More bad news surfaces

[ChaosLord]

You wouldn't pay much mind nor have much use for a movie critic in the local newspaper if every review he writes starts out with:

"I didn't bother seeing the film, but I think I got a good idea what it's like from watching trailers on TV for it.  My brother says it sucks, my paperboy says it sucks, so it obviously sucks - 2 thumbs down!!!!"

I trust what the brother and paperboy say over what any film critic says.


Seriously, I have found that professional movie reviewers have warped tastes and they are completely out of touch with regular ppl.

I have read many surveys that confirm this.



Ok, back to the W8 topic: I am a little bit surprised that you like W8 for gaming.  The other day my brother was reading over a list of games to try out and a  lot of the games said "Does not work on Windows 8".  So it would seem to me that, overall, Windows7 would be better for gaming.

I haven't yet seen any Windows8 games that said "Does not work on Windows7".  I am sure they exist but I think they far fewer in number.

[commodorejohn]

There's errors absolutely EVERYWHERE in the posts.

Then correct it, don't just stand around smarming about it. If you have better information that you're withholding, you don't get to act smug about it.

8.1 is a free download.  Gonna hate something, at least be able to say "yeah, I tried it, and here's 100 reasons why I dislike it!".

Donate a computer that can run it, and I will. I'm not screwing around with my existing systems just for this.

You wouldn't pay much mind nor have much use for a movie critic in the local newspaper if every review he writes starts out with:

"I didn't bother seeing the film, but I think I got a good idea what it's like from watching trailers on TV for it.  My brother says it sucks, my paperboy says it sucks, so it obviously sucks - 2 thumbs down!!!!"

This isn't like judging the quality of a movie based on trailers. This is like judging the quality of a movie based on the fact that it's actually a flipbook with a companion 8-track.

[Duce]

Me not correcting people for posting blatantly false information dredged off various websites is being smug, lol?  Come on, man.  You can do better than that.  If people are going to post "facts", it isn't my job to ensure what you say is the truth.  I assume people wouldn't post FUD without actual experience to back it up, that's all.

As for hardware, I'm running W8 on an old AMD X2 machine with an nVidia 7800 in it.  Runs it just fine by my standards.

[stefcep2]

Hi stefcep2. What tablet PC did you install it on?

An old Toshiba Toshiba Portege M400.  Dual Core 1.8 Ghz 2 Gb Ram.  

Did you try showing the control panel icon on the desktop?  
Right click or hold your finger/stylus on the desktop. Select "personalise" select "change desktop icons" check "control panel". Now you have control panel on the desktop just below my computer and network. No change from windows 7.

I didn't know this.  But why take it away to begin with?

[Ed Raket]

People who are not using WIN8 should know its MANY,MANY times faster then win7, MANY times faster than Ubuntu, MANY times faster than latest OSX... AND i run them all at home... Ive used a wide variety of leading OSses and WIN8 aint half bad. And if MS first atemt on a WIN/NOTEpad failed... who cares, there's plenty fish in the sea... :sealed:

[ElPolloDiabl]

I don't think Windows 8 is the 'worst' Windows. I think it is a 'step back' or downgrade from Windows 7.

[James2002]

People who are not using WIN8 should know its MANY,MANY times faster then win7, MANY times faster than Ubuntu, MANY times faster than latest OSX... AND i run them all at home... Ive used a wide variety of leading OSses and WIN8 aint half bad. And if MS first atemt on a WIN/NOTEpad failed... who cares, there's plenty fish in the sea... :sealed:

I disagree with you. Faster speeds don't mean it stable. Microsoft and their security leaks. How long does it take windows to fix a security leak? A long time. Windows slows down over time.  Back doors in windows. Don't get me started.  All one needs to know is Command prompt.

I will never own a Mac system. I hate the User-interface. You rent the software on Mac. You don't own it. That info can be found on the User agreement.

Linux is  more of being stable and secure verse being the fast operation system out there. Linux when there is security leak. The Linux programmers go and fix it in couple days.  Linux saves the environment. It gives old laptops and desktops new life.

[commodorejohn]

Linux saves the environment. It gives old laptops and desktops new life.

Okay, I'll put up with a lot of dubious claims, but this is quite frankly just horseshít. The endlessly-perpetuated myth of Linux the Featherweight Champion derives what truth it ever had from nerds' stripped-down custom distros that ran with barely more than a tiling window manager with a bare desktop and a bunch of shell sessions in XTerm - yeah, you can do that plenty easy on a 486, let's see you do something impressive on it. Modern distros with modern desktop environments are hardly lighter than their Windows and Mac contemporaries and (in my experience) generally perform worse on low-end systems than "the leading brand." Certainly they're nothing at all like a rejuvenation of an aging machine. (And that's not even getting into the issue of whether the hardware in your old laptop or desktop is even supported...) Windows XP would be a better choice for low-end computing than modern Linux.

[SysAdmin]

Amiga - The featherweight OS!

[commodorejohn]

Damn straight!

[Duce]

XP simply isn't an option for most people in such usage cases, not for much longer anyways.  I go through a fair number of PC's.  Often end up working on some older machine a friend, customer or family had, they decide they would rather just buy a whole new machine than throw even $50 into an old one if it needs a new HD.  I get stuck with the old hardware.

Often, they will come with a copy of XP in some form.  I usually get the machines working and pass them onto someone who can use them, even if they are a bit older, they still make for decent enough email machines and good for word processing and such.  I'd rather see it in the room of an elderly lady at a nursing home, her playing Solitaire on it, rather than put it in a landfill, you know?

Problem we are facing now is XP lifecycle is coming to an end.  In April, it won't be supported in the least.  Even the most critical of security problems in XP, after April 8, 2014 - they aren't getting fixed.  Presents a real problem for me if I install XP on such systems now, cause sure as hell come April, someone will be shouting at me that their machine is broken and wouldn't you know, I can't even patch XP if that's the issue.  I've taken to installing Ubuntu on such machines and it works just fine for re-purposing older machines.

Annoys me a heck of a lot, because XP is such a tried and true OS - but I can't expect them to support it forever.  Considering XP launched in late 2001, and all.  If a guy gets 13 years out of an OS, consider it a good investment I suppose, eh.

[commodorejohn]

Oh, I won't dispute that that's an issue - I'm just arguing on the basis of low-end performance.

[AmigaNG]

Can you explain what halved your productivity? And what you did to increase your productivity to Windows 7 levels.
 

I can give you a perfect example that just god dam happen today, my pc had a windows update last night and now my mouse scroll wheel is no longer working, in anything, spent the last hour messing with settings and reading forums for whats happened. Again never had this kind of issue on Win7 it very annoying when you go from a virually problem free OS back to one with so many little issues.

Also one thing I hate is the full screen apps, why!, certain programs is fine but things like just playing music should not need the full screen, it easy to tell it to use another program on the desktop and that is what you have to do for many of the defult apps, becuase the defult one are rubbish and so unproductive!

if you enjoy it then thats great, but so far win8 is defentally not for me.

[psxphill]

And again, we come to this notion that you can't say something which plainly makes no sense (sticking a tablet UI on a desktop OS, positioning tablet UI as the future of desktop PCs) is stupid unless you've actually used it, because there's some kind of mystical property incommunicable in mortal tongues that makes it totally brilliant, and also the emperor isn't naked, you're just not refined enough to see his magnificent threads.

The "emperor isn't naked" is a perfect argument against your logic.
 
These people who communicated to you that Windows 8 deserves your anger are also saying that the emperor isn't naked.
 
You chose to believe them without looking for yourself & repeat it to anyone who will listen.
 
All I'm saying is that anyone who tries Windows 8 with an open mind actually likes it. You can tell anyone who hasn't tried it or goes in with a closed mind, the reasons they come up for hating it are laughable.
 

I can give you a perfect example that just god dam happen today, my pc had a windows update last night and now my mouse scroll wheel is no longer working

I've had driver updates that have been buggy on all operating systems. Including Linux. Revert each update until it starts working and then report it, or tell Windows to not install that update. Windows 7 & 8 generally use the same drivers, so it might have affected Windows 7 as well.
 

Also one thing I hate is the full screen apps, why!, certain programs is fine but things like just playing music should not need the full screen, it easy to tell it to use another program on the desktop and that is what you have to do for many of the defult apps, becuase the defult one are rubbish and so unproductive!

Wasn't Media Centre the default in Windows 7 Ultimate? That was pretty crappy, but after you told Windows 7 not to use it then you didn't have to worry about it anymore.
 
I don't use any full screen apps, but the existence of full screen apps doesn't make me upset. What if they put out a Windows 7 SP2 that allowed the new full screen apps to run, would you hate that too?
 

I disagree with you. Faster speeds don't mean it stable. Microsoft and their security leaks. How long does it take windows to fix a security leak? A long time. Windows slows down over time. Back doors in windows. Don't get me started. All one needs to know is Command prompt.
 
I will never own a Mac system. I hate the User-interface. You rent the software on Mac. You don't own it. That info can be found on the User agreement.
 
Linux is more of being stable and secure verse being the fast operation system out there. Linux when there is security leak. The Linux programmers go and fix it in couple days. Linux saves the environment. It gives old laptops and desktops new life.

MacOS is the least secure, because Apple spent so long saying they were more secure because nobody was targeting them that they weren't prepared for being targeted and it would also look bad on them if they made a big deal out of it.
 
Linux isn't inherently secure, even when there is a fix then each distribution has to push out the update. You could run a bleeding edge kernel, but you're more likely to have down time due to untested code than an exploit. Linux dominates the web server market, whenever you hear about sites being compromised and user details stolen it's another insecure Linux site. I wouldn't trust a volunteer to write secure code, what are you going to do if they mess up - sack them?
 
Microsoft are better at fixing security holes than anyone because they have the most practise. They do a lot of testing before putting out updates, so they don't usually rush them out. But there are times when they have.
 
I know you have to love Linux and bash Microsoft when you're indoctrinated as a tech geek, but it doesn't make sense. I wonder how many people actually believe it and how many are putting on a front to be accepted. I find Windows 7 & 8 run really well on old hardware too, the latest Linux distros have similar hardware requirements.
 
Google throws up some interesting reading on Linux security
 
http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/05/critical-linux-vulnerability-imperils-users-even-after-silent-fix/
 
The only reason for choosing Linux as a desktop operating system is that it's market share is so low you aren't likely to be attacked as people looking for Linux exploits are going after servers. I'd rather go for an operating system that is regularly attacked, because you at least know it's likely to get noticed and fixed (I always install the latest version of software first for the same reason).

[mjestart]

There is some functionality removed from the start screen that I'd like them to add back. I've tried Win 8 and found it less efficient and functional.

Would like to be able to resize the start screen so it doesn't cover the desktop, or access the 'real' desktop context menu, etc. for example.

[commodorejohn]

All I'm saying is that anyone who tries Windows 8 with an open mind actually likes it. You can tell anyone who hasn't tried it or goes in with a closed mind, the reasons they come up for hating it are laughable.

Actually there are multiple people who have tried it and hated it in this very thread. But hey, as long as you define the terms of the argument as "reasonable, open-minded person = agrees with me" and "doesn't agree with me = unreasonable hater," you automatically win, right? Score!