Will you go to windows8?

I'll be going Windows 8 upon release, purely to force myself to become accustomed to it. I didn't leap straight on Office 2010 when it came out, and as a result I suffered when our customers started calling in with problems relating to it. I have already tried the consumer preview (as well as the beta of Server 2012) but not for long enough to get over the initial "I want my start button back" thing most people seem to experience.

_Jimlad_ said:
its' only ME and Vista which were bad, but saying that if you tweaked UAC and had a good PC Vista was ok
Click to expand...
I found Vista to be pretty good, but then again I had a great system - most people back then had single core systems, often with under 1GB RAM, which is why Vista has such a bad reputation for being slow.
 
3.1 = Good
95 = Bad
95B/C = Ok
98 = Ok
98SE = Good
ME = Kill me now
2000 = Good-->Great by SP4
XP = Good-->Great by SP2
Vista = Ok-->Good by SP2
Win7 = Great
 
HeX said:
3.1 = Good
95 = Bad
95B/C = Ok
98 = Ok
98SE = Good
ME = Kill me now
2000 = Good-->Great by SP4
XP = Good-->Great by SP2
Vista = Ok-->Good by SP2
Win7 = Great
Click to expand...

My post was meant to be tongue in cheek, it doesn't look so good when you write it out like that. ;)

Krugga; win 95 was a terrible resource hog, and you're right... it was ME that was the **** one, not 2000.:)
 
I will no doubt take a good look at it, weather or not I will actually buy a retail copy of it though, I don't know yet. I am most likely to own it on a new laptop or tablet.

From the research I have done, I don't like Metro on the desktop at all, if that and the hot corners can all be completely disabled to make it more like an evolution of Windows 7 rather than a different take on the Windows desktop operating system ...a system that has worked well since 1995, then yes I probably will. If it continues as a slightly awkward bonding of desktop and tablet os's ...then probably not.
 
I was familiar with windows 2.0, but didn't have a PC until '94. Since, I installed every version of windows from 3.0 to 98. I didn't bother with ME. I stuck with 2000 until XP sp1. I tried with XP but found it a PITA with SCSI HDDs. SP1 fixed that.

I never installed vista on any of machines. I never even tried to install it. Only used it when preinstalled on other machines. Didn't like it at all and was running an old Athlon PC, so stuck.

I built a new PC and went Windows 7 pretty much as soon as it came out.

I'm not adverse to completely ignoring Windows editions if they don't do it for me or suit the hardware I'm running.

I'm gonna be interested to see how it works with Kinect. Might be good for an HTPC.
 
Last edited:
When XP was released, there were holes, which were plugged with updates. Despite that it was hailed as a fantastic OS. SP1 did complete XP, but out of the box it was fantastic.
 
Allready have, it's not a massive change at all. It's still w7 desktop with a host of tweaks. Metro is a great start menu and on mobile devices metro is a great desktop.
I realy do t understands people's hate of metro.
You open up start menu you can't do anything else. So why waste 3/4 of the screen and confine yourself with a stupid list. Metro as a start menu is far superior and hopfully a few more tweaks to make it easier.
 
Ricochet J said:
When XP was released, there were holes, which were plugged with updates. Despite that it was hailed as a fantastic OS. SP1 did complete XP, but out of the box it was fantastic.
Click to expand...

It was very resource hungry (almost like Vista) and there were many holes which is why it had regular updates and 3 service packs.

I don't argue that it wasn't a brilliant system after a while, but it wasn't perfect on release either.

Glaucus said:
Allready have, it's not a massive change at all. It's still w7 desktop with a host of tweaks. Metro is a great start menu and on mobile devices metro is a great desktop.
I realy do t understands people's hate of metro.
You open up start menu you can't do anything else. So why waste 3/4 of the screen and confine yourself with a stupid list. Metro as a start menu is far superior and hopfully a few more tweaks to make it easier.
Click to expand...

I don't know about your PC, but on mine the start menu takes maybe 10% of the screen and I don't have to toggle between the Xbox interface and my usual desktop when I do my thing. Not to mention that default tiles are terrible and 90% of people don't customise things like that.
 
Last edited:
Tried it and didn't like it. If there was an option to disable/remove Metro then i'd get it, but at the moment it just feels like a touchscreen interface shoehorned in a rather unruly way into a predominantly keyboard and mouse OS.

Having said that, I do like Metro on Windows Phone 7 so it has lots of potential for touch devices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom