• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Directx 12 to not support Windows 7.

I appreciate the under the hood performance and memory optimisations in Win 8.1, but the interface sucks quite badly. It's pretty obvious that they wanted to cash into the tablet/touch interface market, whilst maintaining their core user base, so decided to go with a hybrid approach that is buggered beyond belief. Anyone who thinks otherwise is only fooling themselves.

Win 7 interface (with maybe the flat UI) and Win 8.1 performance enhancements would have been near on perfect for most people.
 
Though that was already known Win7 would not get DX12.

Get peeps off older OS so good IMO and if you like Win 7 you can make Win 8.1 the same as it and you get Win 10 for free as a Win 8 user anyhow.

Peeps were holding back running XP for 15 years crying about no DX10 onwards.
 
Win 98/SE - Ok, but had to wipe and reload it every few months.

Win ME - Worst OS I have ever used, constant crashing, you never knew what what go wrong next.

Win XP - Fantastic OS, never had any major issues, any issues for me was due to bad hardware.

Win Vista - Really don't know why the majority hate it, I personally loved it as long as you had a very good spec hardware running it. Never had any issues, the only time it blue screened was when I had bad RAM. Vista was rock solid for me until the day I upgraded to 7.

Win 7 - As much as I liked Vista, 7 was a much nicer OS, faster, better UI theme. It handled big hardware changes perfectly, swapped different motherboard/CPU's and 7 just loaded up and carried on as usual once it was reactivated.

Win 8/8.1 - I love 8/8.1, I like the flat theme, but did miss the Aero theme for a while, but when I used 7 again the glass theme just looked outdated. Even on a mechanical HDD at the time, 8 booted at twice the speed 7 and now on an SSD it incredibly fast. My favorite feature is the new Task Manager, so much better as is the new ribbon theme in folders.

I currently have 8.1 running on an Intel Atom N270 netbook with 2GB RAM with a 500GB mechanical HDD, it boots so much faster than XP and 7 did on it, as well as using less memory.

I use startisback as I love the win 7 start menu, but I do use the new start menu at the same time as the apps are very handy.

By the time Win 10 comes out, 7 will be almost 6 yrs old, it's time to slowly retire it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
titaniumx3 said:
I appreciate the under the hood performance and memory optimisations in Win 8.1, but the interface sucks quite badly. It's pretty obvious that they wanted to cash into the tablet/touch interface market, whilst maintaining their core user base, so decided to go with a hybrid approach that is buggered beyond belief. Anyone who thinks otherwise is only fooling themselves.

Win 7 interface (with maybe the flat UI) and Win 8.1 performance enhancements would have been near on perfect for most people.
Click to expand...

Indeed - even on a tablet Windows 8 sucks without some major tweaking and even then the interface (unless you use something that fully reskins the UI) looks amateurish.

Windows 7 UI (with 1-2 things from 8 like the speed graph and better copy/overwrite handling) and 8's performance enhancements would have been great.

Windows 10 is a bit hit and miss at the moment but has a lot of potential to shape up to be a good OS if they half listen to user feedback and back off 1-2 things, I'll be less than happy if I can't get DX12 on my gaming PC without putting 8 on it.

Radeon123 said:
I currently have 8.1 running on an Intel Atom N270 netbook with 2GB RAM with a 500GB mechanical HDD, it boots so much faster than XP and 7 did on it, as well as using less memory.
Click to expand...

I've a 8" tablet with Windows 8.1 on - quad core atom, 2GM RAM and a "SSD" (some glorified flash storage) but 8 boots ridiculously fast on it even with hybrid boot disabled. Shame I had to do some serious shell hacking to get something half usable out of it.
 
Last edited:
LambChop said:
why the rolleyes ? you dont agree ?
Click to expand...

Yep. Radeon123 pretty much got it spot on really.

The main thing wrong with windows 8 is that they took away start menu and tried to force metro. But a simple install of classic shell fixed that for me from day one a few years ago so I never had any issues with it. Boots fast, rock solid OS that never gave me any problem. What's there not to like?

Therefore windows 8 does not = nasty in my book :)
 
With a start button app windows 8.1 for me is better than 7 in just about every way. For me with the App installed it feels like using Windows 7 but just a better version. My App forces windows to load into the desktop so i never even see the metro side of it.
 
Last edited:
TheRealDeal said:
With a start button app windows 8.1 for me is better than 7 in just about every way. For me with the App installed it feels like using Windows 7 but just a better version. My App forces windows to load into the desktop so i never even see the metro side of it.
Click to expand...

Quote... Windows 7 it is a piece of history and that is it... Windows 8.1 with the start button is so much better without the need to search between 1000 folders and subfolders in a old style start menu.

People should stop whinging really or at some point computer will just stop existing, Windows 8.1 is somehow a mix between "Mummy friendly" and "Power User" yet people want Microsoft to create something that would appeal only to "us" bringing down sales of computer eventually as majority of people do not want to spend hours searching for thing and solving issues (as much as a few of us do for the sake of it).
 
Trustdesa said:
Quote... Windows 7 it is a piece of history and that is it... Windows 8.1 with the start button is so much better without the need to search between 1000 folders and subfolders in a old style start menu.
Click to expand...
Your doing it wrong :P no wonder you think people are whinging due to loss of start menu :S
 
If there are 50million windows 7 and 8 users who can all use Mantle, and only 5 million Windows 8(if it's on that) and Win 10 users who can use DX12, which version would get priority? As and when Mantle will also be available on multiple platforms that DX isn't and won't be available on. It's like they are going out of their way to give game devs a reason to favour Mantle.

At some point Mantle will likely work with at the very least AMD gpu's, but free for Intel and Nvidia to make drivers for, on Windows, Android and Linux/SteamOS. Having DX12 available asap across Windows versions would give dev's less reason to think .... well, Mantle will actually be available to more people than DX12... which will we now put the most effort into. Potentially work on Mantle, tell nvidia they will have to support it or wait for DX12 support, do one set of work and have it work on Steam OS with little to no extra effort.

MS should be making it as seamless and easy as possible to get to DX12 for everyone right now, anything else is borderline retarded.
 
Surely as DirectX is written by Microsoft they have the right to choose the OS which can use it?

Windows 8 is great with start8. I cannot go back to 7.

(I could return to vista though - loved that OS)
 
kazuya1337 said:
Why would a product that isn't released yet be supported by a product they don't sell anymore, that makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Maybe because it's where there biggest user bases is? I could maybe understand if Microsoft said the won't support windows 7 anymore like xp but I sure they still update the OS.
They is no reason to not support 7 the only reason they doing it is to make people from there biggest user bases rebuy the OS again.

It's all £££
 
Win 7 is already five years old, how old will it be before DX12 is released. Personally I think its a fair move but I can also understand this will be an annoyance to some.
 
LambChop said:
Win 98 - Good
Win ME - Nasty
Win XP - Good
Win Vista - Nasty
Win 7 - Good
Win 8/8.1 - Nasty
Win 10 - ??
Click to expand...

What's wrong with Win 95? That was good. Big change from Windows 3.1.

Anyway, if you are gamer this shouldn't bother you. Many would have moved on from Windows 7 for gaming regardless how good or bad Windows 8.1 is.
 
Last edited:
malachi said:
What's wrong with Win 95? That was good. Big change from Windows 3.1.

Anyway, if you are gamer this shouldn't bother you. Many would have moved on from Windows 7 for gaming regardless how good or bad Windows 8.1 is.
Click to expand...

I'm a gamer and I'm still using Win 7, I saw no need to upgrade, I still get my gaming fix from Win 7 and the improvements with 8 weren't enough for me to upgrade.
 
i hope this isnt the case or the rumoured new flight simulator is amazing next year otherwise it will mean having a special pc for fsx as it runs awful on win 8.1. ive now got 7 and 8.1 and although a few things are in a different place i find 8.1 ok. i dont think ive ever used the 'apps' tablet looking menu only to shutdown or restart. it boots faster on mechanical than 7 does on ssd as well. im upgrading to z97 in a weeks time and i dont know whether to buy a win 7 license and carry on unchanged or move to 8.1 on the ssd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom