Just because you're not using them doesn't mean you wouldn't be doing things more quickly if you were utilizing the search.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Who is planning on going from windows 7 to windows 8.1?
- Thread starter silk186
- Start date
Just because you're not using them doesn't mean you wouldn't be doing things more quickly if you were utilizing the search.
Ur_Mom
Fully [H]
- Joined
- May 15, 2006
- Messages
- 20,689
Some things (like running Snipping Tool, Live Writer) I use the search (start typing, hit enter) and it's fast. Other things, I have shortcuts for. Just pinned to start, which is a lot faster than search. But, 90% of the time, I don't use it. So, while it can be faster, it doesn't necessarily mean it will be faster. I guess you could measure the time for typing and having it come up vs. clicking on the shortcut on the start menu (via pin to start or browsing the file structure - pin to start shortcut would be a lot faster, though).
My Pet Peeve is the Search, I am a huge user of this. I prefer the aggregate search of 7 then 8 switching between stupid settings / apps or sometimes neither.
I also run command directly in the search dialogue I never have issues on 7 but with 8 I have the fucking annoying bullshit metro popup taking me away from my notes or what ever was on my screen. I use a large screen rather then multiples and in 7 this is not an issue and I can't say the same about 8. I got so fucking fed up with retardedness of 8 I just have Powershell automatically start on boot. Because the search in 7 is unified commands and programs just run especially if you add command line arguments and because its fragmented in 8 you need to fucking swtich between app and setting. I also work in RDS sessions exclusively the windows command key is not always available if you are using a non windows platform.
I also find that 7 RDS sessions are far more responsive then 8, since 8 has the whole screen change and cause a mass lag spike everytime you got to the fucking start screen, this is ten fold on a remote connection that's on a satellite connection.
I also run command directly in the search dialogue I never have issues on 7 but with 8 I have the fucking annoying bullshit metro popup taking me away from my notes or what ever was on my screen. I use a large screen rather then multiples and in 7 this is not an issue and I can't say the same about 8. I got so fucking fed up with retardedness of 8 I just have Powershell automatically start on boot. Because the search in 7 is unified commands and programs just run especially if you add command line arguments and because its fragmented in 8 you need to fucking swtich between app and setting. I also work in RDS sessions exclusively the windows command key is not always available if you are using a non windows platform.
I also find that 7 RDS sessions are far more responsive then 8, since 8 has the whole screen change and cause a mass lag spike everytime you got to the fucking start screen, this is ten fold on a remote connection that's on a satellite connection.
I would say the fastest way is to pin something to the taskbar and use Winkey+position to open it. However, pinning things only works well for applications (whereas files and settings are more accessible via search), and there's only so much room for things to be pinned. Additionally, pinning things to the taskbar takes up room that I usually have occupied by open applications.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
Same. The results for "sys", for instance:
Task Manager
Command Prompt
View your PC name
System
(Additional results)
Clearly "System" should be the top result. And for "microphone":
Set up a microphone
Microphone privacy settings
Two hits, which does not include the "Manage audio devices" result you're probably wanting. You have to jump to the Settings filter, and only then does that result show, appended to the two above Everywhere results. Why arbitrarily limit the Everywhere results to two in this instance?
They've kind of addressed the issue of segmenting results by category, but their match algorithm is so nonsensical so as to be nearly as frustrating as no solution at all.
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
Uhm the 99% of linux users use distros which do not root you by default. This is the standard method of operation as opposed to Windows where everyone is 'rooted' by default after install. This is a fact and you can't change it no matter how much you cry!
If it's best practices and recommendation then why does windows ship against their best practises and recommendations? Maybe because when it's locked down enough to be secure nobody can actually use it worth shit anymore?
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
Yes it's very productive to a) First not have the search find the stuff you want at all, then b) Have to tell the search manually to search from the places it needs to search from and perhaps c) manually have to add 10 drives/partitions to indexing if you want to find anything at any reasonable speed.
In most cases if you want to find something it's much faster to just hunt the files down manually if you have an idea where they are, instead of trying the search.
I thought win 7 had a fantastic search, 8 went backwards. My biggest pet peeve again is the Start Menu highjacking my screen.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
I'm assuming you're using 8.1 because of the reference to the category segmentation but don't know what build you're using. I'm using 9600 and on two different machines the results I got weren't these. With your "microphone" example the third result was indeed "Manage audio devices" though I had to go to the full screen results screen to see that. "Microphone privacy settings" and "Setup a microphone" were the two listings local listings shown in the Search Charm. This was with integrated search both on and off on two different devices.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Start Screen and fair enough. But both the Start Screen and Start Menu take focus away and one can only work with the Start Menu while doing nothing else, just like the Start Screen with a single monitor. But maybe the Start Screen isn't such a bad idea after you lead me to this: http://business.time.com/2013/04/17/dont-multitask-your-brain-will-thank-you/
At any rate, I think the issue with the Start Screen being full screen is more of an issue of familiarity than one of true efficiency. But I've long supported the idea that the Start Screen be configurable so as not be full screen. I do understand that it can be annoying and confusing to people that aren't used to it, particularly on single monitor systems.
guitarguy6
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2007
- Messages
- 1,948
I put Windows 8 on my gaming machine pretty much as soon as it came out. I benchmarked 7 vs 8 and kept it because it was faster. At first I hated the start screen but now I don't care. I'm on the desktop most of the time and have my main programs pinned to the task bar. Whenever I need to find a setting, program or file I just hit winkey which brings up the start screen and I start typing what I'm looking for. It searches through settings, your files and the store and displays the results. I really like it. It's not a necessary upgrade from Win 7 but it does have it's benefits.
If it's best practices and recommendation then why does windows ship against their best practises and recommendations? Maybe because when it's locked down enough to be secure nobody can actually use it worth shit anymore?
They don't. The first user created on a Windows install is an Administrator because every Windows box NEEDS an Administrator account. Without one you would never be able to create additional user account or install software or change many system settings.
Your last sentence is the most hilarious. Pretty much every computer at work for any company I have ever seen is locked down properly and all the users use a standard non-admin user day-to-day. Nodoby runs as an admin user. The admin user exists only to be used when changes need to me made. You never actually log into the admin user, you simply give the admin credentials when admin privalges are needed. This is exaclty how Linux and OSX work as well.
You say this is not productive, yet every business operates their computers this way and they are all perfectly productive.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
I've had indexing turned off for years as I hardly ever need it.
With the rise of SSDs, its even less required. Searches are extremely fast without it.
GotNoRice
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2001
- Messages
- 12,006
As soon as I stop being lazy and do a clean install on my computer, I'm going to put 8 on there (and then upgrade it to 8.1).
Not because I like it, or because I wouldn't rather run 7, but because I have to work on computers running 8 and need to be more familiar with all the stupid new interface menus, etc.
Not because I like it, or because I wouldn't rather run 7, but because I have to work on computers running 8 and need to be more familiar with all the stupid new interface menus, etc.
I am not multitasking I am running sequential commands on a system that I have to document. I don't consider this multitasking since I am working on a single issue at a time. Multitasking for me would be check email, run a command, go to hardforum etc.. I run a command I document the start screen adds another extra step it take me away from my focus start menu doesn't do that.
Also Windows 8 has had issues running commands due to split search.
Its not familiarity as you claim its an inefficiency problem on behalf of Start Screen. I don't like multiple monitors I prefer a single large one.
On Windows xp-7 I developed a workflow that worked very well unfortunatly 8 completely destroyed that with its idiotic start screen.
With windows 8 I just start Powrshell/CMD as my default app which doesn't interfer with highjacking my screen. Unfortunate due to the fact Powershell/CMD (doesn't do search unfortunately)is open all the time I loose a chunk of my usable screen. On 7 I had more windows open. I also had an easier time accessing programs on computer whilst retaining information on my screen at the same time No screen highjack. In order to mitigate this problem I have to PIN everything to my taskbar or make an icon on my desktop. My windows 7 is not all to messy but my 8 is a friggen mess central because I despise the start screen/charm/search functionality. The only left over problem is now I have still the search problem.
Essentially 8 has done absolutely nothing in reducing the amount of mouse/keyboard use and in fact it has added to amount I have to use both.
I hate Start Screen So much I rather just remove the whole fucking thing its essentially un-needed. If I could only add a search bar directly into the task tray I would be happy as pig in mud. This is why I think MacOSX is far superior (command space) to that. Its actually easier to run 8 and 7 on a mac with Fusion. I hate to admit this but Mac is far Supperior to window friendlyness then Windows has ever been especially when you have virtual desktops. Command + Arrow on Mac > Win + Arrow on Windows.
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
Every linux NEEDS a root account, yet on linux setup you end up with two accounts, one for regular use and one for administration. After windows setup you have only one account which is the admin account - and this is the account 99% of windows users remain with forever. If you can't see the fail in that then I have nothing to say anymore.
Your hilariousness about the last sentence is what's hilarious. You've either never had the displeasure to work with corporate locked down workstations or then you haven't even talked with the users. Everyone hates the lockdown. One example: You try to connect to a wireless network. But oh no, connecting to a network is locked down behind an administrative password! So no internet connect for you!
In this particular case the user came to a training from an another city and tried to connect to the wireless network of the companys branch office. Real practical, but surely he was safe when he couldn't use his PC.
The funny part about that statement.
I just recently worked on a older computer for this elderly woman who was running Windows XP, well the HDD shit the bed so I put one in that I had laying around here but she didn't have her Windows disks anymore as it was such an old PC. So I installed Ubuntu on it for her and while going through the install process it never asked for an admin account password, only the first user one. So right now her PC is setup just like how Windows would be, the first user created during install is the admin of said PC. If it need to install something or make system changes all she has to do is type in her user password and enter. I didn't set it up like that it never asked about a separate admin account password separate from user one. I thought it kind of weird as in the past I have always seen it the way you described
hemmiandra
n00b
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2011
- Messages
- 40
Already there, although I went to 8.1 from 8. Not a fanboy of 8 by a long shot, but the merits of W8/8.1 outweigh the disadvantages IMO. Seems to me that most of the users that cant stop complaining about W8 spend an awful lot of time just browsing their desktop. I really dont use the metro UI startscreen much for apps, but it serves as a good quick launcher.
Intelligent, capable employees working at a company with a proper IT setup do not hate being locked down. Employees who cannot work around limited privileges have no business working at all. The fact of the matter is, giving users (in a corporate environment, this is especially true) more computer privileges than needed for their job is dangerous. It'd be like giving every employee a loaded gun with no safety. Companies have liabilities when it comes to data moving out of the organization, and giving worthless employee #14 admin privileges because he is a lazy idiot and doesn't wish to conform to the company security policies is nothing more than a great way to get fined or sued for a large multiple of worthless employee #14's salary.
That's an example of poor execution. That, or the company in question has specific security needs which would them to be more careful about what access points the user is connecting to. Or both.
Last edited:
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
Ubuntu has disabled the root account totally to stop people from logging in with it. Anything administrative has to go through sudo.
A regular user can't directly even execute files downloaded from sources outside the official distribution methods, he/she needs to be advanced enough to know how to change file permissions etc. So it will never work like windows where users can accept any pop-up from the gazillion exploit sites, download and run or at worst autoexecute files without needing to know anything but point and click.
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
Giving any worker a windows workstation to work with is literally like giving him a loaded gun with a safety loosely on. And the funny part is that it has to be locked down far enough to only be useful for a very limited range of tasks (i.e. using the gun as a melee weapon) in fear of them shooting themselves in the foot.
Ironically enough the very tools he gets the workstation for usually (word, outlook etc.) are exactly the attack vectors he needs to be protected against.
You're right. It's an example of a typical situation where corporate lockdown is stopping people from getting their job done. Some users can't even change their desktop resolution or install shortcuts to their desktop lol. Then in the true Windows mess of a fashion, typically the user sitting next to him has full administrative rights to his/her laptop while sitting in the same domain.
Windows 'security' is a mess that prevents people from getting their jobs done. More time is often spent hunting down the IT support than actually getting work done
As you have again failed to understand with your complete lack of security skills, these tools can be very safely used when used properly. These products are very different from the products which were problematic for security in the late 90's and early 2000's. There are security vulnerabilities in Linux packages as well, so clearly there is some risk in using any software.
What's brilliantly funny is that if we gave all of our employees Linux workstations, a large portion of our organization wouldn't be able to get any work done at all, since packages to meet our business needs have not been developed for Linux (and in a few cases, haven't been developed commercially for Windows, either, so some of our software is in-house).
If you understood business or security to even the faintest extent, you would understand that locking computers down is as essential as the computers are themselves. Running a Windows computer with an admin user logged in is no different than running a Linux computer logged in directly as root.
So is Linux security, by your logic.
Last edited:
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
Your complete failure of social skills is evident in your constant attack towards me instead of discussing factual matters. As you saw from the link I provided your 'safe' products contain horrible security holes such as the 'pwned by preview' bug that was just recently fixed. And since corporate IT typically takes its time to evaluate any updates there are still probably millions of workstations vulnerable to this particular attack as we speak and countless more still to be discovered to come
Security vulnerabilities in linux packages are fixed very quickly when found and they're not exploitable by fly-by or preview type attacks. Feel free to PROVE otherwise instead of throwing random generalizations again.
Heh so you've built some horrible .net or IE based in-house tools? Embarrassing. Now tell me some of your users still hang on to IE6 since the in-house tools fail to work in other browser versions
A linux user can do most every day needs while logged in as a regular user. A typical corporate lockdown user can't even install a printer to his workstation without calling in remote support. I've seen so many examples of 'security' preventing people from getting work done... Especially the companies that have outsourced the IT support, things are seriously fucked up. Those machines are really tightly locked down to minimize any chance of non-billable support cases and to maximize billable support tickets. I would probably rather quit working in such a company than accept having a workstation like that lol.
Heh so you've built some horrible .net or IE based in-house tools? Embarrassing. Now tell me some of your users still hang on to IE6 since the in-house tools fail to work in other browser versions
If by horrible you mean industry leading, and if by .NET you mean Java, then yes. Though I'd rather it were .NET, since .NET is without question a superior framework to Java (we'll see if this changes when Java 8 finally gets out) and we have been slowly pushing development to .NET over time. None of the in house software is what's really holding us to Windows. We could, with minimal effort (since it is Java after all), have that code work on non-Windows platforms. But since some of our other software is Windows only, and since moving to something other than Windows wouldn't add any value to our organization anyways and would cost piles and piles of money, we haven't bothered.
So can a Windows user.
Again, you're clearly struggling with grasping this concept. You have seen examples of bad security. Try working for a company which implements good security. Computers can be locked down in an effective, but non-counter productive manner. It isn't locking down computers that is bad. It is locking down computers in a bad way which is bad.
If you don't want to work at a company like that, you shouldn't take job offers for such companies in the first place. These should be some of the first things you figure out during the interview process; Determine how the company handles IT, and if they're doing it wrong, you shouldn't be interested.
It sounds to me like your experience is either extremely, extremely limited, or you've just never experienced a company which does their IT correctly.
Ur_Mom
Fully [H]
- Joined
- May 15, 2006
- Messages
- 20,689
Our users are pretty locked down as to what they can do, and it's very effective. We do software installations (remotely or at the desk), and system changes. Updates are handled via SCCM. Our users can get all their work done very easily. They aren't typically going through and making system changes or installing a bunch of software (which should be a no-no for most companies). If they NEED admin rights, like programmers or whoever, we can do that on a per-user basis.
Sometimes, an audit is a good idea for help make the 'bad way' a 'better way'. Find out why users are requiring admin rights. If it's for something they commonly do and isn't a security risk (or a low one), give them more rights for that purpose. It's not really that difficult. We could lock it down a lot more, but the way we have it is about right for our organization. The users don't complain, and we don't have any unnecessary calls for elevated privileges.
I think the way Windows handles security (in a domain, anyway) is perfect. Never had a problem. As a workstation... for the average home user, it may be a bit much. Secure? Yes. And it probably saves them some trouble down the road. But, they do get annoyed when needing to run as admin or provide the admin password to run a setup program.
nekrosoft13
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2005
- Messages
- 1,581
i won't
window 8 or 8.1 is still a joke
and yes i did say window, not windows
window 8 or 8.1 is still a joke
and yes i did say window, not windows
bigdogchris
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2008
- Messages
- 18,707
I have a question for people who absolutely despise Modern UI and who use StartIsBack as a replacement:
Are there any annoying Modern UI/Metro parts of the OS that still pop up once in awhile? In my testing it seems like Modern is tucked away pretty good, but I'm just not in the mood for surprises if I eventually make the switch.
Are there any annoying Modern UI/Metro parts of the OS that still pop up once in awhile? In my testing it seems like Modern is tucked away pretty good, but I'm just not in the mood for surprises if I eventually make the switch.
nekrosoft13
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2005
- Messages
- 1,581
yeah it still pops up.
Just 3 examples from top of the head
1) if your PC crashes, giant popup shows up asking if you want to submit information, it blocks everything
2) if there are updates, same type of popup
3) if you want to add bluetooth device, it kicks you into metro, Metro usually fails in finding device so you click on "can't detect" and it kicks you back to standard bluetooth windows. and that works.
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
Nah I prefer to do things the right way. OSX/Linux and not necessarily in that order.
...Clearly you have a lot to learn about.
windows 8 would started off better as for me, if it focused solely on metro. it should not even be called windows 8 anymore. i have nothing against radical changes in advantage of functionality. i was quite impressed in how simple and beatyfull windows media center is, having everything in a single fullscreen. of course, modern operating system should be far more flexible then windows media center but it is a nice start (no pun intended).
windows 7 should also be the latest o/s from microsoft and it should be updated in paralel with windows 8/metro. two flavours of the same thing. and as long as there is a need for a windows system, windows system should be maintained. when users themselves decide to transition to metro based systems, when they are good enough, then there would be no use for 7 or traditional windows, if that day would come. if not, update windows along and have two flavours for each choice.
metro as we know it today is a platform for its own applications, running on a windows system and its far from perfect. it seams all that microsoft did in windows 8.1 is try to make metro more attractive to windows users.
you know what windows 8 looks like? an unfinished operating system concept, patched to sell. metro is still too inferior to be ran as the main platform for the o/s, a work in progress, and they tried to pass it to the crowds as is, but it was rejected, and so to satisfy the crowds a standard desktop was introduced in a metro system, to complete it. the result was an operating system that is neither fully windows nor fully metro but just the best took from seven and patched on 8. metro/8 should also be more desktop system and less internet system, i never saw it as a good idea to implement any relation to the internet within software that is not made for purpose of internet. a microsoft account on windows installation? sure, you can skip it, but i don't want my o/s to have anything to do with internet, if i want internet, i'll use the internet browser, isn't that more secure?? if i want to automate things, i'll use batch files, scripts and the code. if i want internet dependency in the core of the o/s, then i am to add it myself and not to be stucked with it by default with no way to opt out. no wonder you need all that security, the easiest way to get malware/intrusion is over network and im afraid windows 8 only goes deeper in the problem.
i don't like the whole concept with microsoft store either, it should be a free o/s made for user's convinience as it was so far, where you can make anything you want off it and not an o/s that is dependent on the internet and restricted by the store. i won't go further into this, i think you know everything im talking about.
so 7 beats 8 for me. metro have got potencial but so far all i see is a system patched to hold and i'm strictly against such solutions. either fix it, rewrite from the core, or it is as you haven't fixed it. workarounds are just an act of lazyness to me.
i am personaly running windows xp as i see nothing wrong with it. i ran windows 7 and it is a better operating system out of the box but windows xp allows more room for customization in various alternative ways.
windows 7 should also be the latest o/s from microsoft and it should be updated in paralel with windows 8/metro. two flavours of the same thing. and as long as there is a need for a windows system, windows system should be maintained. when users themselves decide to transition to metro based systems, when they are good enough, then there would be no use for 7 or traditional windows, if that day would come. if not, update windows along and have two flavours for each choice.
metro as we know it today is a platform for its own applications, running on a windows system and its far from perfect. it seams all that microsoft did in windows 8.1 is try to make metro more attractive to windows users.
you know what windows 8 looks like? an unfinished operating system concept, patched to sell. metro is still too inferior to be ran as the main platform for the o/s, a work in progress, and they tried to pass it to the crowds as is, but it was rejected, and so to satisfy the crowds a standard desktop was introduced in a metro system, to complete it. the result was an operating system that is neither fully windows nor fully metro but just the best took from seven and patched on 8. metro/8 should also be more desktop system and less internet system, i never saw it as a good idea to implement any relation to the internet within software that is not made for purpose of internet. a microsoft account on windows installation? sure, you can skip it, but i don't want my o/s to have anything to do with internet, if i want internet, i'll use the internet browser, isn't that more secure?? if i want to automate things, i'll use batch files, scripts and the code. if i want internet dependency in the core of the o/s, then i am to add it myself and not to be stucked with it by default with no way to opt out. no wonder you need all that security, the easiest way to get malware/intrusion is over network and im afraid windows 8 only goes deeper in the problem.
i don't like the whole concept with microsoft store either, it should be a free o/s made for user's convinience as it was so far, where you can make anything you want off it and not an o/s that is dependent on the internet and restricted by the store. i won't go further into this, i think you know everything im talking about.
so 7 beats 8 for me. metro have got potencial but so far all i see is a system patched to hold and i'm strictly against such solutions. either fix it, rewrite from the core, or it is as you haven't fixed it. workarounds are just an act of lazyness to me.
i am personaly running windows xp as i see nothing wrong with it. i ran windows 7 and it is a better operating system out of the box but windows xp allows more room for customization in various alternative ways.
bigdogchris
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2008
- Messages
- 18,707
Like Windows Updates?
Are you talking about the side bar that comes in, like when you insert a USB drive?
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
Clearly you do if you stick with the windows failwagon. Just yesterday the customer I visited had a hijacked browser despite running F-secure suite and having a GPO locked workstation lol.
The companies who 'do IT correctly' in the meaning you guys seem to think have both extremely high IT costs due to all the bureucracy and staff required and stop me from doing my work in most cases. Nothing is more annoying than having to wait while the customer requests a support ticket from an another country for example, just to install a software that he needs for work or tries to request help for his fucked up workstation with horrible antiviruses etc. installed. Worst case I ever saw was a beta version of Panda security suite running on a customer laptop. Every i/o operation took 3 times as long as it should have and the mouse cursor flashed randomly every few seconds as the POS was doing SOMETHING on the background.
Most of the AVs are worse than viruses themselves.
Last edited:
Have you ever run an entire company off of a strictly non-Windows environment? That is, from the role of someone in charge of important decisions, such as an architect, director or VP, not of the role of a tech support peon. Based on the ludicrously inaccurate and ignorant things you have been saying, I can already tell that the answer to that is no. How many times have you been given a set of requirements corresponding to the business needs of an organization, and put into production a working, complete, effective IT services group (staff, hardware, software) that contained nothing that had anything to do with Windows?
Either you haven't worked somewhere which does security correctly, or you clearly just haven't figured out how to do your own work correctly, then.
Last edited:
I got a fresh copy of Windows 7 Ultimate for the laptop I bought this year, despite Windows 8 being significantly cheaper. I do not consider Windows 8 to be a desktop Windows version after using it for a while in VM and on a variety of desktop systems and laptops. Touch is the wrong type of input for a laptop and desktop system, and the start menu should be a quick way to access programs and OS options, not this invasive full-screen cancerous growth. Even on Windows 7 I always use Classic Start Menu over the default menu as I consider the latter to be too big and useless.
8.1 doesn't fix any of the issues I have with Win8, ergo I won't be using it. I don't care about boot times, or some new DirectX version no game will use for another five years. I already find that Win7 is miles ahead of the other OSes I use on a (nearly) daily basis including Linux (KDE, Gnome) and OS X. Win8 seems to be closer to the painful window management world of OS X than the refined easy of use of Windows 7.
8.1 doesn't fix any of the issues I have with Win8, ergo I won't be using it. I don't care about boot times, or some new DirectX version no game will use for another five years. I already find that Win7 is miles ahead of the other OSes I use on a (nearly) daily basis including Linux (KDE, Gnome) and OS X. Win8 seems to be closer to the painful window management world of OS X than the refined easy of use of Windows 7.
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
I have W7 in desktop and W8 in laptop.
So far i'm very happy with W8 speed and if my university gives me another free license for W8.1 i'll upgrade desktop
So far i'm very happy with W8 speed and if my university gives me another free license for W8.1 i'll upgrade desktop
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
I have W7 in desktop and W8 in laptop.
So far i'm very happy with W8 speed and if my university gives me another free license for W8.1 i'll upgrade desktop to it.
So far i'm very happy with W8 speed and if my university gives me another free license for W8.1 i'll upgrade desktop to it.
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
uh our entire company runs on OSX/Linux as we speak. And we get cold shivers thinking of the horrible past when we still had windows machines. Maintenance time spent for our office hardware has reduced at least tenfold since we migrated our workstations to OSX. Servers run all on linux.
Please explain to me how you can do security 'correctly' without obstructing me from doing my work when the workstation is locked down tight, the end user is stripped of all privileges and we need stuff to happen NOW, not two hours from now. Those hours of waiting are very expensive for the client when they have to call their support or in the worst case get a support ticket from another country lol.
Man you must have had some major Turds at your company. I manage close to 800 workstations and my level of interaction with my team about Viruses and such are almost negligible and the bonus we retain services of AD and a lot of products that depend on this.