wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
I'm not sure how you get "you'll spend half your time in Metro" from "shoving two completely different UI paradigms down peoples throats simultaneously".
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
"You can choose a local account when installing windows, it is not hidden at all."
So how do I stop from having to sign in , I didn't see the "don't want to sign in" option when installing.
If it's not much different than Win 7 then why use it ? especially not having a touch screen.
Win 8 is fine but I do not see the purpose like with Win 7 over Vista.
Never mind , I'm staying with Win7.
Even Win7 makes you create a user account. It's bottom left:
That's honestly my favorite feature since I have to use multiple PCs all the time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4UdrEPJHnE
Not the best video, but the idea is there.
I put Windows 8 on my netbook just to give a whirl and while it runs nice and smooth, it doesn't bode well with me at all. Nothing about it feels like an "upgrade." It reminds me of the days of dropping in a custom shell for Windows XP.
I understand that Microsoft is desperately trying to catch up with Google and Apple in the mobile market, but their efforts are too little, too late. Furthermore, Microsoft did such a horrible job in previous versions of Windows with file synchronization (Offline Files, to this day, is such an utterly horrible POS), that I simply don't trust their implementation of cloud services.
Metro is stupid and unnecessary. All Microsoft needed to do to make an already great desktop OS work well with tablets was to beef up desktop gadgets and add better touch and gesture features to Explorer. Android functions in this manner and it works great. This coupled with simplifying the taskbar for tablet use would make Windows 8 extremely accessible on mobile devices while retaining its desktop functionality (and definitely compete with Android in this respect). This "tile" garbage is sloppy and poorly executed. Remember the last time you heard someone raving about Windows Phone and wishing their computer was just like it? Yeah, me neither.
Microsoft still seems to think that the average computer user is savvy and knows what they're doing. The average computer user is an idiot. Even people who sit in front of a computer every single day and use it for hours on end at the office still haven't a clue how to defragment a hard drive or consolidate the 500 shortcuts sitting on their desktop. People are going to shit themselves just trying to figure out how to get to their files.
Old habits die hard and when you make no efforts to innovate or improve your products until years after the competition does it, you end up alienating your own customers.
The other major issue with Windows 8 is the fact that, under the hood, it's still the same OS we've been using for 15 years. It really hasn't changed all that much. Windows still uses the registry, "virtual" memory, still requires a restart when you update it, and will easily get hosed through Internet Explorer just like its predecessors. These are the tenets of an extremely dated, antiquated piece of software that Microsoft refuses to let go of.
People love iOS and Android. Nobody really "loves" Windows. With old PC titles becoming mobile games, Valve making a solid effort to reintroduce games to Mac, it's really just a matter of waiting for creative and productivity software to become available for Android and I'll have no problem saying goodbye to Windows. Microsoft will still have a healthy stake in Enterprise and IT solutions, but I don't see them having much of a consumer OS presence by 2020. I think it's pretty much down hill from here.
People are going to try Windows 8, hate it, and go back to either Windows 7 or give their money to Apple and Google for offering OS's that do it right.
The other major issue with Windows 8 is the fact that, under the hood, it's still the same OS we've been using for 15 years. It really hasn't changed all that much. Windows still uses the registry, "virtual" memory, still requires a restart when you update it, and will easily get hosed through Internet Explorer just like its predecessors. These are the tenets of an extremely dated, antiquated piece of software that Microsoft refuses to let go of.
I understand that Microsoft is desperately trying to catch up with Google and Apple in the mobile market, but their efforts are too little, too late. Furthermore, Microsoft did such a horrible job in previous versions of Windows with file synchronization (Offline Files, to this day, is such an utterly horrible POS), that I simply don't trust their implementation of cloud services.
People are going to try Windows 8, hate it, and go back to either Windows 7 or give their money to Apple and Google for offering OS's that do it right.
This was the paragraph where I realized you don't know what you're talking about. Thanks for that, having an accurate way to gauge someone is so important.
