Windows 8 Beta

Well, in the build they were showing it is possible to create "groups" of icons.. and designate them in sections.. it's not exactly folders.. but it looked like you could place a bunch of apps under a custom heading like "System Utilities" or "Games", etc. and organize the start screen in a way so that it's not just a jumble of tiles without headings.

However, that isn't available with the preview build that we got.
 
Viper87227 said:
I'm torn on it. I think for a desktop PC, it's annoying. I don't need a bunch of huge buttons scattered all over the place. It does't seem very intuitive for using a mouse. It was very clearly made for touch screens, something I don't see myself having on my gaming PC any time soon. On a tablet I can see this being fantastic.
Click to expand...

I think a large part of *that* is the lack of fit/finish in all the alternatives to the Start menu (all of them).

Let's face facts - how honest has any attempt to create a true alternative the Start menu since Windows 95 been? (From what I've seen, not very - even with Windows Media Center, it felt half-finished.)

Despite that Immersive is not fully populated with even applets, let alone applications, it's certainly far more usable - even with a traditional keyboard and mouse.

Yes; it looks like a tablet/slate/smartphone UI, and that is indeed by design. However, the assumption that it is solely intended for tablets and slates ignores one reason why the UIs are similar - transition between a PC (even, if not especially a traditional desktop or portable PC) and a tablet, slate, or even a smartphone (and not necessarily Windows-based, either).

One of the thorniest problems when you have multiple devices is the UI dissimilarities between them. The more devices, the greater the UI change issues. (That is why I banished the Android VM I used to run in Virtual Box on Windows 7 - transition fatigue; having to deal with the same issue daily on a smartphone would have been nearly as bad.)

Immersive is not as different a UI from that of a tablet/slate/smartphone - however, except for the Start menu being gone, it's really not that different from Windows as it has been, either.

Is it for everyone? No - it's not even for all tablet and slate computer users. (Some of these users may actually prefer a touch-enabled version of the Start menu - which isn't ready yet.)

It's a matter of choice - nothing more or less.
 
Any one else experiencing an issue that when you go to launch a Metro app (IE the weather) you get a message saying: The store is not available in the Developer Preview


? I just started receiving that today....and it wont let me access any of them anymore..
 
W.Feather said:
Any one else experiencing an issue that when you go to launch a Metro app (IE the weather) you get a message saying: The store is not available in the Developer Preview


? I just started receiving that today....and it wont let me access any of them anymore..
Click to expand...

Nope.. i haven't had that one..

I'm guessing I've just been lucky.. as this is pretty early on code wise.
 
Andrmgic said:
Well, in the build they were showing it is possible to create "groups" of icons.. and designate them in sections.. it's not exactly folders.. but it looked like you could place a bunch of apps under a custom heading like "System Utilities" or "Games", etc. and organize the start screen in a way so that it's not just a jumble of tiles without headings.

However, that isn't available with the preview build that we got.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, I didn't know this. Sections would be cool but I think folders are still necessary and would bridge one of biggest functional difference between the new Start Screen and the classic Start Menu.
 
heatlesssun said:
Yeah, people are making WAY to much of the new Start Screen. Needs some work obviously but in using Windows 8 heavily over the last week it simply isn't as desktop unfriendly as some people are making it out to be. One of the things it desperately needs however are folders or groups or some other say to segment it.
Click to expand...

But it isn't nearly as effecient in desktop use existing versions of windoes. That's the trick. It needs to add all this new touch friendly stuff without lowering productivity as a desktop machine. I can't think of a single benefit that the Metro UI brings to a non-touch desktop PC. On the other hand, I can see several places where it makes desktop computing less efficient.

Live tiles are neat and all, but the majority of my computing time won't be spent looking at the start screen, and there is nothing being accomplished with live tiles that can't be accomplished with the desktop gadgets.

I'd love someone to give me an example of how the Metro UI can enhance my desktop experience and productivity over Win7 but it simply doesn't. It's a step forward on touch based systems, but a step back on desktop machines.
 
griffinhart said:
Not me, though I don't expect any performance difference for games between 7 and 8.
Click to expand...

It possible that win 8 could be better since it seems to use your hardware more efficiently. We probably need updated GPU drivers, not sure how the current ones work?
 
for reference, this is what comes up whenever it ry and open a metro app:

unledsgr.png



.....also ... in windows 7 i had an On screen keyboard on the left side of my screen when in tablet mode (it was movable and "hugged" the screen) ... from what I can tell that is not possible in WIndows 8, the only option is at the bottom of the screen on the task bar ?
 
I tried to use the windows 7 boot tool to make a bootable flash drive, and DVD drive and in both cases it told me there was not enough space. That tool seems like a total POS it is 0 for 4 for me for working.

Is there some reason I cannot burn to DVD+R?
Also the flash drives are all 4GB but technically windows calls it 3.7GB. But the DVDs are closer to 5GB.
 
griffinhart said:
I can't think of a single benefit that the Metro UI brings to a non-touch desktop PC. On the other hand, I can see several places where it makes desktop computing less efficient.
Click to expand...

I can think of tons of things it can do for desktops. The new Start Screen can be the portal into one's digital world, in simple terns its a unified notification system that works consistently across all computing devices. As for desktop efficiency there are things that definitely need to be improved but for me it is working out to be quite similar to the
classic Start Menu. Things I use the most are at the left and keystrokes for searching and launching programs work very much the way they did in Windows 7.

griffinhart said:
, and there is nothing being accomplished with live tiles that can't be accomplished with the desktop gadgets.
Click to expand...

While techincially there is truth to this the reality is that Metro is a far more consistent and stable environment to do these types of this plus Metro exposes an system wide API to allow your app to participate in search and other operations as a natural way of extending the UI instead of a messy kludge.

griffinhart said:
I'd love someone to give me an example of how the Metro UI can enhance my desktop experience and productivity over Win7 but it simply doesn't. It's a step forward on touch based systems, but a step back on desktop machines.
Click to expand...

I've already thought of a number of ways where Metro would be awesome for business apps on a desktop. Hit, type in what you're looking for and any app can look into that search and then respond back to the user in any number of ways, a obvious one being to simply launch itself with the results.

Metro provides a great new way to develop applications that run on different form factors and hardware architectures and provides for different input devices. Maybe Windows 8 will be successful but the integration of computing devices is without a doubt going to happen. It's not a matter of if but when.
 
criccio said:
Here is my install working on 3 screens in VMware 8 Workstation. I kinda wish the "metro" interface spread across all three screens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4WtnX2y4yo Crappy video, i know.
Click to expand...

My guess is that the monitors are running independently and that if they were in Eyefinity or Surround mode Metro would span on the screen. The video is fine for what you were demonstrating I thought BTW. Thanks!:)
 
heatlesssun said:
My guess is that the monitors are running independently and that if they were in Eyefinity or Surround mode Metro would span on the screen. The video is fine for what you were demonstrating I thought BTW. Thanks!:)
Click to expand...

This is true. Eyefinity wasn't setup at the time as I don't normally run that when i'm not gaming.
 
Well there is a new Windows 8 theme called Windows Extended. I see they are actually giving love to people with multi monitor setups. It only extends the wallpaper between both monitors, not the start menu. It's a start though ;)
 
heatlesssun said:
I can think of tons of things it can do for desktops. The new Start Screen can be the portal into one's digital world, in simple terns its a unified notification system that works consistently across all computing devices. As for desktop efficiency there are things that definitely need to be improved but for me it is working out to be quite similar to the
classic Start Menu. Things I use the most are at the left and keystrokes for searching and launching programs work very much the way they did in Windows 7.
Click to expand...
So, the start screen acts like the start menu, but doesn't actually bring any improvement to application or document access. It actually takes a bit more clicking or arrow key navigation than it does in Win7. Not a lot different, but just enough...
While techincially there is truth to this the reality is that Metro is a far more consistent and stable environment to do these types of this plus Metro exposes an system wide API to allow your app to participate in search and other operations as a natural way of extending the UI instead of a messy kludge.
Click to expand...
The Metro UI isn't the API, but WinRT is the new API designed to work with the new shell. A little different. It doesn't expose any mroe system wide API's than what Win32 does. The Metro UI may be more consistant when compared to the traditional windows interface, but, that's not saying much yet. The only things it does consistantly are the things that have been redeveloped for the new UI. Take a look at the Control Panel, The Metro Control panel is consistant in design and function, but, extremely limited in power. The majority of actual system control beyond fairly basic stuff still relies on the existing Win7 control panel, and will likely remain so. This is not consistancy.

Windows 8 will also need to live tradtional windows apps for years to come. Maybe not on tablets, but absolutely in the desktop world and as I pointed out, this whole area, as of now is very inconsistant.

