Windows 8 ?

i do have a choice; i have XP, Win 7, Win 8 and 8.1.
in the past year, if i have not tried at least 50 Linux distros i have not tried one. lol

Linux is bloody damn good but if i can't play Mark of the Ninja or such on it then it's useless for me.

i would certainly take Win 8 over XP any time but the difference between 7 and 8 is, on the surface, pretty slim.
Metro aside of course.

i could go back to 7 if i wanted to but if nothing else, Win 8/8.1 boots faster and shut down faster.
it also has built-in support for USB 3.0 out of the box.

i don't care about Metro, i don't use or need it.
and it is easily avoided, if one wants to.

 

i know you're a Linux guy MRK, but Ubuntu with Unity is even more horrible than Win 8, if that is at all possible.

you folks here who complain all the times about Metro:
go play with Ubuntu and come back to us on this. lol

if Ubuntu is the future of Linux, i'll stay with Windows 8, thank you very much...

 

@ EASTER

Nice post, I´ve also read so many bad things about Win 8, that I even thought about installing Win XP on my new PC, which I´m about to buy.

But when you think about, Win 8 is a lot more secure because of Patchguard and EMET.

And looks like they fixed a couple of things in Win 8.1, like loading directly to the desktop and skipping the Metro crap.

Btw, I don´t really care about the start button, but I do care about the system tray and the quick launch feature, are these still present in Win 8?

 

Ubuntu has nothing to do with Win 8.
It's like saying, the neighbor's food sucks, so let's spoil mine too.
Win 8 sucks because it goes against human needs, as simple as that.

As to BSOD:
I have never seen any Windows ever crash with the RIP exception being in an NT kernel function. It was always third-party drivers, often security, hardware problems or heating. So whoever has BSOD is most likely causing them on their own, and not because of Microsoft's fault. And this from a Linux guy. You can say whatever you want about Microsoft, but their kernel is a very decent piece of work. Doesn't mean Win 8 is not crap, though.

Mrk

 

Microsoft needs to compete in the mobile market and for better or worse, you and i are the guinea pigs.

anyway, what do you want me to use?
Windows 7? Linux?

as long as there's a desktop interface under all this iPad-like fluff and it's not too hard to access then i'm good to go.

i'm certainly not gonna keep using XP forever.
or Windows 7 for that matter...

 

I have news for you: Apple and Android already dominate the smartphone and tablet market. Microsoft owns 90% of the desktop PC market. Steve Ballmer is a stupid businessman. If given a choice, what would you rather do: improve and keep your 90% desktop PC market or fight for that 10% of the mobile market your competitors already dominate? That's why Windows 8 is a flop!

Whatever floats your boat.

My point being if it works, don't break it! Microsoft is still looking for that killer app that makes people want to get Metro. Right now there is no compelling reason for any one to switch to or to upgrade to Windows 8.

Until Microsoft ditches the crummy Windows 8 Metro interface, I'm going to stay on Windows 7. I still drive an old car! Like I like say, its a tool and I use the best tool for the job.

 

It's fine to talk about your personal situation, but the fact that you experiment with multiple operating systems means you're not a typical user. Try to look at the bigger picture - I have to because I support many people who do not have the computer skills that you and I have. They have to make do with computers with default setups. For me Windows 8 is just a PITA which I can deal with if necessary, but it isn't necessary and so I don't have to get used to it.

 

People hate change! Microsoft didn't think this desktop redesign through. It forgot the basic rule that most people DONT RUN SMARTPHONES AND TABLETS! Windows 8 doesn't make it easy to use these devices and makes it a lot harder to run desktop PCs.

 

If you been a windows 7 user for any length of time you're in a unique position to simply keep your good system and sit back to watch what develops about windows 8 future.

I hop scotched past 7 from XP directly to 8 and although at first i thought i made a mistake, Metro is like a dead malware to me to be ignored

There's other features far more to like. Metro is just another useless waste of extra files IMO to eventually rip out entirely in order to finally make windows 8 fully complete and acceptable.

Steve Balmer is not with it in any manner. He is a lost leader and horribly misguided with no direction.

User's have been using Metro for years in their browsers aka SPEED DIAL. Duh.

It's a cheap duplication what we already had for years now.

 

Windows 8 has not even been out for a year yet.
you and i with our desktop machines are a shrinking market.

anyway, we we'll see in a couple of years if Microsoft gamble with Windows 8 was a good one for them.
i think it's way too early to celebrate its funeral.

 

As long as MS has their monopoly, they can, and probably will, continue merrily along doing whatever the heck they like, unfortunately, even when the things they do appear to be marketing failures. That's the advantage of the monopoly. And since they are financially well off, and continue to do well in that regard due to business diversity, they can indeed experiment all they like, even fail, and still go on without much damage. It's amazing. In the end, the user either has to adapt to what's offered, or try something else if they like. Either way, something will be there for everyone...

 

Note that Patchguard has been a feature of 64 bit versions of Windows since XP. Regarding EMET, it is not integrated into Windows 8. It remains a separate utility that can be used with 8 just as with 7. The only feature that potentially makes Windows 8 more secure than 7 is "Secure Boot" which requires that the motherboard have UEFI - older boards with traditional BIOS are not supported.

 

The truth is the uses to which smartphones and tablets can be put to are limited. They are more like extensions of desktop PCs rather than replacements for them. I don't think anything is going to replace the traditional PC with a monitor, keyboard and mouse any time soon - because it works, just like the car! And that's where Microsoft is betting on the wrong horse.

 

Spot on. I'd like to add that in my opinion Microsoft has got no chance of taking any significant share of the mobile market away from either Apple or Google. Windows mobile, is in my opinion a terrible mobile OS to use. Back on topic lol. I really do like Windows 8 a lot.

 

Totally agree 100% and couldn't have said it better...

 

Again, I agree here too... They will learn all this in time, the hard way, on both the mobile market, and the desktop pc situations....

 

I don't blame MS for wanting to try and succeed in the mobile market, that's not the problem. The problem is the notion that the OS UI has to be the same on all devices regardless of screen size and hardware interface. Apple hasn't replicated IOS on the Mac. Mac OS logically takes advantage of the much larger desktop/laptop screens and keyboard/mouse interface. The fact that the iPhone and the Mac don't look and work exactly the same hasn't hurt either product. The UIs are optimized for the hardware. Users don't seem to have a problem understanding that.

 

Yup - you either develop an interface specifically for mobile devices as Apple and Google has done or you do what Canonical did - develop an interface that looks and works the same across ALL platforms.

Microsoft tried to straddle the two approaches with Metro and ended up with the worst of all possible worlds.