Poll: Windows 8

[devotedsniper]

The only reason it seems like Windows 8 is hated is because of the loud mouthed crowd (but that's the same with anything, the loudest are always heard)

Not really. It might be a performance upgrade but with an OS that's, especially for the vast majority of users, an almost negligible thing. What matters more is usability and in that regard Windows 8 is an utter failure. This review words the usability issues pretty well, though it probably exaggerates certain things:

Have you actually used Windows 8? I watched that video and couldn't help but think what the hell is this guy on about? I swear he's on crack.

The only thing I've agreed on is the full screen app annoyance but I don't even use the app store so that doesn't even bother me. 8 does not do things automatically, I haven't experienced anything randomly popping up.

And as for "I couldn't find the control panel" and other continuity complaints, if he spent more than 10mins not running around like an idiot he could have found several easy ways to do things, for example;

My first screenshot (2 spliced together) show ways on how to get to control panel, you can use a tradition method (left) or you can use there new menu bar by hovering on the top right side of the screen and then clicking settings on it (right);

Spoiler

[http://s285.photobucket.com/user/DevotedSniper/media/metro_zps39c17c0d.png.html]

And just another thing, he says there isn't an easy way to close apps, again 10+ mins and he would have found something such as going over the left side of the screen and hovering;

Spoiler

[http://s285.photobucket.com/user/DevotedSniper/media/Metro2_zps46ddb581.png.html]

These new menu's aren't even slow, you go over to the side and maybe less than a second the menu pops up there not hard to miss, they even pop up briefly if you mouse over even for a second. All you have to do once its up is right click and it gives you the option to close them, but unless you have a good 50+ apps open they don't slow a computer down (unless seriously underpowered) but lets be honest who would have so many open at the same time (consider how many different programs you run a day, bet its less than 50).

In the end he spent 30 minutes before he was screaming he couldn't take no more, 30 minutes is not enough to get completely used to an operating system (a new style of one), I'm also not sure it's just me but he comes off as really biased, he didn't go in with an open mind. I don't know maybe it's because I'm a computing professional but so far I've found the thing extremely easy to use, it works well and while he makes a couple of good points, I completely disagree with most of the things he said. My main annoyance which would annoy him (something he doesn't mention) is the fact the power button is in the settings... not sure what they were thinking there but still once you know where it is it's just as quick to go there as it is in xp/7.

I am in no way a fan boy of 8, but I don't think bashing a OS for trying something new is right. If you spend an hour maybe two getting used to it you would find it actually works well, metro works well with a desktop, instead of swiping you just use the mouse wheel, it works well. Hell you don't even have to use Metro for the majority of use, once you open a regular program (none app) your back on the desktop.

I also put 8 on my sisters 6 year old laptop (which is slow, single core, 1gb ram, need i go on?) and it runs great, what's more surprising is that after a 2 days of light use my sister (who cannot use a computer for anything other than web browsing to save her life) was using 8 as if it was XP/Vista/7, so it is user friendly even for those who aren't computer experts. One final thing there is still a start button, granted it takes you to metro but again if it really bothers you you can fix that.

 

[itsthesheppy]

I hate it. My 60 year old father and his wife, however, love it. "It's just like our phones!"

You win this round, Microsoft.

 

[turtlbrdr]

I love how they spend Seven iterations of operating systems devoted to making things look more fluid. I love how the windows in 7 look. Then they throw that all away.

They OS is fine in what it's trying to do. It's great for tablets, great for entry-level PC, but for the some of us that are packing i7's and NVidia 550ti's it feels like nothing but a waste of time. Not too mention, getting rid of the start menu, alienates a lot of poeple like it did for me.

If they continue this stupid trend I might have to look into linux or something

 

[Zipa]

I use it with Start8 and its just fine, it is faster than 7 and has some under the hood improvements like better dual screen support and better memory management that made it worth upgrading for me. Personally I wish they went with the normal start menu approach and didn't treat actual PC users like they don't exist all of a sudden but its far better than Vista was when that came out, it was pretty much unusable.

 

[Kinitawowi]

Why is "it boots faster" always mentioned as if it was a big fucking deal?
Even if Win8 boots twice as fast as Win7 (for which you'd have to have a horribly bloated Win7) that saves what, 30 seconds once a day? Who cares? And if you switch your machine on and off so many times that it matters, for fucks sake, don't shut it down, put it into sleep mode. Bam, wake up takes 10 seconds now, problem solved.

Because, as has been noted a billion times by now, it's absolutely critical for Windows 8's target market.

Yes, Windows 8 does boot up faster than 7, and yes, we do live in a "NOW generation" where people think their computer is broken because it takes four seconds to load up a website. Not so much of an issue on laptops, of course, but I will scream and scream and beat people over the head with this until it finally breaks into their skulls - Windows 8 is not designed for laptops or desktops, it's for tablets. Some Microsoft nobjockey asked around to find out why people are using their tablets for internetting instead of their old XP laptops that they're refusing to move on from, and the answer was response time. I can grab my phone out of my pocket, type in my unlock code, punch something onto the Google search bar on the home page and be online in about fifteen seconds. Or I can turn on a desktop, wait for a minute while it starts up, another minute while it sits there and thinks about it, and by the time I've got where I'm going I've forgotten what I ever wanted to look for.

Slight exaggerations, of course, but the point is that speed of startup is exactly what you need - on a tablet. And Windows 8 is aimed at the tablet market first with everything else as an afterthought - it has sacrificed power user demands of customisation and efficiency for low end goals of simplistics and speed.

 

[Virgilthepagan]

While I can understand what Microsoft was going for here, I'm just as certain it was something the world didn't need. This whole notion of creating one OS for every single device and platform they sold to link the whole mess together really wasn't appealing to me. Especially on a laptop it feels like someone crudely sutured the new Apps menu on top of Windows 7. All of the upgrades under the hood are meaningless if the "updated" version looks and feels like a Fischer Price toy designed by the Byzantines; Colorful, shallow, but somehow still annoyingly complicated.

Here's me staying with my 7 until something better comes along.

 

[Total LOLige]

Snip

It's even easier than that to access Control Panel, just use the keyboard shortcut windows key+i and it brings up the settings menu. This shortcut makes it easier/quicker to access shut down and other power options as well.

A list of keyboard shortcuts I found helpful:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/hyperyash/archive/2012/08/28/windows-8-shortcuts.aspx

 

[Gemannihilator]

I like Windows 8, I got it for free with Uni and adapted to the newness in minutes, the new Start Menu looks different, but is functionally exactly the same as the old one, just hit the windows key, type the thing and hit Enter. It has a fantastic boot up time and task manager and I haven't encountered any changes that make me want to switch back to 7.

 

[Souplex]

I haven't liked a Microsoft OS since Bill stopped running the place. (Screw you 7!)
I hate Apple, and I'm afraid to use Linux for fear of messing something up irreparably, so I guess I'm stuck waiting for the Google OS to come out and reach mainstream saturation.

So you are a fan of Vista?

I didn't use it much, but from what I used; it was okay.
I feel like it was kind of the target of a massive smear campaign.
You didn't see much advertising for it when it came out, but you saw so much negative advertising from the other side.
When 7 came out there was oh so much advertising for it, because they learned that lesson from Vista. Unfortunately they forgot how to make a usable OS.

 

[Imper1um]

Here's my feelings on Windows 8: Its a touchscreen OS, plain and simple. If you DON'T have a touchscreen, you should format your PC and go back to Windows 7. There's plenty of places you can get Windows 7 still... just know that new (pre-built) PCs will automatically have Windows 8 installed...which means you will be forced to format to get to a non-terribad OS.

 

[Tufty94]

It's Windows 7 but with a few enhancements. If you don't want to deal with the new interface then you don't have to.

 

[bobajob]

I've tinkered with a couple of friends' laptops that came with it pre-installed; I was impressed by how fast load & boot times are, example the friend in question installed Photoshop(we use it heavily for work) after the initial start & configuration, 2nd time he ran it after closing it, loaded up & ready in 1 second flat. On an i5 2700K laptop. I shit you not. On a decent Win 7 DESKTOP this would take around 7-8 seconds at least.
On the other hand the interface is a mess considering the majority of people who have Win 8 installed don't even have a touchscreen to use it with; I had to show said friend how to access settings instead of the previous "msconfig" menu I had shown him to use before. Took me a couple of minutes of swearing before I figured out how to shut it down, heh.
Of course, it would also perform & boot faster considering it was developed(I hope) primarily for smartphones & tablets, these are considerably less powerful than a decent laptop or your average desktop.

Nothing new in the way of DirectX or gaming support to speak of; That's a deal-breaker for me, personally.

From me, a resounding "meh". I'll stick to 7.

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

I hate it. My 60 year old father and his wife, however, love it. "It's just like our phones!"

You win this round, Microsoft.

Yup.

Anyone who's bright, professional, productive, creative and decidedly non-stupid absolutely hates Windows 8, it's poopy Charms Bar, it's faulty use of input devices, hands and brains.

Anyone who used to spam everyone with viruses, worms, viagra and sexy teen shower offers absolutely loves Windows 8. So far, Microsoft seems successful, but I can't really say because I've only serviced a fistful of Windows 8 installations so far, mainly to add proper Windows functionality back in and get rid of Metro/Modern UI. I sit on licenses for Windows 8, but, so far, I only run the RC in a vbox, as that is plenty enough for me.

captcha: cor blimey

I didn't know you speak my language, captcha. How about dinner tomorrow?

 

[Formica Archonis]

Having used 8.... Bleh. More than once I've had to switch between the Control Panel and the Settings charm to do what I would consider a single task because the Control Panel is gimped and Settings is incomplete.

Two UIs competing on the same machine doesn't work.

 

[mohit9206]

I have not used Windows 8 so far so i don't know whether i will like it or not.

 

[MorganL4]

I haven't liked a Microsoft OS since Bill stopped running the place. (Screw you 7!)
I hate Apple, and I'm afraid to use Linux for fear of messing something up irreparably, so I guess I'm stuck waiting for the Google OS to come out and reach mainstream saturation.

So you are a fan of Vista?

I didn't use it much, but from what I used; it was okay.
I feel like it was kind of the target of a massive smear campaign.
You didn't see much advertising for it when it came out, but you saw so much negative advertising from the other side.
When 7 came out there was oh so much advertising for it, because they learned that lesson from Vista. Unfortunately they forgot how to make a usable OS.

Huh, because I had Vista, and upgraded to 7 the week it came out, and other than having some issues when SP1 was released, it has worked just fine for me. As far as Vista's marketing goes, I remember seeing Bill Gates going all over the place trying to promote the thing. Vista's main problem was that it was the initial switch over to 64bit for most people, which meant that a lot of the hardware they had did not work.

 

[McKitten]

Because, as has been noted a billion times by now, it's absolutely critical for Windows 8's target market.

If you assume the target market is "idiots", sure. Wouldn't surprise me, the developers sure as hell are idiots.
[quoute]Yes, Windows 8 does boot up faster than 7, and yes, we do live in a "NOW generation" where people think their computer is broken because it takes four seconds to load up a website.[/quote]Loading a website is not booting. Loading a website is not something where you will notice a performance difference between Win7 and Win8, ever. Hell, even if you're playing a current high-performance game, the actual difference between 7 and 8 is minimal. We're talking 10% tops, if you're very, very lucky. And actually negative percentages if you're unlucky and it's a game where the better driver support for Win7 makes Win8 actually slower.

Not so much of an issue on laptops, of course, but I will scream and scream and beat people over the head with this until it finally breaks into their skulls - Windows 8 is not designed for laptops or desktops, it's for tablets. Some Microsoft nobjockey asked around to find out why people are using their tablets for internetting instead of their old XP laptops that they're refusing to move on from, and the answer was response time. I can grab my phone out of my pocket, type in my unlock code, punch something onto the Google search bar on the home page and be online in about fifteen seconds. Or I can turn on a desktop, wait for a minute while it starts up, another minute while it sits there and thinks about it, and by the time I've got where I'm going I've forgotten what I ever wanted to look for.

I already mentioned the simple solution to that: put the machine in sleep mode instead of switching it off. Waking a Win7 machine up from sleep is going to take ten seconds tops. Your phone isn't doing anything different anyway, and neither is Win8. If you want to see how long your phone takes for an actual boot cycle, take out the battery, put it back in, and then time how long it takes to get online now. Win8 may shave around 30 second of the time required to boot, but most people only boot once a day anyway. Hell, in many companies, the machines aren't even switched off in the evening, users just log off, and the machine goes into sleep mode on it's own after a while.

Slight exaggerations, of course, but the point is that speed of startup is exactly what you need - on a tablet. And Windows 8 is aimed at the tablet market first with everything else as an afterthought - it has sacrificed power user demands of customisation and efficiency for low end goals of simplistics and speed.

No you don't need boot speed on a tablet. Tablets, just like phones, are rarely ever switched off, only put into hibernate or sleep mode. Comparing boot times of Win7 and Win8 has absolutely nothing to do with that. Of course, it's what M$ does because "halved boot times" sounds a hell of lot better than "wake-up cycle is 1 second faster!"
And Win8 users do it because of a little thing called post-purchase rationalization.

 

[McKitten]

Huh, because I had Vista, and upgraded to 7 the week it came out, and other than having some issues when SP1 was released, it has worked just fine for me. As far as Vista's marketing goes, I remember seeing Bill Gates going all over the place trying to promote the thing. Vista's main problem was that it was the initial switch over to 64bit for most people, which meant that a lot of the hardware they had did not work.

I'd say the main problem with Vista was that it was a horrible bloated resource-hogging mess on release. Calling Vista the beta version of 7 is somewhat lacking because really, release Vista was the beta version of post-SP Vista. (Sort of like XP, people don't remember much now, but release XP was godawful, but turned out very well with SP2 and later updates) There's a good reason why most companies wait for a couple of service packs before switching to a new Windows version...

 

[Boris Goodenough]

I'd say the main problem with Vista was that it was a horrible bloated resource-hogging mess on release. Calling Vista the beta version of 7 is somewhat lacking because really, release Vista was the beta version of post-SP Vista. (Sort of like XP, people don't remember much now, but release XP was godawful, but turned out very well with SP2 and later updates) There's a good reason why most companies wait for a couple of service packs before switching to a new Windows version...

MorganL4 is acutally right, to some extent.
Vista during its developtment phase was called Longhorn, which was ended prematurely (due to having spent too much time developing it) and you ended up with Vista and Win 7 is Longhorn in its full glory.

 

[Generic4me]

I fucking hate Windows 8, just as I used to hate Windows 7.

It's mainly because whenever Microsoft makes a new OS, it's far too advanced for the shitty computer I'll be running it on, I don't understand how to do everything, and it hasn't had enough time to be polished or gain enough compatibility with older stuff to be useful to me.

In addition, it's clunkier this time around, while you can set it to look sorta like Windows 7, it's still clear they designed it for a tablet, which is great because I would never, ever run fucking Windows on a tablet.