• 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.

win8 = fail

IvanDobskey said:
Seriously, you liked WinME? It's the single biggest abomination in the history of computing :eek:
Click to expand...

Funny you say this, i liked ME to an extent too but much preferred 98SE and 2000. I found with the system restore disabled and a few tweaks it was just as good as 98, however it sort of defeated the purpose of being an 'upgrade' when it was just on par with the previous OS so i never used it as i was more into 2000 at the time, even for games i found 2000 superior overall with the right chipset and video drivers.

I used Vista a lot longer than i expected to, however from day one it was run on a Quad (first a Q6600 then a Q9650) with 8Gb RAM and the fastest hdds of the time (think the last hdd that machine had was a 300gb velociraptor) and mid level gpu (X1900XTX then HD4870). So i never had the slowdowns etc.. a lot experienced, but i've worked on a number of normal rigs with it to appreciate how bad it could get.
 
I am quite liking Win8 (it is a HUGE step up from the dev preview), but then I never did 7 so it makes more sense to me. Even without a touchscreen the metro stuff (the bits that work in the UK or work at all) are genuinely useful. Anyway, install from ISO or lower the overclocks? A 2500k idles at.....1.6ghz?
Incidentally I notice the Win performance rating has been changed in 8.
 
The main question here is, why were you trying to install windows 8? :S
 
A bit premature to rip something to shreds especially given the current version is a development preview.
 
Tuvoc said:
I still have two machines running Vista, I think it is good. Not a popular opinion, but has always worked well for me as long as you give it 4-8GB of RAM. Sure Win 7 is leaner and more responsive, but I don't think Vista is bad.
Click to expand...

I think it's seen by many that Vista is sort of Windows 7, without the optimizations. Works fine, but needs more elbow room to do what Windows 7 does with less.

As far as I'm aware. Windows 8 is still Windows 7 at its core, with improvements again and the Metro UI. So I can't see why it would fall down.
 
99% of the people whinging will upgrade to win8 regardless.

also we have this every time:

"xp is just win2000 with a different skin"
"vista is just xp with Aero"
"seven is just vista but more stable"
"8 is just 7 with a re-skin"

And yet (probably) less than 1% here actually know what differences there are under the hood. how much they've tweaked the kernel. what APIs and frameworks are different. etc, etc.

tl/dr: itt: people who like to moan get their moan on.
 
i reckon folk are missing the point of metro, thinking its useless without touchscreen. Hopefully, considering kinect is due out for windows, it would work a treat with hand gestures to navigate the metro ui, which IMO having used it on wp7 is the slickest ui I've seen!
 
What is needed... an OS that is as good and successful as XP but modernised, Windows 7 is good IMO, but XP is still the best OS in general, need another one like that!

Sounds like Windows 8 is a newer Vista..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom