I agree,it was not until Vista x64 arrived that 64 bit OS took off IMHO for the general public,helped by companies actually making proper 64 bit drivers for lots of hardware devices,they were a bit slow at start but that soon changed.
End of Windows XP support spells trouble for some
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
I agree,it was not until Vista x64 arrived that 64 bit OS took off IMHO for the general public,helped by companies actually making proper 64 bit drivers for lots of hardware devices,they were a bit slow at start but that soon changed.
they were forced to otherwise they wouldn't get their 32bit drivers certified. obviously that was a good thing for us.
Perhaps, but it still had a few advantages over vanilla XP, such as stability, since it was pretty much a desktop version of 64 Bit Server 2003, and it allowed us to use 4GB for the first time, plus games and most apps were quicker than in 32Bit XP. I think that could be argued however because some were definitely faster and a few were slower but overall, there was not THAT much in it. Saying that, there is not THAT much between XP and Windows 8 in every game out there, bar a select few.
But for me... Once I got into XP64, I simply could not go back to XP32 because the entire experience was really quite different.
The only real issues I had personally was
PageDeFrag - I love this little app and it only worked on 32Bit XP ( and Win2K )
O&O DeFrag - So, Idownloaded the 64Bit instead ( Big deal )
Partition Magic - So, I then opted for Acronis but now use Partition Wizard
Other than that, 100% of the software I use, was compatible.
Obscure of not - it was, and still is a superior option to basic XP
Oh, and themes and apps like that were also poo but I dont use them.
But for me... Once I got into XP64, I simply could not go back to XP32 because the entire experience was really quite different.
The only real issues I had personally was
PageDeFrag - I love this little app and it only worked on 32Bit XP ( and Win2K )
O&O DeFrag - So, Idownloaded the 64Bit instead ( Big deal )
Partition Magic - So, I then opted for Acronis but now use Partition Wizard
Other than that, 100% of the software I use, was compatible.
Obscure of not - it was, and still is a superior option to basic XP
Oh, and themes and apps like that were also poo but I dont use them.
Vista and above does have a few important improvements ie improved security ,DX10,11 for gaming,I could throw in improved sound stability(the way its handled at software level rather then hardware) over XP as well.
I do feel there is enough changes under the hood so to speak.
I think XP 64 CD I had was the only one that collected dust due to various driver issues or lack of back in those days.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 2,128
Sometimes I wonder how some people function in life. Why is it hard for some people to be adaptable? Adobe didn't stay the same, many things in life change. What about work, doing some that you've never done before? Do people just freak out and protest?
Why can't so many move on?
I really can't understand the mindset some people have.
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 1,121
- Location
- West London
Bad analogy. A square wheel doesn't work. Windows 8 and the start screen do work. It really is just a start menu, that's fullscreen. A start menu that you can customise so that all the things you want are laid out in the order you want.
Square wheel working...kinda
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bH1uC1ld8zU
Yes Metro Start screen is just a desktop with HHHUUUUUGGGEEEEE icons.
Other than being a complete waste of space it does nothing better than the start menu, in fact its less efficient as you have to move further to select things. Its designed for inaccurate fingers. We've had a customisable start screen/desktop since windows 3 or earlier.
So if the Government spent over 6 million for more continued XP support, how much would it have cost to shift to Windows 7 or 8?
Seems any UK Government keeps wasting silly amounts of money on failing IT stuff… At what point can Microsoft keep maintaining that? Isn't that taking up programmers/debuggers time as well for an end of life OS?
Seems any UK Government keeps wasting silly amounts of money on failing IT stuff… At what point can Microsoft keep maintaining that? Isn't that taking up programmers/debuggers time as well for an end of life OS?
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 2,128
This old argument lol well its not a waste because YOU can choose what you want on the Start menu,the old Start menu was limited to what you could pin, it was still using the old boring tree method plus being really small so if you have a small screen or eye sight could cause issues plus crap for touch users.
IMHO its not a waste because I choose what I want on the Start menu and what size tile wise,it also helps keep my old desktop clean too.
Bottomline its just a newer modern way of doing things if you can be bothered to adapt.
Its not a modern way. Its the same way. You can add what you like to the old start or desktop and you can increase the size of the icons text. There's a certain irony in using the metro desktop to do the exact thing the classic desktop is intended for. Simply so you can look at the curtains. Though in truth I'm partial to a nice wallpaper myself.
The primary purpose of metro is not really to improve the UI. The primary aim is to provide a platform for HTML5 apps and a Microsoft app store, to copy the Apple store and the revenue it generates. Across multiple platforms.
The point is you can use Windows 8 without Metro. Underneath its a very decent OS.
Metro might turn into something worthwhile when it comes out of Beta. If you say its great for people with tiny screens, and accessibility issues, maybe you're right. I'm not that user.
It's a modern way compared to the old way,I mean the old Start menu has been around since Win95(so almost two decades),regardless I hope Microsoft brings out something new in Win9/Win10 and continue to try out new Start menus rather then going back to the old ways.
Anyway point stands it's not a waste of the whole screen because you decide on what you want on Metro Start menu,remove or add its up to you,ironically I'm not a fan of the old Start menu or even Metro Start,I still think Linux has some of the best Start menus around.
Last edited:
If they don't keep trying something new then you will never know if its better,otherwise we would be back to old ways with no progress.
Regardless you can't please everyone and no Start menu is perfect for everyone.
Btw I could say samething about the old Start menu ie it needs to be a lot better,see my point.
Last edited:
Generally you learn to do things better. Not worse.
In GUI that usually means making things more intuitive and using less clicks, less movement, less screens to do the same tasks. Its basic ergonomics, UX design.
As soon as you say the user has to learn and adapt for simple tasks its a bit of a failure. This is not flying the space shuttle.
In GUI that usually means making things more intuitive and using less clicks, less movement, less screens to do the same tasks. Its basic ergonomics, UX design.
As soon as you say the user has to learn and adapt for simple tasks its a bit of a failure. This is not flying the space shuttle.