My secondary computer, that I use as an HTPC, has Classic Shell installed with Windows 8 RP. CS gives me an XP-style start menu and at boot it automatically switches to the classic desktop after several seconds of seeing the Metro screen (there seems to be about a 5+ second delay). I will be buying 8 for this machine, and I consider Classic Shell to be a "must have."
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Will U buy Windows 8?
- Thread starter AndreRio
- Start date
My secondary computer, that I use as an HTPC, has Classic Shell installed with Windows 8 RP. CS gives me an XP-style start menu and at boot it automatically switches to the classic desktop after several seconds of seeing the Metro screen (there seems to be about a 5+ second delay). I will be buying 8 for this machine, and I consider Classic Shell to be a "must have."
I can already get a copy of Win8 through my university. Though I haven't decided to make the switch. Most of
my worry is due to gaming - do I really want to find out that my old games (made for WinNT) will not run in
Win8? I'd rather not end up having to run a VM to get to me favorite old games...
* Baldur's Gate II - SOA/TOB
* Riven/Myst Series
* Neverwinter Nights Diamond Edition
* Icewind Dale 1 (and all expansions)
The newer games are ok, but you can never match the depth of the old games with the story-less (or little
story whatsoever) that most games these days seem to have. It is all about the graphics, anymore. Don't
want to lose the storylines with a Win8 switch.
FYI, really lookin' forward to Baldur's Gate Enhanced Edition...
my worry is due to gaming - do I really want to find out that my old games (made for WinNT) will not run in
Win8? I'd rather not end up having to run a VM to get to me favorite old games...
* Baldur's Gate II - SOA/TOB
* Riven/Myst Series
* Neverwinter Nights Diamond Edition
* Icewind Dale 1 (and all expansions)
The newer games are ok, but you can never match the depth of the old games with the story-less (or little
story whatsoever) that most games these days seem to have. It is all about the graphics, anymore. Don't
want to lose the storylines with a Win8 switch.
FYI, really lookin' forward to Baldur's Gate Enhanced Edition...
But does it have the search feature like Windows 7 and 8 have? I have no shame admitting that Start search has spoiled me, I just want things in a smaller area on my screen.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
My experience so far is that Windows 8 is as well-equipped for legacy gaming as Windows 7 is. If it runs in 7, it should also run in 8.
BeastInside
n00b
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2011
- Messages
- 53
You are not judgmental at all....
As for the topic at hand - I won't be buying it for a desktop, but the tablet implementation has me intrigued.
Maybe a windows 8 'surface' device will make it's way to my TODO list.
Polarhound
I suck at [H]F
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2003
- Messages
- 1,305
Impression level reduced by 20: Windows 8 more likely to crash on overclocked systems
Yeah, that makes me want to put that on my box...
Yeah, that makes me want to put that on my box...
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
Well, that stands to reason, doesn't it? Overlocked machines are potentially more unstable and crash Windows more frequently. The same is true of past Windows versions.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Are you freeking serious? An April 2011 report from one of the most anti-Microsoft sites in the known universe. Can you link a report where they though that Windows 7 was as awesome as many of you think?
MacLeod
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 8,279
Cant decide yet. I think Windows 7 is just about the perfect OS so I cant see why I would want to move on from it especially considering the horrible reviews Im hearing from folks. Still, I am an upgrade junkie and so I can never say I wont buy something new. I may get a bug up my ass and want to take the plunge. I say 75% chance Ill stick with Win7 though and await the Win9 or whatever theyll call it.
**Edit
I just changed my mind after reading that Microsoft will kill desktop gadgets in Win8. I dearly love and have come to depend on my All CPU Meter and GPU Monitor. Guess Ill be sticking with Win7 after all.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/sidebar.exe-gadgets-Windows-8-Metro-HTML5,16215.html
**Edit
I just changed my mind after reading that Microsoft will kill desktop gadgets in Win8. I dearly love and have come to depend on my All CPU Meter and GPU Monitor. Guess Ill be sticking with Win7 after all.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/sidebar.exe-gadgets-Windows-8-Metro-HTML5,16215.html
Last edited:
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
You're fucking hilarious sometimes. As though there's any significant number of desktop users beyond Windows users who overclock. With systems that draw a 1kW+.
I've not run Windows 8 on an overclocked system. That said, show me the Windows 8 certified hardware. Oh, wait. that's right, not a released OS and no certified hardware. Shocking.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
I do feel your pain if this is true. There are a couple of desktop gadgets that I love. That said, no one is going to bother with them anymore if Microsoft just killed them in there latest OS.
The bottom line is that Microsoft, company that's about to go out of business tomorrow still set the agenda for desktop computers and if gadgets that were all part time work anyway are history, that's that. People are going to spend there time on Metro apps where they may recoup a few bucks, if not a whole lot more.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
I think you've grossly misunderstood what I've said. Overclocked systems will crash all operating systems more frequently than non-overclocked systems. Windows is no exception.
Thus, it stands to reason that Windows 8 crashes more frequently on overclocked systems than it does on non-overclocked systems, as I said. This was true of previous versions of Windows as well: they will crash more frequently on overclocked systems than they do on non-overclocked systems. It's also true of all other operating systems.
Understood?
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
I was not aware that Microsoft is anti-Microsoft.
(The report The Register is referring to in its article came out of Microsoft itself)
Will I buy it at $15? Maybe.
$40? Doubtful.
I freaking love my Windows Phone. Metro is the best interface I've used. Because it's touch, and simple. Best phone I've used.
On a Desktop? Meh... For most users that launch the same stuff over and over- yeah: tiles of their stuff would be simple. For me? I'm in and out of Active Directory, Explorer, the browser, Group Policy, RDP, virtual machines, etc all day and it's just a terrible interface for that.
IMO they should have done like Windows 7 and not installed the touch features unless a touchscreen existed.
$40? Doubtful.
I freaking love my Windows Phone. Metro is the best interface I've used. Because it's touch, and simple. Best phone I've used.
On a Desktop? Meh... For most users that launch the same stuff over and over- yeah: tiles of their stuff would be simple. For me? I'm in and out of Active Directory, Explorer, the browser, Group Policy, RDP, virtual machines, etc all day and it's just a terrible interface for that.
IMO they should have done like Windows 7 and not installed the touch features unless a touchscreen existed.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
And pinning to the task bar or putting these things at the front of your Start Screen would be slower than Windows 7 how/
[/QUOTE]
IMO they should have done like Windows 7 and not installed the touch features unless a touchscreen existed.[/QUOTE]
Just would have kept users in the Stone Ages longer than Microsoft. Average people want tablets, a computer that light weight and can serve all of their needs and they can anywhere. Desktops are less and less relevant by the minute for average people that aren't dad. That's not to say that that desktops or keyboards and mice and going away, but riddle me this? You really think that ever one needing to work done is simply willing to have a desktop and keyboard and mouse magically appear?
Windows 8 haters are some 20th century. Work gets done where it HAS to and waits no input device.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
+1. Why I like places like this because I had no idea what this was until I researched it. I find it interesting how many people get upset about having to do web searches regarding Windows 8's capabilities. I've been using Windows 8 every day on four machines for 10 months with different input capabilities and had no idea about this. What's disturbing though about places is the level of arrogance and lack of humility. I probably know more about Windows 8 across multiple form factors and input methods than most on planet Earth because instead of finding reasons to hate it, well I actually used it. But because I've actually used the I'm a shill, an idiot, a fool who by their own definition say I've used Windows in ways that 99.99% haven't but those attacking me know better.
Fascinating.
I don't claim to be right. But for crying out loud, use the stuff before making foul comments at least.
zero2dash
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2007
- Messages
- 6,100
I'm sure we'll get it for free through MSDNAA at school; I probably won't download it for awhile though and that's only going to be just to have a copy for the sake of having a copy.
I will continue rolling with 7 and in the rare event 7 craps out or is killed off, I'd probably start using Fedora.
I will continue rolling with 7 and in the rare event 7 craps out or is killed off, I'd probably start using Fedora.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
According to data from Q4 2011, consumers want iPads and Android tablets. It's why the market share for both combined is 64 times greater than the market share of Windows-powered tablets. It's also why Windows tablets like the Slate 500 have sold so pitifully compared to the likes of the iPad and Android tablets.
Consumers want lightweight tablets, yes. Available sales data reflects that assertion. Statistically speaking, consumers do not want Windows tablets. This has been evidenced by the last decade of sensationally low adoption of Windows tablets, despite their continued availability in retail channels.
Average people want whatever is new and fancy. I'm still not convinced the average person actually knows whether or not they want a tablet so much as it's so well marketed thanks to Apple and the ipad that they're buying them anyway.
Desktop sales have plateaued but they have not dropped and laptop sales are still rising, people aren't discarding desktops and laptops for tablets just yet, tablets have carved out their own market. Because of that, I think the future is uncertain. Will people actually decide tablets are a replacement for conventional laptops and desktops? Maybe. Will they decide they still need conventional laptops and desktops, but still buy tablets on the side? That's what they're doing right now, I don't know if that's sustainable though. Or will they decide they still need their conventional laptops and desktops and the extra cost for a tablet isn't worth it? I think that's a real possibility, the numbers aren't in yet though.
I know people like heatlesssun and many others will continue to run tablets alongside desktop and laptop machines, however I think the "average person" is less likely to maintain multiple computing devices (in the long term) unless they have money to burn. It remains to be seen if desktops, laptops and tablets will coexist, or if one will give way to another.
The only thing tablets have replaced thus far is netbooks. Netbooks are massively down and tablets are massively up, laptops and desktops are still going strong so it's hard to say tablets are replacing them at this stage.
Personally I don't know that many people who both have good desktop machines AND good laptop machines, usually one or the other is a crusty old box that barely runs solitaire. My personal anecdotal evidence is "average people" decide to upgrade from their current machine (be it desktop or laptop) to a new machine (be it desktop or laptop) rather than maintaining both a desktop and laptop. But that's just among the people I know. However that's why I feel once the marketing hype dies down and people actually sit down and think "do I need/want this?", there's a good chance tablet sales will slow down and/or reverse.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
You might be right be you though it's pretty obvious you have zero experience with Widows 8 on tablets. If I'm wrong I'll be happy to discuss specifics. I have three of the recommended devices from Microsoft for Metro development. In fact one of them, the Samsung Series 7 Slate that you were linking to after the Surface announcement had me ROLF.
Where was that device announced and who helped build it with Samsung?
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Don't worry about it. wonderfield has obviously never used Windows 8 even on a decent Windows 7 tablet. Not trying to be mean or anything but Windows tablets are my specialty, I spot BS and zero experience pretty quickly.
The quoted report says that OC computers IN GENERAL are more likely to crash (duh). Register and Polarhound spun it to make it sound like Win8 was more likely to crash on an OC computer than Win7 was, which was absolutely NOT what the MS report said.
OT: I'll be using Win8 Enterprise on my main PC because there's enough back end enhancements that I absolutely adore that I can look past having to click "Desktop" once every couple of weeks.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Please explain how an overclocking study published in April 2011 that never specifically mentions Windows 8 once because it was still under internal development proves that Windows 8 has issues with overclocking?
This study was linked in the news section of this site last week. The Register's headline is a prima facie lie.
I never said it was. You made that up.
The desktop is almost identical in both versions, and that's more or less my beef... A desktop (at least at work) is what I need to function. When Windows 8's is almost identical, I don't see the purpose for it in my work flow.
The question isn't "Does it work?" but "Is it best for the work flow?" Not just for me but our users.
I've already alluded to the fact I can see potential benefit to our users. People that use a handful of the same apps every day can simply have tiles pinned to Metro and be very simple.
Of course not. I think you're under the assumption that everyone is forced to choose either a tablet or desktop. It's not the case.
On my desks, I've got a Desktop, Laptops, and a tablet. The desktop does 80% of my work. It's simply easier. A full keyboard, mouse, dual displays... I never have to screw with docking, etc.
My laptop is great if I have to run to a network closet someplace, or I'm out of the office. I need USB connection (for serial adapters) and Ethernet connection when I'm doing that.
And to be frank, my tablet has probably not been used in at least 2 months. I don't even know if it has a charge on it. Not to say it doesn't fit some workflows, it just doesn't fit the majority of people's. In a home environment, sure... People that just browse Pinterest and email from home can be fine with a tablet.
We have some users that a tablet works great for them, but the vast majority do not fit that bill.
I think marketing and a price had a bigger impact on that than did Windows.
HP Touchpad turned out to have massive buzz when HP had their firesale. Price plays a huge part. As does marketing.
Windows tablets have lacked two things:
1) A very simple interface tuned for touch (now fixed with Metro)
2) Lower pricepoint to compete with ARM devices
Both of these things haven't been addressed until Windows 8, so it'll be interesting to see how it turns out. Surface will bomb if Microsoft doesn't hit an iPad price point.
Because they will force you to buy it
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
This is all reasonable to me. I apologize if I put words into your mouth.
I think marketing and a price had a bigger impact on that than did Windows.
HP Touchpad turned out to have massive buzz when HP had their firesale. Price plays a huge part. As does marketing.
Windows tablets have lacked two things:
1) A very simple interface tuned for touch (now fixed with Metro)
2) Lower pricepoint to compete with ARM devices
Both of these things haven't been addressed until Windows 8, so it'll be interesting to see how it turns out. Surface will bomb if Microsoft doesn't hit an iPad price point.
Because they will force you to buy it
Very good points about the historical issues with Windows on tablets. As you have pointed out Metro solves most of the usability issues on tablets and x86 hardware has vastly improved.
As for Surface pricing, I'm pretty sure it be competitive with the RT running in the iPad range and the Pro running in the ultrabook range as Microsoft has already stated. I don't think however that Microsoft is trying to aggressively price the Surface as that would create even more tension between Microsoft and its PC partners.
However that could change if Windows 8 doesn't sell well. Surface is Microsoft's ace in the hole. If push comes to shove I could see Microsoft pricing Surface so aggressively that couldn't fail if that's what Microsoft thinks it needs to do.
