Windows 8 vs Windows 7: Dispelling myths.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#101 Posted by lx_theo (6211 posts) -
[QUOTE="tagyhag"]It does absolutely nothing for me to need the upgrade. Plagueless
Fair enough, I can see that. However what I don't understand is people building new PC's with Windows 7.

Cheaper and avoids the risks with how Microsoft handles WIndows 8
#102 Posted by 04dcarraher (19954 posts) -

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="XaosII"]

Yeah, and i've had Windows 8 for a few months myself. You are very much wrong. I cant think of anything in Windows 8 that takes longer than Windows 7 does.

I'd love to hear somethhing more specific.

hexashadow13

Or you can just use the metro start menu to launch desktop applications and never actually touch any metro apps.

That true to a degree however you still have to switch back a forward to get to certain options and features,unless you spend time and or money to get Win 8 desktop mode setup where you can avoid most of the Metro hassles.

#103 Posted by hexashadow13 (5157 posts) -

[QUOTE="hexashadow13"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"]04dcarraher

Or you can just use the metro start menu to launch desktop applications and never actually touch any metro apps.

That true to a degree however you still have to switch back a forward to get to certain options and features,unless you spend time and or money to get Win 8 desktop mode setup where you can avoid most of the Metro hassles.

You don't seem to like metro apps so I'd assume you're not talking about those as the features. Not sure what you mean otherwise. Settings wise the only one I go into the metro setting thing to change is the lock screen background. All the rest of the stuff as far as I'm aware can be changed using the regular control panel, or is stuff related to metro apps and stuff, so you wouldn't need to use them anyway.
#104 Posted by jun_aka_pekto (16701 posts) -

Let's see. I have a spare Windows Vista and a spare Windows 7 (retail) licenses plus an unused Windows 7 Upgrade Family pack (3 licenses). I don't need Windows 8 yet.

#105 Posted by Rattlesnake_8 (18414 posts) -
I'll stick to Win 7.
#106 Posted by Plagueless (2569 posts) -

[QUOTE="Plagueless"][QUOTE="tagyhag"]It does absolutely nothing for me to need the upgrade. KungfuKitten

Fair enough, I can see that. However what I don't understand is people building new PC's with Windows 7.

Windows store and account integration are some of the reasons for people to stick to Windows 7.
I.e. fear of MS closing the platform. Limiting what you can get away with on PC. People don't want all information conveniently linked together or to have the PC decide everything for them. They want a certain amount of freedom and feel that windows 8 is threatening it. This is not a completely ridiculous consideration, seeing as several game developers have said they do not like what they see.

The desktop and all it's function is still there, and is still what you'll be using 90% of the time. Nothing has changed. The only reason you have to go through MS is if you want to create an app for use on the Start Screen. Traditional desktop programs are the same as they've always been.
#107 Posted by Plagueless (2569 posts) -

[QUOTE="hexashadow13"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"]04dcarraher

Or you can just use the metro start menu to launch desktop applications and never actually touch any metro apps.

That true to a degree however you still have to switch back a forward to get to certain options and features,unless you spend time and or money to get Win 8 desktop mode setup where you can avoid most of the Metro hassles.

:lol:, another ignorant, uniformed person. When you start up the PC, the Desktop icon is in the top left corner of the start screen. One click and you're there. Then, you can use File Explorer which is pinned to the taskbar at the bottom of your screen to get all the programs/files you want on the desktop without even touching the start screen. Takes hardly any time at all as there is a search function. :roll: Next. And even then, if you aren't dumb and actually use the Start screen, the search function there is lighting fast and can do everything the traditional explorer does.
#108 Posted by Plagueless (2569 posts) -
[QUOTE="Plagueless"][QUOTE="tagyhag"]It does absolutely nothing for me to need the upgrade. lx_theo
Fair enough, I can see that. However what I don't understand is people building new PC's with Windows 7.

Cheaper and avoids the risks with how Microsoft handles WIndows 8

Actually it doesn't, it actually makes you more prone to problems since one day MS will stop supporting Windows 7, and new programs (like games) won't work properly.
#109 Posted by Rockman999 (7232 posts) -

The price and improvements over Win7 were enough for me.

I would never go back to that bloated and slow Win 7.

#110 Posted by XaosII (16631 posts) -

aw... still defending Win 8? Defenders will just reply with the same excuses. The Win 8 UI is awful simply because it was a mandate from Sinofsky etc, it's not the result of any usability studies or efforts to make the UI more usable. There are plenty of good intentions, combined with awful execution and user experience. Windows 8 is clearly a "one size fits all" rush-job that was driven in a dictatorial fashion by its main-overseer at Microsoft, Steven Sinofsky (the man "left" the company shortly after the Win8 debute. Signs and wonders). Countless of people have raised their voices on the official Windows 8 blog when the OS was in development, yet the dev team and Sinofsky did demonstratively ignored the highly technical issues that were brought up and only answered the simplistic ones. As a desktop OS its awful Microsoft put away the start button. If you click on the hidden start button, you're back to the Metro interface. It's a jarring experience. They want you to force going Metro, yet the whole Metro and WinRT experience is so limited and smart phoney, Metro apps are castrated like the mail app it can't handle the most common mail protocol, yet MS forces you to use them (the default image/video/music viewers/players are awkward Metro apps in W8.. even in desktop mode. Ya its so much better :roll:04dcarraher

"Why is it so bad"

"Because it is"

"Can you be more specific"

"Because Microsoft made it so."

You should win debate awards.

I have no particular interest in Microsoft's internal politics. Im asking you to explain to me why you think its so bad, especially when i've told you several times already that the most efficient way to use the start menu has been windows key + the ifrst few letters of the applciation and hit enter; That's been the same since Vista. Some options have moved around, but i've counted the steps/clicks it takes to get to them and its either the same or less.

Your only complaint has been that the built in applications are sub-par? You mean the ones that are totally optional and actually exist unlike the base version of previous Windows?

#111 Posted by YoshiYogurt (5987 posts) -

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Windows 8 does not have the identical usability of its older predecessors. it takes longer to find things, you have to switch back and forward to get to certain features and options. Its a hassle. XaosII

Uh... Thats awfully nondescript and untrue.

At worst, it "takes longer" because it has moved to a different location but it would take the same or fewer steps/clicks to perform the same action. Its not a hassle. You just havent figured out how to properly use it.

It's very true. My friend built a computer with windows 8. It takes longer to get to everything and UI is indeed slower and laggy. Windows 7 UI was faster with 2 years of crap accumulated than windows 8. Settings/Control panel take longer to get too and the metro settings list is bland and hard to read. Windows 8 is a bloated POS right now, not getting a new OS until they make a proper one without the metro tablet BS that I'll never use.
#112 Posted by XaosII (16631 posts) -

It's very true. My friend built a computer with windows 8. It takes longer to get to everything and UI is indeed slower and laggy. Windows 7 UI was faster with 2 years of crap accumulated than windows 8. Settings/Control panel take longer to get too and the metro settings list is bland and hard to read. Windows 8 is a bloated POS right now, not getting a new OS until they make a proper one without the metro tablet BS that I'll never use. YoshiYogurt

Not a single thing you've said is true. Windows 8 is consistently faster than Windows 7 when it comes to its UI.

Settings/Control has moved options around, but i can promise you it takes the same if not less clicks than in Windows 7 or Vista. Prove me wrong.

#113 Posted by YoshiYogurt (5987 posts) -

[QUOTE="YoshiYogurt"] It's very true. My friend built a computer with windows 8. It takes longer to get to everything and UI is indeed slower and laggy. Windows 7 UI was faster with 2 years of crap accumulated than windows 8. Settings/Control panel take longer to get too and the metro settings list is bland and hard to read. Windows 8 is a bloated POS right now, not getting a new OS until they make a proper one without the metro tablet BS that I'll never use. XaosII

Not a single thing you've said is true. Windows 8 is consistently faster than Windows 7 when it comes to its UI.

Settings/Control has moved options around, but i can promise you it takes the same if not less clicks than in Windows 7 or Vista. Prove me wrong.

Let's say it's just as fast(it wasn't when I used it), It still looks awful. I prefer the classic start menu style.
#114 Posted by Lucianu (9493 posts) -

Because it doesn't provide a substantial update in the context of gaming. Like how i went from XP to Windows 7 64. That's what i call a significant update, and a required one to play new games that dropped XP support, and play them at their utmost 'oomph'. What, i should just shell out money for a little performance increase and a minuscule DirectX update that's not even going to be noticeable in the first place? Though to each their own, even tho i wouldn't, i understand why some might.

Also another reason for me is that it hasn't ben that long since i switched to 7, and i've grown comfortable with it. Leaving your comfort zone isn't a small feat to do, unlike what some arrogant people may think.

Yet another reason is that all the old games (and i do play a ton of them), albeit some tweaked, work great, and i don't have the guarantee that they'll work as good in Windows 8. Hell, feedback has ben negative in this regard from a lot of people that use Windows 8.

There, three good, personal reasons.

#115 Posted by XaosII (16631 posts) -

Let's say it's just as fast(it wasn't when I used it), It still looks awful. I prefer the classic start menu style.YoshiYogurt

It is just fast if not faster. But since you are disguisted by the UI, let me ask you something: How often do you spend time in the start menu and/or control panel so much that this is such a deal breaker?

I dont know what you people do that you spend such a significant portion of your day to day computing activities that an insignificant change to the UI (again, the most effective way to use the start menu hasnt hcnaged since Vista) that its so important. I would've thought a half-thinking person would've already realized the ability to place icons on their desktop and/or pin programs to the taskbar to require entering the start menu a minimal activity.

#116 Posted by clyde46 (46825 posts) -
The Metro UI is horrible to use if your not on a touch screen. Everything about it is designed for touch screens! What was wrong with the classic desktop, you know the one that is used on nearly all Window's OS since 95 if not earlier. Linux still use the classic GUI interface, as does OSX. Why did MS decide to force users to use this abomination?
#117 Posted by XaosII (16631 posts) -

Because it doesn't provide a substantial update in the context of gaming. Like how i went from XP to Windows 7 64. That's what i call a significant update, and a required one to play new games that dropped XP support, and play them at their utmost 'oomph'. What, i should just shell out money for a little performance increase and a minuscule DirectX update that's not even going to be noticeable in the first place? Though to each their own, even tho i wouldn't, i understand why some might.

Also another reason for me is that it hasn't ben that long since i switched to 7, and i've grown comfortable with it. Leaving your comfort zone isn't a small feat to do, unlike what some arrogant people may think.

Yet another reason is that all the old games (and i do play a ton of them), albeit some tweaked, work great, and i don't have the guarantee that they'll work as good in Windows 8. Hell, feedback has ben negative in this regard from a lot of people that use Windows 8.

There, three good, personal reasons.

Lucianu

1) You're argument would've been stronger had you just left it at "I dont want to pay for an upgrade" instead of essentially saying "i dont want to pay because i dont know what it does." No one is forcing it down your throat. Do a little research to decide whether it holds value for you or not; there are far more features than what you've listed.

2) Being afraid of change has nothing to do with whether or not the product is good or bad. That's not Window's fault - that's yours.

3) If it works on Windows 7 it'll pretty much work on Windows 8. 8 is based off 7 (which was based off Vista). I can't gaurantee you that it will work on 8, but every older title i've tried that has worked on 7 has worked on 8.

#118 Posted by 04dcarraher (19954 posts) -
The Metro UI is horrible to use if your not on a touch screen. Everything about it is designed for touch screens! What was wrong with the classic desktop, you know the one that is used on nearly all Window's OS since 95 if not earlier. Linux still use the classic GUI interface, as does OSX. Why did MS decide to force users to use this abomination? clyde46
Just stay with windows 7 and leave all the fashion victims to go to the FISHER PRICE designed Win 8 METRO! All these fanbois who claim that win8 is progress should demand to be paid by MS for their propaganda services :P: Win7 + Classic Shell is all you will need, Win 8 is not recommended for enterprises, professionals, and advanced PC users in general.
#119 Posted by Zophar87 (4351 posts) -

From my personal experience, Windows 8 as a desktop OS is junk compared to 7. Having to shuffle your way through metro to get to certain places and features, Major lack of backwards compatibility for older games compared to 7. Every XP era game I tried had graphical glitches or wouldn't run at all while using latest drivers. Once back to 7 all issues were gone. With Win 8 they removed alot of the legacy coding that makes older programs and games work.

04dcarraher

You haven't ever used Windows 8 for any extensive period of personal use. Have you?

#120 Posted by XaosII (16631 posts) -

Win7 + Classic Shell is all you will need04dcarraher

Oh. I get it. You're one of *those* people. Those who are stubborn and once they become comfortable with a concept or an idea they refuse to see anything else, even if it might be better, as actually being better.

The kind of people that would own a "Windows 95 For Life" tee shirt.

#121 Posted by 04dcarraher (19954 posts) -

[QUOTE="Lucianu"]

Because it doesn't provide a substantial update in the context of gaming. Like how i went from XP to Windows 7 64. That's what i call a significant update, and a required one to play new games that dropped XP support, and play them at their utmost 'oomph'. What, i should just shell out money for a little performance increase and a minuscule DirectX update that's not even going to be noticeable in the first place? Though to each their own, even tho i wouldn't, i understand why some might.

Also another reason for me is that it hasn't ben that long since i switched to 7, and i've grown comfortable with it. Leaving your comfort zone isn't a small feat to do, unlike what some arrogant people may think.

Yet another reason is that all the old games (and i do play a ton of them), albeit some tweaked, work great, and i don't have the guarantee that they'll work as good in Windows 8. Hell, feedback has ben negative in this regard from a lot of people that use Windows 8.

There, three good, personal reasons.

XaosII

1) You're argument would've been stronger had you just left it at "I dont want to pay for an upgrade" instead of essentially saying "i dont want to pay because i dont know what it does." No one is forcing it down your throat. Do a little research to decide whether it holds value for you or not; there are far more features than what you've listed.

2) Being afraid of change has nothing to do with whether or not the product is good or bad. That's not Window's fault - that's yours.

There's a difference between change for the better and change just to change to keep it flashy and hip.

3) If it works on Windows 7 it'll pretty much work on Windows 8. 8 is based off 7 (which was based off Vista). I can't gaurantee you that it will work on 8, but every older title i've tried that has worked on 7 has worked on 8.

False, every XP era game Ive tired had graphical glitches or wouldnt run at all even with compatibility options. However put Windows 7 back solved all issues, clearly shows Win 8 does not have all the bells an whistles that 7 had.

#122 Posted by clyde46 (46825 posts) -
. (Not my pic, one I found on /g/)
#123 Posted by 04dcarraher (19954 posts) -

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

From my personal experience, Windows 8 as a desktop OS is junk compared to 7. Having to shuffle your way through metro to get to certain places and features, Major lack of backwards compatibility for older games compared to 7. Every XP era game I tried had graphical glitches or wouldn't run at all while using latest drivers. Once back to 7 all issues were gone. With Win 8 they removed alot of the legacy coding that makes older programs and games work.

Zophar87

You haven't ever used Windows 8 for any extensive period of personal use. Have you?

:lol: been toying with 8 ever since previews and actually have a laptop with 8, removed it since it gave nothing but issues with older games and UI is incoherent for any real use for desktops.

#124 Posted by rilpas (8222 posts) -
haven't used windows 8 yet, but I'll likely upgrade when I can, seems to be a less resource heavy OS then 7. also, reading this thread, seems windows 8 receives a lot of hate for no real reason
#125 Posted by 04dcarraher (19954 posts) -

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] Win7 + Classic Shell is all you will needXaosII

Oh. I get it. You're one of *those* people. Those who are stubborn and once they become comfortable with a concept or an idea they refuse to see anything else, even if it might be better, as actually being better.

The kind of people that would own a "Windows 95 For Life" tee shirt.

:lol: Nope, change just to change for no real improvement isnt "better" its pointless.
#126 Posted by XaosII (16631 posts) -

There's a difference between change for the better and change just to change to keep it flashy and hip.

False, every XP era game Ive tired had graphical glitches or wouldnt run at all even with compatibility options. However put Windows 7 back solved all issues, clearly shows Win 8 does not have all the bells an whistles that 7 had.

04dcarraher

Funny. theres a laundry list of improvements on Windows 8 that don't involve Metro. So no, its change for the better. Your inability to cope with change isn't the fault of the product.

Well, since you clearly mentioned that you had only used Windows 8 during the developer preview which was even a few months before the consumer preview and there were no official Windows 8 drivers, then yeah, its probably reasonable to expect a few issues. The vast majority of older games i've tried worked just as well as they did on 7. Of course, i happen to have the sense to use the actual release version and judge it from that instead of an early pre-release version.

#127 Posted by hexashadow13 (5157 posts) -
[QUOTE="clyde46"]. (Not my pic, one I found on /g/)

I'm pretty sure Windows never had mkv codecs by default. You would either have to get a codec pack, which all still work, or use another media player like VLC (What I do). Also, why the hell would someone make an MKV but give it a separate srt. The fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuk?
#128 Posted by clyde46 (46825 posts) -
[QUOTE="hexashadow13"][QUOTE="clyde46"]. (Not my pic, one I found on /g/)

I'm pretty sure Windows never had mkv codecs by default. You would either have to get a codec pack, which all still work, or use another media player like VLC (What I do). Also, why the hell would someone make an MKV but give it a separate srt. The fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuk?

VLC? What is wrong with you man?!
#129 Posted by 04dcarraher (19954 posts) -

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

There's a difference between change for the better and change just to change to keep it flashy and hip.

False, every XP era game Ive tired had graphical glitches or wouldnt run at all even with compatibility options. However put Windows 7 back solved all issues, clearly shows Win 8 does not have all the bells an whistles that 7 had.

XaosII

Funny. theres a laundry list of improvements on Windows 8 that don't involve Metro. So no, its change for the better. Your inability to cope with change isn't the fault of the product.

Well, since you clearly mentioned that you had only used Windows 8 during the developer preview which was even a few months before the consumer preview and there were no official Windows 8 drivers, then yeah, its probably reasonable to expect a few issues. The vast majority of older games i've tried worked just as well as they did on 7. Of course, i happen to have the sense to use the actual release version and judge it from that instead of an early pre-release version.

:lol: I have a laptop with 8 so Ive used the real version and its pointless.
#130 Posted by hexashadow13 (5157 posts) -
[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="hexashadow13"][QUOTE="clyde46"]. (Not my pic, one I found on /g/)

I'm pretty sure Windows never had mkv codecs by default. You would either have to get a codec pack, which all still work, or use another media player like VLC (What I do). Also, why the hell would someone make an MKV but give it a separate srt. The fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuk?

VLC? What is wrong with you man?!

Wat? It's portable, clean, and does everything I need it to do. :/
#131 Posted by XaosII (16631 posts) -

[QUOTE="hexashadow13"][QUOTE="clyde46"].(Not my pic, one I found on /g/)clyde46
I'm pretty sure Windows never had mkv codecs by default. You would either have to get a codec pack, which all still work, or use another media player like VLC (What I do). Also, why the hell would someone make an MKV but give it a separate srt. The fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuk?

VLC? What is wrong with you man?!

So where is exactly is the problem with the picture and/or VLC?

#132 Posted by clyde46 (46825 posts) -
[QUOTE="hexashadow13"][QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="hexashadow13"] I'm pretty sure Windows never had mkv codecs by default. You would either have to get a codec pack, which all still work, or use another media player like VLC (What I do). Also, why the hell would someone make an MKV but give it a separate srt. The fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuk?

VLC? What is wrong with you man?!

Wat? It's portable, clean, and does everything I need it to do. :/

Thats cool, if you like to see encoding errors all over the place. Use MPC which is far better than VLC.
#133 Posted by XaosII (16631 posts) -

:lol: I have a laptop with 8 so Ive used the real version and its pointless.04dcarraher

I have a desktop with Windows 8 and its not. Very convincing evidence.

#134 Posted by Lucianu (9493 posts) -

[QUOTE="Lucianu"]

Because it doesn't provide a substantial update in the context of gaming. Like how i went from XP to Windows 7 64. That's what i call a significant update, and a required one to play new games that dropped XP support, and play them at their utmost 'oomph'. What, i should just shell out money for a little performance increase and a minuscule DirectX update that's not even going to be noticeable in the first place? Though to each their own, even tho i wouldn't, i understand why some might.

Also another reason for me is that it hasn't ben that long since i switched to 7, and i've grown comfortable with it. Leaving your comfort zone isn't a small feat to do, unlike what some arrogant people may think.

Yet another reason is that all the old games (and i do play a ton of them), albeit some tweaked, work great, and i don't have the guarantee that they'll work as good in Windows 8. Hell, feedback has ben negative in this regard from a lot of people that use Windows 8.

There, three good, personal reasons.

XaosII

1) You're argument would've been stronger had you just left it at "I dont want to pay for an upgrade" instead of essentially saying "i dont want to pay because i dont know what it does." No one is forcing it down your throat. Do a little research to decide whether it holds value for you or not; there are far more features than what you've listed.

2) Being afraid of change has nothing to do with whether or not the product is good or bad. That's not Window's fault - that's yours.

3) If it works on Windows 7 it'll pretty much work on Windows 8. 8 is based off 7 (which was based off Vista). I can't gaurantee you that it will work on 8, but every older title i've tried that has worked on 7 has worked on 8.

Just to be sure you don't missinterpret anything, i did write 'in the context of gaming'. Exactly, no one is forcing anything down my throat, hence why i don't care about upgrading to Windows 8. I did a little research, why the hell would anyone post in this thread if he hadn't? Minus dumbasses that seek attention. I've read articles about how gaming is on this new OS and checked out benchmarks, which is the only thing i can do because for me to fully comprehend Windows 8, i would need to experience it myself, or go to someones that uses it, and no soul i know has it.. Some games perform better, wile some perform exactly the same. Doesn't sound like a substantial increase to me. And this excluding the oceanic differences in hardware from one dude to another that will cause some semblence of a difference of performance.

Well no sh*t, ofcourse it's my fault. To leave your comfort zone is something tied only to you. And that's ultimately what's going to decide if you wanna jump towards something unfamiliar. Read the last sentence in my post, it contains the word 'personal' there. I didn't add it just to waste 2 seconds of my life.

Your experience is fully noted, though i'm gonna need a lot of more feedback. Since that's not what i see from the people that posted here.

#135 Posted by Zophar87 (4351 posts) -

[QUOTE="Zophar87"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

From my personal experience, Windows 8 as a desktop OS is junk compared to 7. Having to shuffle your way through metro to get to certain places and features, Major lack of backwards compatibility for older games compared to 7. Every XP era game I tried had graphical glitches or wouldn't run at all while using latest drivers. Once back to 7 all issues were gone. With Win 8 they removed alot of the legacy coding that makes older programs and games work.

04dcarraher

You haven't ever used Windows 8 for any extensive period of personal use. Have you?

:lol: been toying with 8 ever since previews and actually have a laptop with 8, removed it since it gave nothing but issues with older games and UI is incoherent for any real use for desktops.

Then you'd know that your initial point is completely wrong. Once you configure and arrange the metro, it's no different than your basic Windows 7 desktop.

#136 Posted by hexashadow13 (5157 posts) -
[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="hexashadow13"][QUOTE="clyde46"] VLC? What is wrong with you man?!

Wat? It's portable, clean, and does everything I need it to do. :/

Thats cool, if you like to see encoding errors all over the place. Use MPC which is far better than VLC.

MPC plays animated subtitles incorrectly. I have not noticed any encoding errors so far.
#137 Posted by 04dcarraher (19954 posts) -

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="Zophar87"]

You haven't ever used Windows 8 for any extensive period of personal use. Have you?

Zophar87

:lol: been toying with 8 ever since previews and actually have a laptop with 8, removed it since it gave nothing but issues with older games and UI is incoherent for any real use for desktops.

Then you'd know that your initial point is completely wrong. Once you configure and arrange the metro, it's no different than your basic Windows 7 desktop.

Ya its different , its full screen and you still have to flip flop
#138 Posted by hexashadow13 (5157 posts) -
[QUOTE="Zophar87"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] :lol: been toying with 8 ever since previews and actually have a laptop with 8, removed it since it gave nothing but issues with older games and UI is incoherent for any real use for desktops.

04dcarraher

Then you'd know that your initial point is completely wrong. Once you configure and arrange the metro, it's no different than your basic Windows 7 desktop.

Ya its different , its full screen and you still have to flip flop

What do you mean by flip flop?
#139 Posted by Zophar87 (4351 posts) -

[QUOTE="Zophar87"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] :lol: been toying with 8 ever since previews and actually have a laptop with 8, removed it since it gave nothing but issues with older games and UI is incoherent for any real use for desktops.

04dcarraher

Then you'd know that your initial point is completely wrong. Once you configure and arrange the metro, it's no different than your basic Windows 7 desktop.

Ya its different , its full screen and you still have to flip flop

How is it different? You navigate it the the same manor and open programs the same exact way. It just looks radically different, but at it's core, the way it functions is no different. Once again, you've never used Windows 8 and if you have then you used it for maybe 30min and then switched OS because you have no idea what you're talking about.

#140 Posted by 04dcarraher (19954 posts) -

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]:lol: I have a laptop with 8 so Ive used the real version and its pointless.XaosII

I have a desktop with Windows 8 and its not. Very convincing evidence.

aw there's a reason why Windows 8 isnt selling too well, because its pointless change for desktops and laptops meant for mouse and keyboards This metro tile interface is forced on you. And it's not designed efficiently for desktops. Period. Full stop. End of story. And this BS about "hey haters, just switch to Desktop mode" ... well, yes, you can do that, but guess what, you're constantly having to flop between 2 completely different user experiences (tiles and desktop icons) on a regular basis to do it. And the experience is nothing short of a hassle Oh wait, please tell me "get with times, leave the past behind". Ok, i'd love to ... i'll try running a new RT tile app. Let's see here.... now i have a SINGLE FULL SCREEN APP on my 17" screen. 90% of my screen is wasted on showing nothingness.
#141 Posted by MBirdy88 (8453 posts) -
[QUOTE="XaosII"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]:lol: I have a laptop with 8 so Ive used the real version and its pointless.04dcarraher

