Windows 8 - Looks really awsome

So I uninstalled Java and instead installed the 64bit of Java 7, which runs perfectly.

 

Java's been working for me, both the 32bit and the 64bit.

 

Interesting, how well does it support operating systems outside of Windows?

 

Mount ISO Files In Windows 8

 

Downloading Ubuntu Beta... we'll see how well Hyper-V works.

 

My humbe uptake on the subject:

Windows 7 has just come out, but Microsoft is not wasting any time. There is already a new release baking in the big Redmond ovens. Accordingly, your not so humble servant presents a preview of pre-beta Windows 8 release known as the Windows Developer Preview, featuring new tile-like Metro interface for touchscreens and ARM support; topics covered include installation, personalization, Wireless setup, new desktop look & feel, classic desktop, local applications, gadgets, Windows Explorer changes, Internet Explorer 10, windows updates, hardware support, task manager, resource usage, security, and more. I guess you will like this article.

http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/windows-8-preview.html

Cheers,
Mrk

 

Kinda skipped over a lot of the security there haha

 

Understanding how Hyper-V will work on Windows 8

 

Err...no more gadgets actually.

 

Not in the sense of desktop gadgets, but trinkets you play with and that add spice and flavor to your user session, yes.
Mrk

 

Gadgets are working fine for me.

 

"But let's put Metro aside. If you disable this thing and never use it, then Windows 8 feels something like a new Windows 7 service pack. The changes are tiny, barely visible. Most people won't know any difference. This is a good thing, but it does not justify the whole new edition of a system, though. On the bad side, the performance is not as good as it used to be. Windows 8 is slower, more sluggish than its predecessor.

Ermmm ... maybe not so good ... does anyone remember Vista?

" ... Windows 8 is robust and stable and offers a very good hardware support and backward compatibility. It just needs to consume fewer resources, that's all. Overall, 9/10, well deserved."


So; 'looks really awesome' translates basically as a slightly upgraded Win 7 (conventional desktop version anyway) with some tweaks & the like.



I can live with that.

 

Anyone that claims Windows 8 is slower than Windows 7, quite simply, is feeding you bull. (Source?)

Performance and security are the main reasons I'm using a developer preview as a day to day OS. Even if the start menu fails the OS will still be popular because of the core improvements such as speed, security, and hardware acceleration. Can't say the same for Vista which was slow and crash prone.

 

Well that's a relief. I'd settle for as fast as Seven.

I assume the 'tablet' start menu will be more specifically for those type of devices. This is understandable & I can see why MS is developing this interface format. For many of us using desktop PCs it will be superfluous essentially. I'm sure eventually Win 8 will be the logical replacement for Win 7.

I dunno, Vista SP 2 isn't so bad.

 

Win8 is most certainly faster than Win7. And it should improve too.

 

lol this article is silly. There are, as Funky said, core improvements. At the kernel level a lot has changed. This can not be considered a service pack by any means whatsoever. Quite a few of the changes are drastic.

 

I'll take your word for it. Maybe the author was trying to sum it up for the average end user: "Most people won't know any difference"

 

I meant OS adoption at release, XP was pretty bad at release too then they patched it. Vista adoption wasn't exactly fast, 7 most definitely was. Even if 8 is slower than 7, adoption will definitely be faster than Vista because of the core improvements. It's not even out yet and it's already more stable.

I guess, but the reduced start up time should be noticeable.

 

Yeah but I think there are blatant and noticeable improvements.

Yes, there are tons of huge things behind the scenes that users won't notice. But something like 250MB less RAM usage can lead to a noticeable performance improvement.

A new file system that allows for more space and better performance is definitely noticeable.

 

Personally I thought XP was an improvement on Windows Me and Windows 2000 from its release, & to be honest I couldn't wait to get it. Vista has had its own problems, of course. I still preferred it to XP though.

Well, that's something I suppose.

 

It needs some familiarity for the average end-user, but overall it is looking quite good from my limited perspective. I can't see me ditching Win 7 any time soon though!

 

Try it on a machine with a weaker cpu/graphics card and then see what gives.
Mrk

 

Better results than 7 on my 5 year old laptop, like I said the day the dev preview was released.

Quite simply there is no logical way that you can have better performance with 7. The only thing I can think of that might cause it is maybe an issue with the default graphics driver since the entire UI is hardware accelerated. Did you try the latest GPU driver from Windows Update or just run the default developer preview? Many issues were resolved in updates.

 

I tried on an IBM T60p 32-bit 2gm ram, ati firegl card. What was yours?
The laptop is probably 6 years old or so.
Mrk

 

Admittedly my laptop is somewhat better than that, a 64bit AMD processor with the Xsomething series ATI GPU. Did you read my edit?