Microsoft Wants You to Forget Windows 8

oneils said:
I'll have to look into this because it wasn't obvious to me how to "snap" an app. It was just full screen. I'm kind of a "pointing" user. I like to be able to do everything with the mouse rather than keyboard.
Click to expand...

It's not at all obvious but this is also true of the snapping of desktop apps, you just have to know that it's there. However moving windows around is a well known process with desktop apps.
 
The ones who like 8 are probably using 3rd party stuff to get the start menu back and stuff. That does not count. You should not have to pay for additional software to make the software you paid for usable.

I'll admit I never used windows 8 but from the screenshots I've seen, and seeing it in action, I know I would HATE it.

Also I will cry the day Linux decides to do the cloud thing too. I really hope they know better. One of the main reasons people use Linux is for better control, security, and privacy. All that will be shot out the window if they follow the cloud fad. Sadly I could see it happen. Ubuntu/Gnome 3 already did the windows 8 metro thing.
 
Red Squirrel said:
The ones who like 8 are probably using 3rd party stuff to get the start menu back and stuff. That does not count. You should not have to pay for additional software to make the software you paid for usable.

I'll admit I never used windows 8 but from the screenshots I've seen, and seeing it in action, I know I would HATE it.

Also I will cry the day Linux decides to do the cloud thing too. I really hope they know better. One of the main reasons people use Linux is for better control, security, and privacy. All that will be shot out the window if they follow the cloud fad. Sadly I could see it happen. Ubuntu/Gnome 3 already did the windows 8 metro thing.
Click to expand...

I use windows 8, and no third party apps. You need to read the thread before posting some crap like that
 
Red Squirrel said:
The ones who like 8 are probably using 3rd party stuff to get the start menu back and stuff. That does not count. You should not have to pay for additional software to make the software you paid for usable.
Click to expand...

Classic Shell is free. ;)

I'll admit I never used windows 8 but from the screenshots I've seen, and seeing it in action, I know I would HATE it.
Click to expand...
Um... perhaps you should try using it before bashing it?
I'm the biggest anti-M$ Linux hippie on this forum, and even that statement makes little sense to me. :confused:

Also I will cry the day Linux decides to do the cloud thing too. I really hope they know better. One of the main reasons people use Linux is for better control, security, and privacy. All that will be shot out the window if they follow the cloud fad. Sadly I could see it happen. Ubuntu/Gnome 3 already did the windows 8 metro thing.
Click to expand...
Well, that's the nice thing about Linux, you can build your own, preferably without any cloud functionality.
 
Red Squirrel said:
The ones who like 8 are probably using 3rd party stuff to get the start menu back and stuff. That does not count. You should not have to pay for additional software to make the software you paid for usable.

I'll admit I never used windows 8 but from the screenshots I've seen, and seeing it in action, I know I would HATE it.

Also I will cry the day Linux decides to do the cloud thing too. I really hope they know better. One of the main reasons people use Linux is for better control, security, and privacy. All that will be shot out the window if they follow the cloud fad. Sadly I could see it happen. Ubuntu/Gnome 3 already did the windows 8 metro thing.
Click to expand...

You don't have to pay for all third party stuff. Also lots of people myself included used and liked it just fine without changing anything. You never used, it which is telling but there is really no point in you using it because you already made up your mind.

Linux is already doing the cloud thing in android. The most popular Linux distro.
 
rudy said:
You don't have to pay for all third party stuff. Also lots of people myself included used and liked it just fine without changing anything. You never used, it which is telling but there is really no point in you using it because you already made up your mind.
Click to expand...

What's funny about this, is the people that actually liked Windows 8 didn't use any 3rd party programs to modify it.
Those who didn't like it are the ones that did; irony!

Linux is already doing the cloud thing in android. The most popular Linux distro.
Click to expand...
As a rule of thumb, when one talks about Linux, they mean GNU/Linux, not Droid/Linux.
We probably should have specified that.
 
Red Squirrel said:
The ones who like 8 are probably using 3rd party stuff to get the start menu back and stuff. That does not count. You should not have to pay for additional software to make the software you paid for usable.

I'll admit I never used windows 8 but from the screenshots I've seen, and seeing it in action, I know I would HATE it.
Click to expand...

I used to use Start 8 when Windows 8 came out. I too complained about not being able to boot to desktop and I didn't like the start screen for one reason, it didn't allow you to change the background aside from a solid color. Both these issues were fixed in 8.1 and I no longer use Start 8 since I think the Start screen is now just as good as the start menu ever was.

Do metro apps suck? Maybe but I don't complain about them because I don't use them and neither does anyone who uses Windows 8. People have this idea that you will be inundated with Metro apps by using Windows 8 which is nonsense.

You are one of the brave ones who admits they have never used it. That is admirable.
 
I love windows 8 now that I don't have to deal with the home screen.

It's fundamentally better than Windows 7 from what I have seen.
 
Staples said:
Do metro apps suck? Maybe but I don't complain about them because I don't use them and neither does anyone who uses Windows 8. People have this idea that you will be inundated with Metro apps by using Windows 8 which is nonsense.
Click to expand...

There are some pretty nice modern apps out there that work well even on desktops and laptops. Mostly of the social networking/casual gaming type of things but a lot of people do use laptops and desktops for these kinds of activities. But no, there's no need to use any of them except PC Settings and Search. In addition to the Start Screen those are the only three modern elements that one would encounter on an 8.1 device with the stock UI if they only used desktop apps.

This is why I think it's not that difficult for the average person to use 8.1 as a desktop OS if they only use desktop apps. Adding modern apps into the mix does make things a bit more complex.
 
Bigbacon said:
Vista got the bad review because so many people had just horribly old machines with old hardware.
Click to expand...

No, Vista got bad reviews because as usual, in order to sell it, minimum requirements were set so low in order to get people to believe that their current machine would run fine that way. They had a computer running XP fine, but believed all the hype about how great Vista was, so they fell for the M$ sales pitch. But if you actually had a machine with those minimum things, nothing would run; it would take half an hour to boot, and then the swap file would churn the fixed disk endlessly until the machine locked up (or blew up). Then there was no way for them to get their computer back to the way it was without professional assistance, most often someone like a member at this website who actually knew better, but was not consulted on the purchase of the new OS because of M$ advertising about how wonderful it was and how easy it would be to upgrade. Every OS by M$ is sold like this; great expectations from misleading commercials and advertisements, then a great letdown when they actually find out what they've done to their computers. Of all M$ crappy tricks, fooling the public into believing that moving to windows 8 being easy was second in disasters only to Dos 6 with the doublespace debacle.
 
nightfly said:
No, Vista got bad reviews because as usual, in order to sell it, minimum requirements were set so low in order to get people to believe that their current machine would run fine that way. They had a computer running XP fine, but believed all the hype about how great Vista was, so they fell for the M$ sales pitch. But if you actually had a machine with those minimum things, nothing would run; it would take half an hour to boot, and then the swap file would churn the fixed disk endlessly until the machine locked up (or blew up). Then there was no way for them to get their computer back to the way it was without professional assistance, most often someone like a member at this website who actually knew better, but was not consulted on the purchase of the new OS because of M$ advertising about how wonderful it was and how easy it would be to upgrade. Every OS by M$ is sold like this; great expectations from misleading commercials and advertisements, then a great letdown when they actually find out what they've done to their computers. Of all M$ crappy tricks, fooling the public into believing that moving to windows 8 being easy was second in disasters only to Dos 6 with the doublespace debacle.
Click to expand...

Yeah MS always has sys requirements set WAY too low.

Even XP you need at least a gig of ram and dual core for it to be usable, I remember when it came out and it was shipping on machines with like 128MB of ram and a single core processor. It was dog slow right out of the box. Same thing with Vista, it was shipping on machines with like 1GB of ram, maybe even lower, and single core processor. Yeah, it will run, but add an A/V, a browser with several tabs open, and try to open a word document or something, and it's going to be bloody slow. It seems each Microsoft OS is more and more of a pig, for no reason. Their OSes today use almost 1000 times more resources than their first desktop OS. They both do the same thing. (run your programs)
 
Red Squirrel said:
Yeah MS always has sys requirements set WAY too low.

Even XP you need at least a gig of ram and dual core for it to be usable, I remember when it came out and it was shipping on machines with like 128MB of ram and a single core processor. It was dog slow right out of the box. Same thing with Vista, it was shipping on machines with like 1GB of ram, maybe even lower, and single core processor. Yeah, it will run, but add an A/V, a browser with several tabs open, and try to open a word document or something, and it's going to be bloody slow. It seems each Microsoft OS is more and more of a pig, for no reason. Their OSes today use almost 1000 times more resources than their first desktop OS. They both do the same thing. (run your programs)
Click to expand...

You're over exaggerating that a bit. Windows XP will do just fine for basic things on 512 MB of ram and a single core, my Pentium M laptop is a testament to that. Web browsing flash ads and bullshit like that hurts it a bit but NoScript helps a lot.
 
I've got a coat hanger, pair of latex gloves and minimal medical training.
Let's make this happen!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top