I've already thought of a number of ways where Metro would be awesome for business apps on a desktop. Hit, type in what you're looking for and any app can look into that search and then respond back to the user in any number of ways, a obvious one being to simply launch itself with the results.
Click to expand...
Oh, there are some cool things that metro UI can do for certain business apps, I'm not denying that. But for a productive desktop environment, it won't bring anything new to the table.
Metro provides a great new way to develop applications that run on different form factors and hardware architectures and provides for different input devices. Maybe Windows 8 will be successful but the integration of computing devices is without a doubt going to happen. It's not a matter of if but when.
Click to expand...

Metro isn't what will provide this. WinRT and the windows 8 platform will. Metro is simply the UI that we access and manage these applications from. And this new WinRT platform will be more hardware agnostic, which is a great thing. But, the whole Metro UI and it's full screen apps metaphor is great for portable devices like tablets, but not for the desktop. The ability to run applications and applets in a windowed mode is simply crucial for many desktop users.

The ideal Windows 8 needs to allow me to run all my apps windowed or full screen, with a consistant, efficient way to switch between all of my apps. My desktop PC has to easily handle many apps running at once in various windows accross multiple monitors. Until Win8 gives me this functionality, It simply will not by my desktop operating system.
 
Last edited:
Well, I've decided to install it on my laptop and to my surprise, a laptop with 2 GB of RAM ran better under Windows 8 than under Windows 7 Home Premium. The difference is practically night and day.

The UI I'm still in a love-hate relationship with at the moment. Like someone mentioned above, Microsoft needs to add group folders to the Start screen. I have not enabled the default Start menu as provided through registry editing or a hacking utility. I'm trying to learn it as I go along with it as I have done with Windows 7 Beta up to RC and then retail release. It is as griffin mentioned in his post that you are doing extra steps to get a program started.

The MetroUI is doing all these extra steps than what's necessary.

For example, I'm actually getting faster in using Sleep mode, Restart, or Shutdown by hovering the cursor over the Start button, then hitting settings then Power then selecting my options. However, it's one step too many to do that. Why hasn't Microsoft ever thought about a separate dedicated button in the system tray or taskbar to quickly access them?

Also, the Start screen automatically adds nearly every shortcut made available in the Programs menu which includes the Uninstall icon. It would be nice that programs you install had an option to decide if you just want the program in the Start Menu/screen only that's necessary to run the program. Until that happens, you have to go to the icon you don't want, right-click and unpin it. Or, if you want to add the program, you have to search for it and then pin it.

They have to slim down that process. It would rather be nice that when you right-click the program or app icon in the Start screen and the Uninstall option (or whatever other stuff programs install like a link to their website or the link to the screenshots folder if it was a game) shows up there instead.

This is great for tablets because programs won't have those extra things programs install on desktop PCs. So, for tablets, it's good; for desktops, not so much.

As far as program compatibility goes, Avast 6 does not work or install unless someone has figured out how to get it working. IE10 has its quirks so far. Java itself does not work even with Java Beta 7. Also, trying to change the default search engine to Google has issues as IE10 keeps telling me that a program corrupted it or something.

Trying to play a free-to-play MMO like Grand Chase causes NProtect to crash. I haven't found a way around that yet, or a fix even.

Other than that, I have come to like the fact it is a more streamlined OS than Windows 7-- more efficient in handling system resources, memory and processes. It's faster and doesn't give my laptop a workout by accessing that hard drive so often that Windows 7 did when it was installed.

Edit:

Also, I'm actually liking the Ribbon in Windows Explorer and like with Office 2007/2010, I'm actually liking the fact that Microsoft is adding more functionality to it. It is a welcome change since having seen it go through very little changes since Windows 95. Usually this was only provided through third party Explorer programs, now we get something similar.
 
rudy said:
I tried to use the windows 7 boot tool to make a bootable flash drive, and DVD drive and in both cases it told me there was not enough space. That tool seems like a total POS it is 0 for 4 for me for working.

Is there some reason I cannot burn to DVD+R?
Also the flash drives are all 4GB but technically windows calls it 3.7GB. But the DVDs are closer to 5GB.
Click to expand...

works fine for me every time i have used it, using a kingston USB key, heck i had to use my 16G compact flash card and my sandisk USB reader once and it worked., DVD is 4.2G.
 
griffinhart said:
Not me, though I don't expect any performance difference for games between 7 and 8.
Click to expand...

techie81 said:
It possible that win 8 could be better since it seems to use your hardware more efficiently. We probably need updated GPU drivers, not sure how the current ones work?
Click to expand...

Fenris_Ulf said:
Gizmodo had a quickie benchmarking. In 3d video there was a slight improvement, maybe 1%.
Click to expand...
Well according to this cnet preview, the benchmarks in Crysis were quite a bit higher (around 20%) for Windows 8. Now, the Farcry 2 were much lower, which to me is obviously a driver compatibility issue. Now I'm really curious.
 
Another side issue .... finger touch will NOT disable....i go into control panel and set it to disable, and it doesnt disable....Wacom Drivers are so - so in this (bottom left of screen when in laptop mode) has no recognition in Win 8, while in Win 7 it worked w/o issue .... just a few quirks here/ there , all with drivers straight from HP's site(when windows included/found ones did not function)
 
Anyone know a hack to get Logitech setpoint to instal on windows 8. They have those stupid drivers that wont let you install unless it is the right OS. I think I need to assign one of my mouse buttons to windows key.
 
rudy said:
Anyone know a hack to get Logitech setpoint to instal on windows 8. They have those stupid drivers that wont let you install unless it is the right OS. I think I need to assign one of my mouse buttons to windows key.
Click to expand...
Google and direct download the set point driver. Even after installing the driver your W8 might have difficulty detecting the mouse. You might have to keep trying opening the set point after installation to get it detected. Try running as admin also.
 
Rudy, try running the installer in compatibility mode. Go to the installers properties and set it to Win7, that should let it run.
 
RoboticPotPie said:
Conveniently forgot Windows 2000.
Click to expand...

Yeah.. Win 2000 is the version I'm most fond of myself. The stability and features of XP without the bloat. Beautiful default desktop too (and although the wallpaper is nothing but a solid color, it's a really nice color). To their defense Win 2000 wasn't really for home users. It was pretty much only for businesses

Anyway, up to Win 8 Microsoft was doing tick-tack. Meaning they made something new that kinda sucked, because it was just new (and sometimes not well implemented), but the next version more or less perfected it.

But with Win 8 MS is still building on the Vista/7 core if I'm not mistaken. So it's just further improvement on 7
 
Last edited:
I have been playing with this a bit and it is certainly one of the most risky things M$ has ever done with an OS. The image above with all the versions of windows since 3.1 got me thinking about the interface. And more or less it has always been fairly standard. You have a start button in the bottom right, a task bar on the bottom and a desktop. But this is complete different. For over 20 years we have seen the same basic layout and TBH I dont think people can handle the change.

For me personally I see some cool things in windows 8, obviously tablets and touch devices . But beyond that it makes a pretty good UI for an HTPC. But right now it is no where near polished enough and alot of things are not intuitive enough for basic users. I sat an 8 year old down and observed what they could and could not figure out and there are to many things which cannot be figured out without knowledge of windows shortcuts.

Also it is in fact a layer on top of windows 7 no matter what M$ claims and there is far to much that is just 2 ways to do the same thing. This is going to piss off people more than anything. Lets hope they have some major revisions coming down the pipeline otherwise we are going to see M$ giving google the perfect event to take advantage of for moving into the desktop space.

So basically I see promise but in the end it will all come down to execution and cleaning up the details.

Also I heard a comment about it on NPR I thought it was funny the only thing they could talk about was some new error message that replaces the BSODs. Those guys can barely breath coming off of steve jobs cock long enough to gasp some useless negative detail no one even cares about in windows 8.
 
rudy said:
Also it is in fact a layer on top of windows 7 no matter what M$ claims and there is far to much that is just 2 ways to do the same thing. This is going to piss off people more than anything. Lets hope they have some major revisions coming down the pipeline otherwise we are going to see M$ giving google the perfect event to take advantage of for moving into the desktop space.
Click to expand...

Metro isn't another layer on top of Win32, it is an entirely new native Windows API more formally called the Windows Runtime or WindowsRT.
 
OK I'm going to post something to stir some conversation.

First, I tested both Windows 8 x64 and Windows 7 x64 on the exact same machine/hdd with the same drivers. I installed the OS and took a few readings:

Windows 8: Size on disk = 18.1 GB
Windows 7: Size on disk = 22.4 GB

Win 8 Preview is missing features so I'm guessing that's why it has a smaller footprint.

Ram usage

Windows 8: Ram approximately 5 min's after boot = 648MB
Windows 7: Ram approximately 5 min's after boot = 830MB

OK, now the part I can't explain. I benchmarked Crysis @1080p with High settings, no Vsync, disabled Windows Defender.

Crysis runthrough from coming out of the water until you hit the first road past the humvee that comes in for reenforcement.

Windows 8 Avg of 65 FPS
Windows 7 Avg of 47 FPS

The windows 7 install barely made it over 65 FPS for the maximum. I also verified that Win 7 was in 32-bit/DX9 mode, so it had the most advantage. I ran the 32 bit version on Win 8 as well. I forgot to check if it was DX10 though. However Crysis Dx10 mode is slower, so it wouldn't be an advantage in any way.

How could this be? It also confirms this guys findings about Crysis on Windows 8.
 
Ya I probably did not articulate my point well enough basically my point is you can tell me that your car runs with an electric engine and it is totally different but who cares how it functions what I care about is the whole experience. Sure under the hood things are different but from the outside all metro feels like is something slapped on top of windows 7 that has tons of over lapping functionality or redundancy. It is clumsy in its current form for sure, and it makes almost no sense because there is so much overlapping. It is a very crude attempt to shift people from the traditional windows interface to a new interface. Perhaps a reaction to the vista move that people so stubbornly resisted. But IMO from what I see it just is not going to make any sense to most people. Why are their 2 internet explorers that act differently, that is what people are going to be talking about. People are going to find it confusing as hell knowing what is open and closed and how to get to programs where their are often multiple ways to do it. Personally I think they need to make a new theme or skin for the "windows 7 desktop" that makes it look like part of metro at the very least.

One other thing I HATE is this new move to make things so that people cannot close applications. Apple started this utterly shitty trend and I have no idea why anyone bothered to copy. It sucks. It confuses people. And it takes people out of control of their OS environment. I might not know what I am doing but I can sit down at any linux, apple, or current windows OS and know how to press the X that closes apps and switch between them but in windows 8 I have no clue in the metro apps. To me they are just always stuck open until I restart the machine.

BTW I am having another problem sometimes the system goes into maybe some sort of sleep or something where it just says windows developer preview on the screen. My mouse is off at that point and the keyboard has a light but I cannot get off that screen. Is there some shortcut I need? Or what is it.
 
Last edited:
rudy said:
Sure under the hood things are different but from the outside all metro feels like is something slapped on top of windows 7 that has tons of over lapping functionality or redundancy. It is clumsy in its current form for sure, and it makes almost no sense because there is so much overlapping.
Click to expand...
Well, I can agree with you. Managing apps on it is a pain in the ass and I only installed a few things. Managing the CP through Metro sucks. I just find myself always going back to the desktop and getting things done much faster.
It is a very crude attempt to shift people from the traditional windows interface to a new interface.
Click to expand...
I can agree with this. I see the problem though of trying to bring a tablet/touch interface to desktop PC's when the majority of desktop PC's is not touch, is a very bad idea. If I run Windows 8 eventually, I will be turning Metro off. If I ran a tablet, I would think differently.

I'm starting to think that Microsoft is bringing this new interface to the desktop to cash in on app's, and to make the desktop more like a phone, in order to get people to buy the app's.
 
rudy said:
Ya I probably did not articulate my point well enough basically my point is you can tell me that your car runs with an electric engine and it is totally different but who cares how it functions what I care about is the whole experience. Sure under the hood things are different but from the outside all metro feels like is something slapped on top of windows 7 that has tons of over lapping functionality or redundancy. It is clumsy in its current form for sure, and it makes almost no sense because there is so much overlapping. It is a very crude attempt to shift people from the traditional windows interface to a new interface. Perhaps a reaction to the vista move that people so stubbornly resisted. But IMO from what I see it just is not going to make any sense to most people. Why are their 2 internet explorers that act differently, that is what people are going to be talking about. People are going to find it confusing as hell knowing what is open and closed and how to get to programs where their are often multiple ways to do it. Personally I think they need to make a new theme or skin for the "windows 7 desktop" that makes it look like part of metro at the very least.

One other thing I HATE is this new move to make things so that people cannot close applications. Apple started this utterly shitty trend and I have no idea why anyone bothered to copy. It sucks. It confuses people. And it takes people out of control of their OS environment. I might not know what I am doing but I can sit down at any linux, apple, or current windows OS and know how to press the X that closes apps and switch between them but in windows 8 I have no clue in the metro apps. To me they are just always stuck open until I restart the machine.

BTW I am having another problem sometimes the system goes into maybe some sort of sleep or something where it just says windows developer preview on the screen. My mouse is off at that point and the keyboard has a light but I cannot get off that screen. Is there some shortcut I need? Or what is it.
Click to expand...

I'm a Windows man but I owned an iMac exclusively for a year last year and at first I was confused about the closing programs as well. But after a while I understood the purpose and also just got used to it. if you want to really close it, it's very easy (right click on the taskbar in OS X and hit close on the program. One extra step than just pressing X).

But the reason is simple and makes sense: when you open a program, you are likely to open it again later. Say Firefox. I close it like 50 times during one session. So what's the point of loading and unloading the program off the memory 50 times? It's just not efficient and detrimental to performance since the program has to load into memory again and again and again. With OS X it stays loaded in memory but out of your sight. So when you launch Firefox, it launches instantly as if it was minimized.

With today's cheap and plentiful RAM, it doesn't make sense not to implement this. In fact I didn't know Win 8 did that
 
Thats what superfetch and precaching is for. I have no problem with the program staying in memory if memory is plentiful and not needed by anything else. I am not really talking about what is going on in OSX I am more speaking to what happens on iOS. With any desktop OS regardless of how the memory is managed when you press the X the program is no longer part of the view. This is done so you can manage your workspace. In metro I cannot figure out the equivalent of closing an application. This is my major problem.

And I think I others find this trend to be stupid which is why everyone who owns any phone downloads a task killer nearly within the first week of buying it regardless of which phone OS it is.
 
rudy said:
Ya I probably did not articulate my point well enough basically my point is you can tell me that your car runs with an electric engine and it is totally different but who cares how it functions what I care about is the whole experience. Sure under the hood things are different but from the outside all metro feels like is something slapped on top of windows 7 that has tons of over lapping functionality or redundancy.
Click to expand...

I'm running Windows 8 on a single 24" 1920x1200 screen quad core desktop and an Asus EP121. Sure there are rough edges, it is a preview release with at least another 8 months of development probably but everything is just so fast on both devices, to me it just doesn't feel slapped together with moving about everything is practically instant. And sure there's a focus on tablets but tablets are the fast growing market and the thing is more and more people are going to have both tablets and laptops and desktops. Being able to go from one device to another using the same apps, sharing the same hardware, it's a kind of integration that's hard to achieve with disparate OSes.

rudy said:
It is clumsy in its current form for sure, and it makes almost no sense because there is so much overlapping.
Click to expand...

No sure what you mean by the overlapping. I've been running Office, Visual Studio 11, web browsing and playing video. Pretty much works the same way as Windows 7. Web browsing is vastly improved in 8 and I like the even using the Metro browser on the desktop as there a no plug-ins, kind of nice way to avoid Flash video. Again the performance is so smooth that going to the Start Screen is just as quick as the classis Start Menu. The Start Screen needs folders and ways to select multiple items. Add that and it'll work for most people just fine over the classic Start Menu with a little bit better way to handle an auto-hide task bar, there is some conflict there.

Overall I'm loving it, works well on a desktop, works very well on a tablet, faster than 7 on the same hardware and it's just preview. Yes the desktop integration needs work but there's a long way to go before it's set in stone and since this is such a critical release I'm at least sure that Microsoft is going to do it's best to make it work well since Windows 8 either does well or Microsoft will be in a ton of trouble, there's simply no way to recover like they did going from Vista to 7.
 
RoboticPotPie said:
Conveniently forgot Windows 2000.
Click to expand...

Windows 2000 was still viewed as "that OS for businesses and IT, not for fun" before Microsoft merged the two lines with XP, so I'll give him a pass on that (he needs to change the Windows 7 graphic from pro to hp to be consistent, however). It would make more sense if he relabled Windows 3.1 as "shit", Windows 95 as "good", then insert Windows 98 First Edition as a shit release (redundant, viewed as less stable than 95, had that shutdown bug).


TBH, any Windows release my dad gets with a new computer turns out to be the "shit" release :D; Windows 3.1 for our second family PC, Windows 98FE for the upgrade (yeah, totally skipped 95 :(), Windows ME for my schoolwork PC, and now he's using a laptop with Vista and is sitting out Windows 7.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top