I have a desktop with Windows 8 and its not. Very convincing evidence.

aw there's a reason why Windows 8 isnt selling too well, because its pointless change for desktops and laptops meant for mouse and keyboards This metro tile interface is forced on you. And it's not designed efficiently for desktops. Period. Full stop. End of story. And this BS about "hey haters, just switch to Desktop mode" ... well, yes, you can do that, but guess what, you're constantly having to flop between 2 completely different user experiences (tiles and desktop icons) on a regular basis to do it. And the experience is nothing short of a hassle Oh wait, please tell me "get with times, leave the past behind". Ok, i'd love to ... i'll try running a new RT tile app. Let's see here.... now i have a SINGLE FULL SCREEN APP on my 17" screen. 90% of my screen is wasted on showing nothingness.

60 Million isn't selling well, HOKAY, business taking to it surprisingly well isn't selling? HOKAY. Your hate is empty nothingness, Windows 8 will only get better and better.
#142 Posted by guard12 (1657 posts) -

I see that MS has windows 8 pro upgrade for sale for $40 until january 30th. Should I upgrade from 7? Honestly

#143 Posted by MBirdy88 (8453 posts) -
[QUOTE="XaosII"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]:lol: I have a laptop with 8 so Ive used the real version and its pointless.04dcarraher

I have a desktop with Windows 8 and its not. Very convincing evidence.

aw there's a reason why Windows 8 isnt selling too well, because its pointless change for desktops and laptops meant for mouse and keyboards This metro tile interface is forced on you. And it's not designed efficiently for desktops. Period. Full stop. End of story. And this BS about "hey haters, just switch to Desktop mode" ... well, yes, you can do that, but guess what, you're constantly having to flop between 2 completely different user experiences (tiles and desktop icons) on a regular basis to do it. And the experience is nothing short of a hassle Oh wait, please tell me "get with times, leave the past behind". Ok, i'd love to ... i'll try running a new RT tile app. Let's see here.... now i have a SINGLE FULL SCREEN APP on my 17" screen. 90% of my screen is wasted on showing nothingness.

I don't understand your problem, nobody forces you to use the apps to replace any software or website.... especially on the desktop side, the only ones I use are games because the modern versions of microsoft games are so much better now and other touch games I wouldnt find normally that play with mouse. You are not forced. whatsoever.
#144 Posted by hexashadow13 (5157 posts) -
[QUOTE="XaosII"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]:lol: I have a laptop with 8 so Ive used the real version and its pointless.04dcarraher

I have a desktop with Windows 8 and its not. Very convincing evidence.

aw there's a reason why Windows 8 isnt selling too well, because its pointless change for desktops and laptops meant for mouse and keyboards This metro tile interface is forced on you. And it's not designed efficiently for desktops. Period. Full stop. End of story. And this BS about "hey haters, just switch to Desktop mode" ... well, yes, you can do that, but guess what, you're constantly having to flop between 2 completely different user experiences (tiles and desktop icons) on a regular basis to do it. And the experience is nothing short of a hassle Oh wait, please tell me "get with times, leave the past behind". Ok, i'd love to ... i'll try running a new RT tile app. Let's see here.... now i have a SINGLE FULL SCREEN APP on my 17" screen. 90% of my screen is wasted on showing nothingness.

You don't have to switch between them at all. The only interaction I have with the metro thingy is to open it, click a folder or app, and I'm back in the old desktop. There's no hassle. It's easier. Having more on screen that you can click is more efficient than the old start menu where you could have like 7 or 8 things pinned, while here you can have around 50 at 1920x1080. Also if you're using a metro app on a monitor pin an app to both sides as well. Only times I use metro apps are to pin them to the sides of the regular desktop, and even then super rarely.
#145 Posted by ArchoNils2 (6238 posts) -

I have never and I will never get any Window before SP1 or Sp2 released

#146 Posted by superclocked (5834 posts) -
In my case, your post was actually counter productive. I didn't realize that I would need 3rd party software to get the start menu back and watch movies. I also didn't know that they removed desktop gadgets. I'll definitely be sticking with Windows 7 for a while...
#147 Posted by 04dcarraher (19954 posts) -
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="XaosII"]

I have a desktop with Windows 8 and its not. Very convincing evidence.

MBirdy88
aw there's a reason why Windows 8 isnt selling too well, because its pointless change for desktops and laptops meant for mouse and keyboards This metro tile interface is forced on you. And it's not designed efficiently for desktops. Period. Full stop. End of story. And this BS about "hey haters, just switch to Desktop mode" ... well, yes, you can do that, but guess what, you're constantly having to flop between 2 completely different user experiences (tiles and desktop icons) on a regular basis to do it. And the experience is nothing short of a hassle Oh wait, please tell me "get with times, leave the past behind". Ok, i'd love to ... i'll try running a new RT tile app. Let's see here.... now i have a SINGLE FULL SCREEN APP on my 17" screen. 90% of my screen is wasted on showing nothingness.

60 Million isn't selling well, HOKAY, business taking to it surprisingly well isn't selling? HOKAY. Your hate is empty nothingness, Windows 8 will only get better and better.

60 million are bought licenses are from mostly oem makers is mostly all prebuilts,laptops, tablets and phones using 8 :lol: "At some point, are going to have to face reality: Windows 8 is selling slowly. More slowly than Windows 7 at launch, and more slowly than Windows 7 a year ago.Despite the hype, and hope, around the launch of Windows 8, the new operating system did little to boost holiday sales or improve the year-long Windows notebook sales decline, NPD noted. Windows notebook holiday unit sales dropped 11 percent, on par with Black Friday, and similar to the yearly trend, but revenue trends weakened since Black Friday to end the holiday period down 10.5 percent . [Average Selling Prices, or ASPs] rose only $2 to $420. Touchscreen notebooks were 4.5 percent of Windows 8 sales with ASPs around $700. Sales of Windows notebooks under $500 fell by 16 percent while notebooks priced above $500 increased 4 percent.
#148 Posted by MBirdy88 (8453 posts) -
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="MBirdy88"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"] aw there's a reason why Windows 8 isnt selling too well, because its pointless change for desktops and laptops meant for mouse and keyboards This metro tile interface is forced on you. And it's not designed efficiently for desktops. Period. Full stop. End of story. And this BS about "hey haters, just switch to Desktop mode" ... well, yes, you can do that, but guess what, you're constantly having to flop between 2 completely different user experiences (tiles and desktop icons) on a regular basis to do it. And the experience is nothing short of a hassle Oh wait, please tell me "get with times, leave the past behind". Ok, i'd love to ... i'll try running a new RT tile app. Let's see here.... now i have a SINGLE FULL SCREEN APP on my 17" screen. 90% of my screen is wasted on showing nothingness.

60 Million isn't selling well, HOKAY, business taking to it surprisingly well isn't selling? HOKAY. Your hate is empty nothingness, Windows 8 will only get better and better.

60 million are bought licenses are from mostly oem makers is mostly all prebuilts,laptops, tablets and phones using 8 :lol: "At some point, are going to have to face reality: Windows 8 is selling slowly. More slowly than Windows 7 at launch, and more slowly than Windows 7 a year ago.Despite the hype, and hope, around the launch of Windows 8, the new operating system did little to boost holiday sales or improve the year-long Windows notebook sales decline, NPD noted. Windows notebook holiday unit sales dropped 11 percent, on par with Black Friday, and similar to the yearly trend, but revenue trends weakened since Black Friday to end the holiday period down 10.5 percent . [Average Selling Prices, or ASPs] rose only $2 to $420. Touchscreen notebooks were 4.5 percent of Windows 8 sales with ASPs around $700. Sales of Windows notebooks under $500 fell by 16 percent while notebooks priced above $500 increased 4 percent.

No the real reality here is Windows 8 is at its core better than 7 and business are starting to realise this. at its core its better than windows 7 and simple free apps bring back all the functionality of windows 7 if required. In reality this operating system was designed for the future, not to satisfy a slowly dying PC centric community, anyone who thought that windows 8 would be massive in its first year are a joke of a human being as none of the hybrid devices have truly come into their own yet. Regaurdless of your stupid hate and naysaying, a hybrid desktop and devices are the future, one start change is NOTHING to cry over.
#149 Posted by Chozofication (3113 posts) -

Linux is the future I think.

#150 Posted by hexashadow13 (5157 posts) -

Linux is the future I think.

Chozofication
Until the average person's computer skills improve immensely, that ain't gonna happen.