The failure of Windows 8 simply isn't an option for Microsoft. There are no second chances here, Windows 8 has to succeed at almost any cost.
I think that's exactly what will happen: they'll price aggressively. They already know how to do this (Xbox 360). Get the hardware out the door for the best price on the market, and profit off applications.
The question becomes: can Microsoft make more money by licensing Windows 8 to tablet/ultrabook vendors, or can Microsoft make more money by undercutting them all and raking in the Marketplace profits? I guarantee you Microsoft already knows the answer to that: and it'll be reflected in how they price Surface.
I don't think Windows 8 is a "succeed at almost any cost" thing. I think they were more at risk 3-4 years ago with the "rise" of Mac, perceived failure of Vista.
They knocked the ball out of the park with Windows 7, and most businesses are now hopping on board with it. Most businesses skip an OS anyways, so I think Windows 8 is more aimed at the consumer than anything.
The only thing that's a threat to them is the rise of the tablet. What is missed, however: is how many people are using JUST an iPad? Not many. The tablet market isn't really replacing anything. It's more like the MP3 player was: it's a new device that people are buying IN ADDITION to their regular devices. People still need a full OS. That is when they turn back to Microsoft. I don't think they're in danger of losing any licenses of Windows quite yet. They simply want to dip into the money-pot that is the new tablet market.
Like the MP3 player, eventually that function got sucked into phones and now (more or less) that market is now dead. That might happen with ultrabooks/laptops in 1-2 years. If the market starts churning out awesome tablets with some kind of awesome keyboard solution, you might start seeing those ultrabook/laptop devices disappearing.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
I don't believe I need Windows 8 tablet experience to interpret basic statistics. I'm uncertain as to the relevance.
I don't recall ever mentioning or linking to any Samsung tablet.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
All operating systems (and all software) will fail more frequently, statistically speaking, on overclocked systems than they will on non-overclocked systems. Microsoft's research certainly confirms this. I never claimed that Windows 8 performs any differently or with any less stability than any other operating system, Microsoft-made or otherwise.
I keep repeating the phrase "it stands to reason". Do you understand the meaning of this phrase?
Polarhound
I suck at [H]F
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2003
- Messages
- 1,305
Just like you saw Apple's new direction with the upcoming 7" iPad (something Jobs HATED), don't be surprised if they pull a true stunner and announce that with Windows channeling AOL they are going to open up their OS for ALL systems in their one window to capture a huge market share.
The Register's article was titled:
Microsoft: Don't overclock Windows 8 unless you like our new BSOD
Redmond boffins burn up CPUs so you don't have to
Then Polarhound made the post:
Microsoft: Don't overclock Windows 8 unless you like our new BSOD
Redmond boffins burn up CPUs so you don't have to
Then Polarhound made the post:
Implying that Win8 is unstable and burns up OC'd systems faster than previous systems, which that report doesn't support and is completely false, so no, it doesn't "stand to reason" that win8 is any worse than win7 or winxp for overclocking.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
Please point out where I claimed that Windows 8 was any worse for overclocked systems than any other operating system.
I don't particularly like the metro apps or interface. That said I will undoubtedly be required to support it and I like the boot performance, new task manager and seemingly the threading improvements. Kernel seems to perform much better. The new file transfer applet is great, too. Very slick.
In short, get rid of Metro and we're good. Classic Shell +1.
In short, get rid of Metro and we're good. Classic Shell +1.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
I had pointed out The Register is a very anti-Microsoft site and you responded by saying how was the site being anti-Microsoft if it used a Microsoft study to make it's point. Well, it's anti-Microsoft because the title of The Register article is a complete lie as Windows 8 had NOTHING to do with the Microsoft study since it didn't even exist when this study was done. Indeed the study was about hardware failures in general and not specifically overclocking. Why would one even bring up Windows 8 in a study that had nothing to with Windows 8 since it didn't even exist when the study was done?
The Register headline is nothing more than a lie meant to generate page views.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
I don't and haven't disagreed with that.
wonderfield
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 7,396
I caught your post prior to the edit. In the post you referred to, I was pointing out the humor in his referring to the originator of the April 2011 report as "anti-Microsoft" when the originator of the report was Microsoft. The Register article was published this month, not in 2011. That is in no way an endorsement of the article or the headline in any way, so don't read into it as being such.
It was actually my intent to defend Microsift in the first response I made about that article, though apparently I did not defend with adequate zeal for some. That's beyond my control.
It was actually my intent to defend Microsift in the first response I made about that article, though apparently I did not defend with adequate zeal for some. That's beyond my control.
Just because you think you have a killer product on your hands that doesn't mean the general public will like it.
MS probably thought that about Windows Vista and we see how that turned out for them.
MS also has many 2nd choices cause their is no other Desktop os maker.