I'm not bitching about ANY of that though.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Right. Stardock was all about ADDING eye candy or ALTERING functionality.
Things like Classic Shell or Start8 are about RESTORING functionality.
And your argument falls apart because I HAVE to go to a third party solution because Microsoft has REMOVED my options.
CreepyUncleGoogle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 6,871
It's not really restoring anything. That'd kinda imply it was there before and was lost or taken away. That stuff wasn't included in Windows 8 to begin with so it's actually adding functionality rather than restoring it just like would be the case if you installed Angry Birds or Office 2013 on a Windows 8 computer.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Technically there are more options with 8. While Microsoft took the Start Menu out of the box in 8, there are 3rd party options for it and now there is a new UI element, like it or not, that is new and that doesn't have a 3rd party analog.
Obviously the Start Menu is an issue for a lot of desktop users and what Microsoft should have done is to allow options for the Start Screen to behave like the Start Menu. But I do think this gets overhyped especially from a consumer perspective. For a lot of people the complaints aren't about functionality but the difference in aesthetics between the Start Screen and Start Menu.
CreepyUncleGoogle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 6,871
It'd actually be really amazing to click a Start button and see a Win7 start menu sized set of text descriptions and then have the live tiles replace the static icons as sort of thumbnail views of what a Modern UI program is doing. And then Microsoft could restrict the display of programs in the new start menu to stuff from the Windows Store. Other programs could just be found by looking in the program folder where they're installed instead of being present on the start menu. This would allow Microsoft to move forward with both live tiles and the Windows Store, but still allow legacy applications or 3rd party GPL stuff to work in newer operating systems.
Hagrid
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2006
- Messages
- 9,168
Kool aid ha too much sugar, maybe lemon water?
I didn't join the bandwagon, they joined me!
Its not really bad though with classic shell.
The rabid windows 8 defenders are getting to be worse than the apple fanatics. I think I'd rather read debates about the mac pro trash can.
My "hate" for windows 8 started when I first used it on a family member's new laptop in Christmas of 2012... try learning it on a non touch screen laptop with just a track pad. I lasted 5mins before sitting down at a table and connecting a mouse. Then I got to spend time figuring out why IE 10 or 11 all of a sudden wouldn't show java or flash vids on MSN news. Chrome would work fine. Still don't know why that happened. I was told they eventually ran restore to get it working again.
People can call me an old fogey, hate lemming, or whatever they want but a touchscreen interface (that makes the "XP is a Fisher Price OS" line a prophetic joke) is not the best way to run a desktop or laptop OS. If they'd made it truly hybrid and let users customize it natively back to the old start screen, you'd have far less complaints and more people happily and blindly buying into the new MS app store walled garden/ecosystem. Instead it shows how blind they are to who are still their customers all to grab some of that sweet sweet tablet market. On top of that they couldn't wait a year and jumped the gun with windows RT that couldn't run most windows programs. So MS takes a dump on their customers, their hardware makers (surface tablet competition) and devs to muscle their way into the tablet market.
All this talk about the engine is great don't mean squat if I think the UI is a full screen mess tacked on to a desktop OS.
My "hate" for windows 8 started when I first used it on a family member's new laptop in Christmas of 2012... try learning it on a non touch screen laptop with just a track pad. I lasted 5mins before sitting down at a table and connecting a mouse. Then I got to spend time figuring out why IE 10 or 11 all of a sudden wouldn't show java or flash vids on MSN news. Chrome would work fine. Still don't know why that happened. I was told they eventually ran restore to get it working again.
People can call me an old fogey, hate lemming, or whatever they want but a touchscreen interface (that makes the "XP is a Fisher Price OS" line a prophetic joke) is not the best way to run a desktop or laptop OS. If they'd made it truly hybrid and let users customize it natively back to the old start screen, you'd have far less complaints and more people happily and blindly buying into the new MS app store walled garden/ecosystem. Instead it shows how blind they are to who are still their customers all to grab some of that sweet sweet tablet market. On top of that they couldn't wait a year and jumped the gun with windows RT that couldn't run most windows programs. So MS takes a dump on their customers, their hardware makers (surface tablet competition) and devs to muscle their way into the tablet market.
All this talk about the engine is great don't mean squat if I think the UI is a full screen mess tacked on to a desktop OS.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Plenty of Windows 8 opponents have noted from day one that desktop and modern UIs needed to be better integrated. There are those that are pretty happy with the way things stand and even bemoan Microsoft taking the steps that it did with 8.1 and even more in 8.1 Update to make things more keyboard and mouse friendly. So no, there are issues, but more so one of familiarity than functionality particularly with 8.1 and Update 1 goes further.
I'm not sure though how more people would be using Windows Store apps if there were an Metro off switch, that certainly would have made it even tougher for developers to make the decision to develop for that people could turn off or completely ignore.
If you already own 90% of the desktop market and have forever, with the next biggest competitor to Windows 8 being Windows 7, it's not exactly an insane business strategy to leverage a dominate product to gain entry into new markets, particularly as the market that you dominate is seeing a contraction in new sales.
It's actually not tacked onto the desktop, it is the desktop. The modern stuff is built into the core of Windows 8, and it was very important to do that to gain speed and efficiency that couldn't be accomplished on top of the desktop. In any case, this debate should end pretty soon, it looks like Microsoft is going to have everything integrated well enough with enough options so that the hybrid concept will work much better. Windowed modern apps and something like the Start Menu that's not full screen. Even in Update 1 there's now title bars for modern apps and the show up in the taskbar and the taskbar is available to modern apps. Microsoft isn't ignoring the desktop, but it is making it more malleable beyond traditional desktops and laptops and ultimately that's good for Microsoft and its customers. It extends the life of Windows and allows it to run on more devices.
Open office for windows is 50 times better than word perfect. And it's 100% free.
Disposed
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2010
- Messages
- 5,211
Wooooooooosh