Do you prefer Windows 8 to Windows 7 and earlier?

I think he is agreeing in that he wants the Windows 8 under hood but not the UI of Windows 8 or 8.1. I agree with that hole heartedly but I still would like access to metro for times when I am in full consumption mode.

During the Beta a lot of us were excited over Windows 8. It looked like a real winner. I really was looking forward to also a RT tablet and a new Windows phone as well. I know for all my friends and family I was ready to recommend the same agenda to them as well. But near the very end M$ changed all of this with a group of bone headed decisions that it is now locked into. Even if they did a full reversal and went with a UI setup everyone liked it is probably too late.

Most of us who were holding out for those new devices have now made alternate purchases. Few will want to take one year old or newer tablets and toss them. Fewer with two or more year phone contracts will run out mid contract to get a new phone. In the end it is probably just too late for Windows 8, IMHO Windows 9 needs to be accelerated and if it isn't the must have OS and UI it could really place the company in a hole that is hard to dig out of...................

 

Windows 7 Is the Best Windows ever. Next is Windows XP. Windows 8 is a crap. Is a bull-s-h-i-t .Windows 9 will be next future best windows.

 

I do that to put the under hood of W8 into W7 and give the user/installer option of W7UI-start menu or W8 Metro interface. Such a simple move something M$ can't do unlike Apple that with all the hard knocks can make it simple and people buy them.

 

At least Apple's been mostly consistent with their OS UI. As much as I dislike them, I have to give them credit for that at least.

And Linux is as free and wild as ever, it seems. At least it's not too difficult to install your favorite UI over your favorite distro.

 

The windows 8 phones are really very underrated. The OS is so much faster and more streamlined than android and gets a lot more out of sub-par hardware. This is a massive advantage in the low-mid range smartphone market.

Unfortunately for them, not everyone has realised that Iphones and top of the line Samsungs are really luxury products. The best value is undoubtedly in the mid range, and there's no option from apple there and the Android's are limited by requiring higher end specs not to be laggy. People haven't yet caught on to this, which is unfortunate for the likes of Nokia and Microsoft.

I agree that the under the hood aspect of 8 seems to be better than 7, but the UI is superior in 7 for productivity. There are some aspects of the 8 UI that I am really coming to enjoy, but you have to go out and actively seek them - they're not particularly intuitive until you look them up.

 

Not surprised, considering that WP is designed to run on the bare hardware whereas Andrios is built to run onto of a virtual machine.

 

It's called lack of innovation and not thinking outside but thinking inside of the box and lack of good managerial skills to make truly innovative products. Really UI superior to 7 productivity - at least I can have a clean Desktop and only icons that I want to have on there. So your UI choices is very lopsided and fail to see the fail UI integration it fails to do even basics productivity in the UI compared to a straight forward 7 start and go productivity so your own word are ironic in themselves.

 

Not this again. Seriously? More productive? Switching between desktop and separate UI is more productive? It's more keystrokes, less time with eyes on the tasks, a discontinuity. Being able to only look at a single screen at a time is better for productivity? It breaks the simple UI design principles and not in a good way. This is not Windows, it is "full screen tiles".

I use Windows 8.1 because I own it now. But I use Startisback and never, I say NEVER use the Metro UI. I am completely very efficient with Windows desktop style interface. It's not about learning a new OS, and if it's not intuitive as you say, it's broken. A solid OS UI is all about being intuitive so you don't have to figure something out. Sure if you're new to it you may have to learn the basics of how things operate, but you shouldn't have to dig around to find it.

I gave windows 8 without a third party start menu a chance, to see if it really could be more efficient. Well I failed, or moreso it failed me.

 

Even though the only apple product i own is an iphone, and even though iOS is quite simplistic, i must give credit where it's due. my 91 year old grandfather has no problems using my iphone at all. The new employee at work who got stuck with a win 8 machine....not so much.

 

Read what I said... I said that the 7 user interface is more productive...

 

l'll vote for Windows 8.1 if I saw this poll earlier. For me, I find Win8 much faster than Win7 and I especially like the task manager of 8 and the ribbon thingy in file explorer. I also like the fact that there are two environments in 8 which is quite good for my eyes after long hours of using desktop.

 

Not this again...faster then Win7. You can't perceive in real time as the difference is negligible to make any meaningful comparison and alot depends on the machine and the setups. What two environments are you referring to about at least give some clarification to that statement?

 

Doesn't Win 8/8.1 boot faster than 7? And for the two enviroments, I think he means desktop and metro, start page.

 

I had found that to a full desktop they were about the same. To metro only yes it was faster..............

 

On modern hardware that supports Intel Rapid Start Technology, there's no difference.

 

Windows 8 is faster when running on Piledriver cores than 7.

 

Based on what independent test???

 

It looks as if like Bulldozer that Piledriver relies on CPU modules similar to the old C2Q. On single threads not affinity set the scheduler of Windows 8 will be about 10% faster than that of Windows 7 scheduler. If the AMD bulldozer patch is applied the advantage of Windows 8 slips to about 5%. Now this is for non optimized multi thread or single thread as well.

This has to do with the old scheduler not being properly optimized for CPU's with modules and non-NUMA etc.......................

 

I don't know, fresh install of eight did feel faster than a fresh install of 7 in my experience. I don't have any proof though, just my experience.

 

It is actually a false feeling. It is by the fact metro is there right away but if you click on desktop and account for that time too the are about the same for boot up..........

 

You can boot straight to desktop now in 8.1

 

I can not directly comment on windows 8.1 but unless there have been other enhancements over 8.0 it should still be no faster on most modern hardware. But again it counts what you load up! With windows 7 you may still be losing up Aero and using gadgets etc.. These extras can cost time, thing here is you may just be arguing over a few seconds a day that daily could be lost over windows 8.x UI in the first few minutes of operation..............