I put Windows 8 on my netbook just to give a whirl and while it runs nice and smooth, it doesn't bode well with me at all. Nothing about it feels like an "upgrade." It reminds me of the days of dropping in a custom shell for Windows XP.
I understand that Microsoft is desperately trying to catch up with Google and Apple in the mobile market, but their efforts are too little, too late. Furthermore, Microsoft did such a horrible job in previous versions of Windows with file synchronization (Offline Files, to this day, is such an utterly horrible POS), that I simply don't trust their implementation of cloud services.
Metro is stupid and unnecessary. All Microsoft needed to do to make an already great desktop OS work well with tablets was to beef up desktop gadgets and add better touch and gesture features to Explorer. Android functions in this manner and it works great. This coupled with simplifying the taskbar for tablet use would make Windows 8 extremely accessible on mobile devices while retaining its desktop functionality (and definitely compete with Android in this respect). This "tile" garbage is sloppy and poorly executed. Remember the last time you heard someone raving about Windows Phone and wishing their computer was just like it? Yeah, me neither.
Microsoft still seems to think that the average computer user is savvy and knows what they're doing. The average computer user is an idiot. Even people who sit in front of a computer every single day and use it for hours on end at the office still haven't a clue how to defragment a hard drive or consolidate the 500 shortcuts sitting on their desktop. People are going to shit themselves just trying to figure out how to get to their files.
Old habits die hard and when you make no efforts to innovate or improve your products until years after the competition does it, you end up alienating your own customers.
The other major issue with Windows 8 is the fact that, under the hood, it's still the same OS we've been using for 15 years. It really hasn't changed all that much. Windows still uses the registry, "virtual" memory, still requires a restart when you update it, and will easily get hosed through Internet Explorer just like its predecessors. These are the tenets of an extremely dated, antiquated piece of software that Microsoft refuses to let go of.
People love iOS and Android. Nobody really "loves" Windows. With old PC titles becoming mobile games, Valve making a solid effort to reintroduce games to Mac, it's really just a matter of waiting for creative and productivity software to become available for Android and I'll have no problem saying goodbye to Windows. Microsoft will still have a healthy stake in Enterprise and IT solutions, but I don't see them having much of a consumer OS presence by 2020. I think it's pretty much down hill from here.
People are going to try Windows 8, hate it, and go back to either Windows 7 or give their money to Apple and Google for offering OS's that do it right.
I was actually asking how to stop from having to sign in after it has already been installed or is that even possible ?
So you put Windows 8 on a current gen netbook, hardware that virtually NO ONE will 8 run Windows 8 on an concluded that Windows 8 is too little, too late?
There are multiple factual errors in that post and his personal conclusion of Windows 8 was drawn by using it on a current get netbook, hardware that no one will ever run Windows 8 on, particularly if it's a typical 1024x600 netbook device that can't run Metro apps.
This was the paragraph where I realized you don't know what you're talking about. Thanks for that, having an accurate way to gauge someone is so important.
Do all Microsoft employees spend more time gauging what Microsoft customers know about Microsoft products than they do focusing on what customers want from Microsoft products? Seems like very dismissive and unproductive behavior to me.This was the paragraph where I realized you don't know what you're talking about. Thanks for that, having an accurate way to gauge someone is so important.
Windows still uses <snip> "virtual" memory,
This was the paragraph where I realized you don't know what you're talking about. Thanks for that, having an accurate way to gauge someone is so important.
Do all Microsoft employees spend more time gauging what Microsoft customers know about Microsoft products than they do focusing on what customers want from Microsoft products? Seems like very dismissive and unproductive behavior to me.
They're changing it too much!The average computer user is an idiot. Even people who sit in front of a computer every single day and use it for hours on end at the office still haven't a clue how to defragment a hard drive or consolidate the 500 shortcuts sitting on their desktop. People are going to shit themselves just trying to figure out how to get to their files.
Old habits die hard and when you make no efforts to innovate or improve your products until years after the competition does it, you end up alienating your own customers.
They're not changing it enough!The other major issue with Windows 8 is the fact that, under the hood, it's still the same OS we've been using for 15 years.
People love iOS and Android. Nobody really "loves" Windows.
The hardware of my netbook is irrelevant. Microsoft's effort to make desktop users use a tablet UI for their PC is silly. Windows 8 as solely a tablet OS is one thing, but Average Joe running it on his/her desktop who's been used to the old fashioned Start Menu since the 95/98 days and dragging shortcuts from every corner of his PC onto the desktop? No, it ain't gonna bode well at all.
Do all Microsoft employees spend more time gauging what Microsoft customers know about Microsoft products than they do focusing on what customers want from Microsoft products? Seems like very dismissive and unproductive behavior to me.
There has to be some reason why he put "virtual" in quotation marks. That definitely needs clarification.He thinks Microsoft should ditch virtual memory. That alone tells me I don't want him anywhere near any OS dev team.
They appear contradictory only when the interpretation is radically skewed. In one quote he's talking about the interface; the other he's talking about the Windows 'core'. Those elements which aren't directly user-facing, as evidenced by the words "under the hood". These are obviously different things.Not to mention the contradicting points he brings up.
Would I "take the word"? No. Would I take an elitist, wholly-dismissive attitude toward negative feedback? No. Somewhere in between lies a sensible approach to dealing with customer feedback. You disagree, do you?So tell me, if you spent years on a product would you take the word of a tiny minority of people that have seen your product and an even tinier minority of those people that actually used you product on the platform for which it was optimized?
Do all Microsoft employees spend more time gauging what Microsoft customers know about Microsoft products than they do focusing on what customers want from Microsoft products? Seems like very dismissive and unproductive behavior to me.
I don't believe that's his claim.I mean, FFS, he claimed that it's the exact same kernel for the past 15 years.
There has to be some reason why he put "virtual" in quotation marks. That definitely needs clarification.
Given some of the other points in that paragraph, I don't think it's unwise to assume he just doesn't know what he's talking about.There has to be some reason why he put "virtual" in quotation marks. That definitely needs clarification.
Wikipedia said:In addition to the new user interface, security capabilities, and developer technologies, several major components of the core operating system were redesigned, most notably the audio, print, display, and networking subsystems; while the results of this work will be visible to software developers, end-users will only see what appear to be evolutionary changes in the user interface.
Wikipedia said:At the core of the operating system, many improvements have been made to the memory manager, process scheduler, heap manager, and I/O scheduler.
The core has changed greatly over the past 15 years. See above.They appear contradictory only when the interpretation is radically skewed. In one quote he's talking about the interface; the other he's talking about the Windows 'core'. Those elements which aren't directly user-facing, as evidenced by the words "under the hood". These are obviously different things.
People love iOS and Android. Nobody really "loves" Windows. With old PC titles becoming mobile games, Valve making a solid effort to reintroduce games to Mac, it's really just a matter of waiting for creative and productivity software to become available for Android and I'll have no problem saying goodbye to Windows.
Hello? If Android has sufficient productivity tools to satisfy him, a supposed power user, then why would anyone expect Windows to hold on to its lead in the Enterprise market?Microsoft will still have a healthy stake in Enterprise and IT solutions, but I don't see them having much of a consumer OS presence by 2020. I think it's pretty much down hill from here.
I don't believe that's his claim.
he's talking about the Windows 'core'
under the hood, it's still the same OS we've been using for 15 years.
You have not disabled virtual memory. Trust me, if you had, you'd knowMy pagefile has been off for months with no impact at all.
He thinks Microsoft should ditch virtual memory. That alone tells me I don't want him anywhere near any OS dev team.
I mean, FFS, he claimed that it's the exact same kernel for the past 15 years. That's so laughably inaccurate that I don't even know where to begin debunking it.
Your netbook does meet the base requirements for optimal Windows 8 functionality. That said the one key ingredient that you are missing is either a touch screen or enhanced track pad. As much as people want to keep touch out of the discussion of Windows 8 touch will be a key ingredient on Windows 8, if not via a touch screen then with a track pad and with form factors very few Windows users have seen before. Windows 8 is deeply tied to hardware and it cannot be evaluated for what it has to offer without some touch mechanism. Will that deter non-touch users from upgrading. Perhaps at first but then there are a whole slew of Metro apps that might change their mind.
They appear contradictory only when the interpretation is radically skewed. In one quote he's talking about the interface; the other he's talking about the Windows 'core'. Those elements which aren't directly user-facing, as evidenced by the words "under the hood". These are obviously different things.
Okay - what exactly about the memory subsystem would they have to change before you would say it's not the same as 15 years ago?I never said they should ditch virtual memory. I didn't even remotely hint that whatsoever. My point was that that aspect and others I've mentioned have been with Windows for a long time. You can breathe easy, though. I don't have any plans to hang out with or stand near OS dev teams.
Back in the 98 days the most popular vector in the browser was ActiveX. This vector is effectively gone.Thank you for simply taking my post at face value and not putting words into my mouth. Yes, the UI has changed dramatically and Average Joe may have a problem with that. Under the hood, no, things haven't really changed much, which is also a problem because Windows 8, just like all its predecessors, will still succumb to the wrath of "Super AV Pro 2012" and the like.
He also said "it really hasn't changed all that much", indicating that he acknowledges changes. He's guilty of over-generalizing, not of ignorance, by my reckoning. That seems like a pretty minor charge in the grand scheme of things, and doesn't warrant the kind of responses which followed, in my opinion.If the kernel is not 'core' or 'under the hood', then pray tell what is?
I do.
So when I ask what we need Metro for, your answer is "you don't?"
From what I've seen, I have no doubt that Windows 8 will rock on a tablet. I'm not disputing that at all. My argument is that as a desktop OS in the hands of Average Joe, the significant changes to the UI are going to be a problem, especially if he or she has no desire or interest in mobile platforms. As for me personally, I just don't care for Metro. I don't see the need for it when I can mix shortcuts and gadgets together on my desktop.
I will believe the idea of convertible tablets breaking out of their niche-product status when I see it.And you may very well be correct. All I'm saying is that the Average Joe until now has never had the opportunity to have both a desktop and tablet in one device.
Travel back in time to 2002, when Windows XP Tablet Edition was introduced, and this post will actually make sense.And you may very well be correct. All I'm saying is that the Average Joe until now has never had the opportunity to have both a desktop and tablet in one device.
He also said "it really hasn't changed all that much", indicating that he acknowledges changes. He's guilty of over-generalizing, not of ignorance, by my reckoning. That seems like a pretty minor charge in the grand scheme of things, and doesn't warrant the kind of responses which followed, in my opinion.
Travel back in time to 2002, when Windows XP Tablet Edition was introduced, and this post will actually make sense.
I will believe the idea of convertible tablets breaking out of their niche-product status when I see it.
They're going to have a hard enough time as it is getting the ARM tablets to within spitting distance of the iPad's price. Let alone Intel tablets, or Intel tablets with keyboards, or Intel tablets with keyboards and sufficient horsepower to replace a desktop.
Irrelevant. You said "Average Joe until now has never had the opportunity to have both a desktop and tablet in one device." The tablets of 2002 combined the tablet with the Windows desktop....the Tablet PCs and Windows of 2002 look very little like the Tablet PCs and Windows 8 coming out this fall.
Irrelevant. Again, you said "Average Joe until now has never had the opportunity to have both a desktop and tablet in one device." The tablets of 2002 combined the tablet with the Windows desktop.The Tablet PCs coming out this fall will overall be faster, lighter, cheaper and have a good touch UI compared to the Tablet PCs and Windows of 2002