No, I don't like it: if I would to use a Mac or an IPhone, I would purchase them. And not meaning enhancements for me. My actual OS works fine.
I will most likely get windows 8 on a preorder deal assuming they do it like they did with windows 7. I need to learn the Lastest windows os to help my customers. I also want windows 8 due to some of the new features such as having a task bar per monitor I have been wanting that feature for ages. I think I will only get windows 8 for my desktop thou since I dont use my laptop much.
Do I need to upgrade? No, Windows 7 is running fine. Will I upgrade? Yes. I'm going to build a new computer next year and will install Windows 8 on it. I like trying new software and have always upgraded to each new version of Windows. Additionally, I provide tech support for many family and friends and it helps to stay one step ahead of them. Plus, I like trying new things.
Ugh I forgot they pushed it back further. Ridiculous. I hope they keep to the 2014 date, I think they will.
So what exactly are supposed to be the major improvements in Windows 8? I'm assuming there will be IE 10 and a newer WMP. And IE is supposed to have spellcheck in version 10?
The entire system has spellcheck on Win8. Win8 should have a new filesystem, which will be faster and use less space. Win8 has new security mitigations and improvements to older ones. Win8 has smartscreen system wide. Win8 will have a fully GPU accelerated GUI. Win8 will have a hybrid boot. Win8 will have a Windows Store. Win8 will have blah blah blah a million other things that make it a huge jump from 7. Moving from 7 -> 8 is like moving from XP -> 7.
Eh, well, that's not saying a lot, really. I also say that as a former XP user and current 7 one. All this "acceleration" is basically a way to get you to spend more cash on a graphics card. A new filesystem that uses less space..in a world of terabyte drives, it's meaningless. Security? More is better, of course, but it'll just be the same old, tired out monthly patches, business as usual. We'll still have malware, ransomware, spyware, and it'll all run on Win 8 too. Metro means nothing to me, nor does a store, and I know how to spell. Tell you what, remove the completely idiotic registry, and get rid of all these damned locked copies of other folders that Win 7 plagued us with, and I might become more interested.
Not impressed AT ALL. Upgrading is nice in this age that we live in,but unless you can come up with more than that,I'm afraid with everything that it is these days,economy being one of them,not many will be impressed just because of these features.
Agreed. It seems to be quite a big jump. @dw426 Remove registry and replace it with what? The folders help people find things with less clicks/time. So no.
Use the same system Linux does, that way nothing gets junked up and numbnuts don't bork their systems. As far as folders, I don't think you get what I meant. I'm not asking for folders to be gone period, just the "ghost folders" that Windows 7 introduced..I mean, there are two versions of the same folders everywhere.
Really? Not saying a lot? lol the changes between XP and Vista/7 are massive. Nooo, a new file system is not meaningless at all. Using less is always better especially in a world full of laptops, which can't take advantage of 3TB drives etc. And that's not even touching on performance. The GPU accelerated UI actually isn't about buying a new GPU, it works well with IGPs meaning no dedicated GPU necessary. You aren't impressed with massive changes that lead to far improved performance and security. Well, what would impress you exactly?
I want to get a windows 8 tablet with dual boot of android ice cream sandwich, on asus transformer with a high-end upcoming qualcomm processor and a retina display. Not sure how many of these features I can get.
i've been happy with win7 and i'm not sure if i'd like a touchscreen the size of my pc....touchscreens are fine with my ipad or iphone but the mouse has become second nature to me...and unless win8 is so much more superior over win7 when it comes to how my pc performs, then i see no reason to upgrade
Lower RAM usage, faster disk due to faster file system, and some new graphics stuff that should effect games.
i've switched to Linux. the main reason was Windows 8. Windows 8 felt too much like Windows 7, and i felt there was not enough changes for my taste. i just don't have the patience to wait for Windows 9. hahaha! as an extra bonus for using Linux; i don't have to deal with a whole bunch of security headaches and having to configure security apps/setup and babysit them. lol i better stop here i before i start sounding like a fanboy.
When my current PC with Windows 7 dies no doubt i'll get a new system which will have windows 8 on it. But until then i see no need to upgrade to windows 8, windows 7 is great and does everything i need with minimal fuss.
Ghost folders was probably not the right way to put it, but, for example, two "Apps" folders, two "My Documents" folders, and so on. It just isn't needed, imho. DLL hell also happens in Windows, and plain text files are still by far easier to keep in line than registry entries everywhere, most of which (along with files) stay stubbornly behind when removing programs. @Hungry: Memory use and UAC are about the biggest things brought by Windows 7. Actually, why bother talking about security when 7 (left to its own devices) is just as hackable as XP was. Mark my words, 8 is not going to be any different. Saying 7 has some performance and security improvements over XP is a fact. Saying it's light years ahead of XP, fallacy. Same as 7 vs 8, improvements, yes, anything more said is simply hype and wishful thinking. Windows is Windows at the end of the day, that's just how it is. Call me nuts, I can take it But again, just wait a while until we're, oh, say a few months into the release, maybe even sooner as the "test period" goes on. I'm willing to eat a bucket of crow if need be, but that's my belief thus far.
Because it isn't... at all. Like... there is no world in which creating a 7 exploit is as easy as creating an XP exploit. ASLR alone is a huge mitigating factor and that's not the only thing added by a longshot. And something like superfetch isn't a minor performance enhancement, neither is DX10/11 support, which XP lacks. Not to mention proper 64bit support, which will further increase security and performance. Pretending that a 12 year old OS is at best denial and at worst spitting in the face of over a decade of technological improvements that are now built into the kernel of new OS's. Yeah an entirely new runtime environment, that's just a minor change right? There are significant changes moving from 7 to 8 just as there were moving from XP to 7. And what we've seen in 8 is, as you said, still purely testing period and not even beta. We still haven't seen what performance improvements (and possibly security improvements) will come with a new filesystem.
I'm just curious... what changes do you consider large? Has there ever been a large change in your opinion?
I wouldn't be able to have the same built-in security with Windows XP, as I have with Windows Vista/Windows 7, such as MIC (mandatory integrity control). -http://blogs.technet.com/b/steriley/archive/2006/07/21/442870.aspx I mean, with just one or two steps (depending on my preferences), I can kill any infection coming from the browser, by setting a low integrity level to the browser. You cannot do this in Windows XP. Windows Vista brought security improvements and 7 also brought them, such as AppLocker, which works at kernel, rather than user level like SRP. 8 will bring them as well. 100% perfect? Keep dreaming... Nothing is.
