Yeah, Windows 8's on fire...

I think they should have just made it possible to easily choose which screen to use by default - Desktop or Start. Also make an option to put, again easily, a Start button. Plus adding some customization to Start screen by default would be a good thing. Charms make no big sense either. And I want my Aero glass back. I should be able to choose whenever I want to turn it on or off like in Win7 (Vista? never used it, so don't know). I know that something you can edit, other things there's software for that, but I don't understand why I have to install additional junk in order to make simple tweaks to feel the OS I'm using is mine. These little things would mean a lot for oldhags like myself to feel at home.
I did use Win8 for a couple of weeks, thought about switching to it, since I didn't find those things above very annoying, but I had some compatibility issues on my side and no Aero glass. And later I though why should I adjust, when Win7 does exactly what I want. Most of the time (99.9999999999999999999%) I was on the good and ol' Desktop, sometimes switching to Start screen to launch some crap, read email, see weather forecast, so it was kinda cool at what.
I may still get back to Win8 in future, maybe it will bring something good. I did have an opportunity to fool around with Win8 tablet. There is a learning curve from iOS/Android (in case of gestures), but once you learn how to operate Win8 (and since I did know how) it made me use it more pleasant than other two. A tablet PC running Win8 is the first one I really began to want. The "there's no applications for Win8" argument - true. But you don't need a million of apps either. I'm pretty sure the most necessary are there already.
What I don't understand is why people having these debates. I mean MS has an OS for desktops/laptops (Win7) and for tablets/devices with touch screens (Win8). Pretty much good combination.

 

Just my few cents, it took me half a day and a handfull of third party programs to make Windows 8 usable to the point where I could actually work. Could not figure out how to completely disable the "swipe" function. I agree the video was a bit over the top, however it was very funny and gave quite a few valid points. After the Win8 "fix", I thought the computer ran slower than Vista but did have a nice boot time. I akin the OS to Norton - Takes some doing to make it work the way you need it to but runs like crap and hogs resources.

 

It's generally accepted that Windows 8 is less resource hungry than Windows 7 is.

 

The difference isn't staggering, but yeah for me Windows 8 is slightly less resource hungry, but given the hardware we see in computers these days, it's not like it really matters.

While I don't have a hate for Windows 8 like other members do, I agree on the points that MS could just have kept aero (have it disabled by default, but leave it there) as well as allows the start menu to be there for desktop users. I mean, the core of the OS is similar enough to Windows 7 for this to be feasible, it's not like they rewrote the whole thing as indicated by it's version # (6.2), 7 was 6.1 and Vista 6.0, so why not give users the choice, it's pretty much what they've been so far and what people have come to expect of MS as well. Sure there are apps that can do that, but for corporate environments, that is one more thing to deploy and worry that it may break something.

Oh and MS needs to do something for multi monitor support, their hot corners are getting in the way sometimes with multiple monitors.

 

Although I got a good chuckle out of the video review posted, to the point of having to wipe my laptop's LCD afterwards, the key aspect of W8 failure (in my opinion) was best formulated here:

 

I run into this too. In some respects multi-monitor got some well-overdue tweaks with the taskbar and such, but then they made it too hot-corner-centric so trying to get to one corner on one monitor can be a little delicate. Trying to do a "Desktop on one screen, ModernUI on the other" is also kind of 1.0.

As I said, I don't know what users like yourself wanted. At the the of the day, the OS is a place we click and run things. We got that nailed down decades ago. They got the stability nailed down, they can only efficiency-ize so much out of the code vs. the hardware. Everything else is basically fluff, and how we value that fluff varies from person to person.

Paraphrasing something I heard a while back; Windows 8 is like being Zsa Zsa Gabor's seventh husband. "I know what to do, I just need to make it exciting."

It's also fun to look at OS's like OS X and various Linux distros and see what they are doing. They aren't exactly doing anything amazingly incredibly fantastical. The perception that the latest OS isn't doing some magical thing people seem to be expecting but can't explain is hardly unique to Windows.

 

Ubuntu got a lot of negative feedback about Unity, though I think this is mostly because of the fact that they bundle it with Amazon tools that could compromise security. Easy enough to get rid of those, and the Unity interface wasn't that drastic of a change (like you noted). Haven't seen GNOME or KDE (and their derivatives) change much either, though I'd imagine that is what happens when you allow more user input into design than you get with commercial OSes. Point being, most of them are fine with "old" UI practices (in comparison to W8). It also helps that it's pretty simple to install your own desktop UI if you don't like the default one; having the ability to completely customize the desktop UI also helps... sort of like Rainmeter but on steroids.

Apple pretty much has their OSX design nailed down; they got it right for their target audience and I don't hear a lot of OSX users complaining about the design aspects of their UI.

 

To be fair, windows 7 is not "that much better" than XP (you can say 64bit, support more ram etc ;but that was driven by hardware need which is not the case anymore), and I have to state again that there are people who swear they will never upgrade from XP.

I ve seen numerous people spent the effort to turn win7 look XP (classic menu/theme,small icon,bliss etc).
I use win8 desktop exclusively with third party start menu and liked small improvements in win 8 desktop, though I still freak out if a app pop up cause I can't find the X.

Anyways, my thought is, blame the company/marketing, the OS really have nothing "wrong". It is not that they can't, but they decided not to.

 

Huh...no. That approach might be palatable and/or hold true for some applications/users.

Once you have "fluff" starting to mess around and not-play-nice with aspects that are quintessential for one's line of work, you are looking at a non-starter.

Which is the point of the whole "pro" vs. "against" W8 battle...no one was expecting much of anything. W7 is fine in most respects and didn't need major overhaul.

It needed to be broken even less...

 

My biggest beef with Unity was that after 12.10 (I think) I couldn't change the location of taskbar. I didn't like it to be on the right side. Shuttleworth claims that's how you are supposed to use Ubuntu. I don't like that. Maybe there's a way now. But when I originally looked for answer, there wasn't any.
Back when I first tried Unity (11.04) I had installed Compwiz plugin (if I'm recalling it correctly). It made Unity very customizable. Thing I liked in 12.10 was that I think it came with it, so you could customize Unity out of the box. To some extent.

But I'm pretty sure you can do this with Windows 8 too.

I also kinda find it funny that Valve recommends to install Ubuntu to try out Steam for Linux given that Gabe Newell doesn't like Win8 and both OSes at the time of their release had some iffy changes. Both have unusual GUIs and have stores, but you still can install software like you used before.
Not hating, but let's just be fair.

 

IIRC, the Windows UI is heavily tied to the underlying system, whereas in Linux they are much more detached (hence why it's easy to uninstall GNOME and go for KDE, for example). However, I haven't heard of a way to easily change out the desktop UI for another desktop UI in any version of Windows. For example, I can't uninstall explorer.exe and switch it out for a Windows version of GNOME if I wanted to.

 

I think the point of distinction here is more one of OS X and Linux NOT doing anything incredibly stupid...

 

That has no creditable instances to backup that at all. He at least is providing more test then you have done so far.

At least he is publishing his results of which I have yet to see much to anyone provide as much as he has done for free even if that is his own opinion and that should matter to most general users.

Excuse me, we ask for help as well if you haven't notice lately on forums and emails and videos as the guy just did.

No I think you missed alot more from what the video was trying to say not that he doesn't like W8 for any reason but the history of developments that made Windows as popular a O/S and give it the market share it took from Mac and all other O/S. That is the point you missed.....

That is a lost term in itself...no there is one way to use it and that is the plain fact of it. If M$ didn't give you Windows - today you be using DOS. Of my replies if you haven't seen them - some are for "GENERAL" users and they want to turn on and start using the computer not take a University Course in how to become a Surgeon. It shouldn't be that hard to learn and as he mentioned a bad app will ruin itself but a bad O/S will ruin everything associated with it. One does little damage while the other will just ruin the experience in one fellow swoop......

That is you again not the General Public, sure they have icons but they will always look for the START Menu/Button in one form or fashion. They have a point of "REFERENCE" that is what he is talking about point of Reference where all apps start and being from so if one can't find it on the desktop they know where to look. That's is good you got it for free but then again why use it when the W7 already works and does what does good at already....Most people don't have time and time is money that is the FACT = TIME IS MONEY.

No, it's not most people it's everyone will use the "START" Menu/Button for when they get stuck or need a point of "REFERENCE'. That is what will make or break a good O/S. Have no point of Reference and you can be sure it will have bad reviews no matter how brand spanking new it is.

 

Why can't I express how I use Windows? Why do I have to speak for the general public?
I don't have to provide anyting, I've already said what he did wrong in the video, for instance saying that the Control Panel is hidden on the Desktop when in fact it's been that since XP.
I mean, what have you provided so far, besides nagging and whining?
How come you compare him to me?

I meant help as in F1, but I guess you're one of those who refuses to use a manual.

No.

So now you're going to dictate how to use Windows. I also see that you don't understand the competition to Windows.

I tried to explain that I can only speak for myself. Can't you figure out what "I" and "me" means in my posts?

Execpt me. And some others. I don't think you understand the concept of EVERYONE. Nice hairsplitting.

Your point of view seem to be:
- If you have something bad to say about W8, speak freely.
- If you have something good to say about W8, you have to speak for everyone.

 

Best ... video ... ever.

Wow, that explains exactly how I felt about it, but just couldn't convey it properly.

 

You haven't been paying attention, if that is what you honestly think. Various linux distros have been getting raked over the coals recently for doing mind-boggingly strange things. Fedora 18 was recently deemed the Worst Red Hat Distro Ever by a kernel developer that is well-respected, and I will back that the installer is absolutely horrid, even by OSS standards. Ubuntu gets kicked around every release, for things like left-sided menu buttons and sprinking Amazon icons all over and arbitrarily yanking out code here and putting questionable code there. Every time Shuttleworth has an epiphany the flaming pitchforks come out.

OS X is hardly immune. Apple is notorious for lacking in backwards compatibility, and they showed it in Mountain Lion right off the bat by jettisoning 32-bit platform support and where MS gets OMG THEY CHANGED TOO MUCH, Apple gets OMG THEY DIDN'T CHANGE HARDLY ANYTHING! To many users, the only thing 10.8 did was give them a new background and force them to upgrade their apps (not always free). And oh, you got a new Mac and you want to downgrade to Lion? Yeah.. no.

I use OS X on a daily basis (I own two Macs and support a large Mac population) and I also use Win7 and I "deal" with Linux. I can't fanboy anything, I can't say "use this, not that" because I use this, that, and the other thing. Daily. I'm flexible that way.

It's known that MS collects certain metrics on CEIP-agreed machines and many of their changes are based on what they see in those metrics. I'm apparently somewhat near to what the average user does apparently, as my workflow with Win8 is virtually unchanged from 7. It was a very drop-in replacement. I can understand how people outside of the median on the CEIP would not like the changes.

 

That doesn't surprise me that people dislike W8 so much. I'm not in that group as I do like W8. It's a fast stable OS so i'm OK with that part. What i'm not OK with is the lack of fluidity with the OS. IOW there is no consistency. Things that took less steps in the past, usually take more steps in W8. And applying a shoehorn to a touch based OS on a desktop is plain silly and that's W8 biggest problem. The OS doesn't make any sense because IT WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR A DESKTOP.

But MS says you can pin your most favorite program icons to the taskbar. Well wasn't the point of the START menu for that and leaving an uncluttered Desktop? Now you have a cluttered taskbar like OSX !

One thing I discovered that MS took away in W8 was the ability to scan a file by right clicking on the file and selecting it for scan in the context menu. It's gone !

My other problem with W8 and W7 is the bloated WinSxS. It's more bloated in W8 than it was in W7. Surely the best software engineers in the world can find a way to protect the OS with a better solution than to hard link the hell out of the OS resulting in a redundant folder that is bigger than the actual OS. Shameful !

 

Problem is the median usually is the minority. it is essentially an average. It is where you consider the upper and lower edges of the median and the percent of total users falling within the group. Now it isn't where today we should recommend another OS but Windows 8 is leaving the door open for other OS's to become popular.

Windows 8, except in rare circumstances, is usually not just a 100% drop in replacement with no other considerations. It can't be by default as there are differences in operation and if you operate Win 8 100% the same way you use Win 7 you could get nothing done. So inn the end you have to be able to "Deal" with the Win 8 changes. For me killing gadgets and Aero Glass were the final straws, now fix it ALL or I won't use it!

As it is I do not need or want Win 8. The majority of users, even original beta testers, are of the same ilk. Median or not, M$ has had ample opportunity to see responses from general, business and other users. M$ full well knows this is a fight as they have stated multiple times this is a marathon not a sprint. They know they are not just fighting then OEM's but the marketplace and the consumers themselves. This is one fight they will loose as they are not as big as they think they are.

I am sure some one there, at M$, has the numbers but if they sink themselves low enough the parts may become worth more than the whole. We all know what happens then. M$ is opening themselves to a world of hurt and they may be doing to themselves what the anti-trust was unable to do...................

 

Well, I will admit that I have not paid too much attention to what is going on in the Linux world in the last few years. I do know about the brouhaha around Unity, however.

I happen to know Alan a little (I was once involved quite deeply in Linux, and I know a few of the kernel developers; that's now about a decade ago, however...), and I trust his judgment.

Yes, I know about that one.

I am aware of the situation there as well. But here is the point (and a similar response holds true for the case of the Linux mess-ups, although admittedly to a lesser degree): Apple has always ben jerking their users around. Apple users accept that (because they always knew that Apple knows best anyway, I guess), and they seem to be fine with it. On the other hand, backwards compatibility, and the fact that you could rely on Microsoft to continue supporting your software and work environment has been the crucial feature of that company and its software, and this is one of the major reasons for their success in the industry: Businesses knew they could rely on them.

Now, all of a sudden, with Windows 8, and even more so with that incredibly stupid and irresponsible talk coming out of Redmond of ultimately wanting to get rid of the desktop altogether, they are trashing the most important asset they have. I discussed this before, and I repeat: They are going to pay a steep price for this blunder, and time is running out for them to change course.

Yes, it is well known how Microsoft uses, and abuses, these metrics as a bludgeon to kill off criticism of their misguided decisions. This is not necessarily the forum to discuss this, but it is obvious that they are misreading the data from their metrics in obvious ways. In simple words, the fact that a feature is rarely used does not mean it is not needed. How often do people use, say, the Component Services snap-in of the MMC? Are you going to argue that therefore that snap-in should be eliminated? Heck, how often do people use the command line in Windows? Should that one go, too?

 

QFT

No mistake: businesses have, and (if they fix their W8 problem) will always be Microsoft's biggest customer. Us end-users were always just "extras" in the Windows world, mainly because a lot of people don't like having to learn two different OSes and just stuck to Windows since that's what work uses, in the same way that a lot of people don't like (or have trouble) learning a second language. If businesses decide not to support Microsoft anymore in the future, then the company is basically screwed out of a large proportion of their revenue. And probably a large part of their profits too; Office is realistically tied to Windows (OSX usage is fairly low in comparison) and the Xbox division isn't very profitable at all.

That said, most users' needs are very simple. Internet browser, some sort of document editing capability, lightweight casual games (may or may not be in browser), and... not much else. Any modern OS can handle that sort of workload: OSX, Linux, and BSD are all capable operating systems that can work well with a user, the web is more or less standardized by this point so any browser will work, and .docx is compatible with OpenOffice (LibreOffice? I don't keep up with the names) and I'd imagine other word processors as well. On top of that, Linux and BSD are free, so there's cost savings for the end-user as well (ignoring OEM bribing from Microsoft). So you can easily have a scenario where a user (or business) is fed up with Windows 8, someone introduces them to some distro with KDE (looks an awful lot like Windows 7 and before), have a much shorter re-training period than Win7 -> Win8, and boom! Who needs Windows 8? Especially with this whole cloud trend, where most of what a user does can be done in a browser anyway (see Chromebook, Office 365, etc.) and the fact that businesses should already have most of their stuff on servers anyway (ignoring BYOD, which I thing is a horrible idea, but I digress), and the OS on the end-user's computer becomes a moot point for the most part. I even see OSX as a viable alternative to Windows 8, and I am *far* from being an Apple fan. At least Apple is the devil you know (breaking backwards compatibility often), whereas I have no idea what's going on with Microsoft right now.

Maybe Microsoft is in a business equivalent of a middle-age crisis, and Windows 8 is their tricked-out Mustang?

 

Aye, but with the hand-full of software tools that need to run in order for it to behave more like 7, it chews up your resources like mad. The quick fix programs are not a removing tool for the pita features of 8.

 

I've done some comparing in Virtualbox, and there's a tiny difference after a fresh install, but then the size of winsxs grows proportional to the amount of updates, and since W8 have gotten more updates (in MB) than W7 SP1 so far it also becomes larger.

Installation size, disk usage -

Windows 7 SP1 Ultimate 64 English: 7729 MB
Windows 8 RTM Pro 64 English: 8036 MB

Here it's easy to forget that W8 has swapfile.sys, so if you subtract 256 MB you're down to a difference of just 51 MB.

After updating both versions back in January, W8 got ~3 GB larger, and W7 got ~1.8 GB larger.

 

I used to think like that for years. The taskbar must be as clean as possible. I never really knew why tho, it was like an obsession that I couldn't question.

Then W7 showed up, and I didn't need separate icons/buttons for starting and using programs anymore (I can't understand why it took MS so many years to figure that out), so I started moving away from the start menu, and I've never looked back.
Now I have every program I need for daily usage right in front of me, and not needing that extra click into the Start menu makes it even more convenient.
I have to admit that this is maybe not usable on a low res screen together with large taskbar buttons and labels enabled.

It may look strange or cluttered, but try using it for a week, it's very useful. If you run more than 40 programs on a daily basis it may not be the right thing for you tho.

 

Some bad news...........

IDC: Windows Tablets To Have Single-Digit Market Share in 2017 -- Redmondmag.com

Microsoft should kill failing Windows RT, and focus instead on full Windows tablets, says IDC report | Computerworld Blogs

Windows Tablet Market Share To Stay in Single Digits Through 2017 -- Redmond Channel Partner

 

Well, yeah, Windows RT was a stillborn child from the get-go. I have to assume that the few of those that were in fact sold have been bought by mistake.

The pessimistic estimate for the Windows 8 tablets, on the other hand, is somewhat surprising even to me. One might think that there is a realistic value proposition in these. However, if IDC's prediction on this turns out to be right, then Microsoft should dump the entire idea of Windows 8, and their "Modern UI", right now. I have said all along that needlessly jeopardizing market share in an area of success (the traditional Windows desktop/laptop market) in order to chase after market share in a completely unproven area is the height of stupidity. If IDC is correct, that strategy will fail.

 

I wouldn't say the market is unproven so much as completely owned by Apple and Google.

 

I think though they are talking true dedicated tablets, not convertibles etc. Now I will say that with my Nexus 10 I would love Windows RT if Windows 8 were on my DTR. Since M$ killed windows 8 for my DTR they killed my getting a windows RT tablet for consumption. M$ does not even realize they market that is being lost. If desktop users had an OS that would also synch easily to the consumption tablet and their phones the market could be huge. M$ just needs a way to convince their current desktop users to use the new OS, but in scratching my head I think they actually did at one point till they decided this just was not a primarily desktop OS nor would supply an option to make it act as one.

M$ has a HUGE market base. There is no doubt there. Over the years the success of their OS's has lied in enticing new users to join that market base. This by adding features and have a more intuitive and robust OS with each iteration. I can not understand why they have decided to buck this trend in every aspect. All this while again trying to drag its current user and OEM base kicking and screaming down that path. Now when I say user I mean consumer, work and IT along with their share holders.

IMHO it should have been Windows RT released with option for desktop or tablet usage. Touch screens would be a quickly demanded item within its niche market including convertibles (actually what I was looking forward too). After 6 months time to get some metro momentum then lets see windows phones and RT tablets, they could be introduced earlier but again the market traction would probably be low.

Again IMHO you have to generate market excitement. Killings the acceptance of Windows 8 as a desktop OS is not a way to generate but to kill excitement over the OS and its truly mobile sibling. I also think it is too late to capture that excitement back into the market. M$ has already accepted this in their own words of this being a marathon rather than a sprint...................

 

It better be, otherwise we'll be stuck with Metro on desktops like idiots - just for kicks, tried it on a 23" 1920x1080 display and it looks horrible in full screen, with single colors and huge tiles (well, they're actually pretty small by default but still needlessly big compared to icons)...

Obviously I'm still using 7 and don't see a reason to upgrade...

 

Well it's a matter of taste and how every individual works. I always had my desktop and taskbar clean, with all the programs stuffed in the All Programs menu . In XP I organized them by category in sub-folders, while in 7 they're just... there - I access every app/software using the search field (typing the first 3-4 letters of the programs name and pressing Enter).

It's the same in 8, only all of those programs are put in front of my eyes, which is annoying since it kind of sends me into a stupor - when I want to open a program, I can't decide between using the keyboard (to search by name or use the arrows) and the mouse (since I see the program icon with my eyes already).

Plus do I need all the live tile information? I don't need to have everything at a glance, it's information overload, it's flash multitasking (as in flashbang not Adobe ) and it's generally bad for attention and productivity.

 

Exactly, Windows 8 with its Metro UI is great - for tablets and Ultrabooks! Why couldn't Microsoft just make two editions - Windows 8 Desktop and Windows 8 Touch - instead of trying to get everyone to use it as a universal OS. That would solve all the things.

 

Exactly. I mean, what's the point of running a Microsoft OS if it can't run Windows (NT) software?

Don't look at me, I'm not the one saying the new Start page is good or useful.

 

Ah me... what I wouldn't give, to go back to OS/2 Warp.:yes:

Sure IBM's code was bloated, but that's the kind of bloat I like. Instead of delivering you with a BSOD, like MS did with all of their earlier versions of Windows, OS/2 actually explained the problem you were having. This was the main impasse between MS, and IBM. Back then, IBM wanted a robust OS containing thousands of SLOC's, so the OS could be "stable", and easily diagnosed when a problem developed. MS didn't care about the number of SLOC's, and only cared about the space used up on the drive.

In my career, I started out using FORTRAN, moved on to COBOL, then programmed in RPG. I must have been a really lousy RPG programmer, because all of my UN-handled escape messages, contained specific information about the program, and why it failed. Plus, I had a lot of //Comments// in my compiled programs, so any other programmer could follow my logic, and make updates/changes as necessary.

 

I ran OS/2 in the 90's and still have it on a VM today. *This* is not actually explaining anything.

OS/2 2.1 TRAP'd on live TV, when it was being demo'd on the Joan Rivers show.

We're off-topic.

 

Yeah, you are, but I agree, OS/2 was pretty cool at the time. Actually the foundations of its user interface design moreso than the underlying kernel. It certainly beat the pants off of NT 3.1...

 

More bad news for Windows RT, The Kindle Fire HD on sale. 269 for the 16GB and 299 for the 32GB............
Kindle Fire HD 8.9" Tablet - Stunning 8.9" Screen and Dolby Audio

 

My two cents:
After using Windows 8 Pro for a week, I really like it. I was disappointed for days, but after getting over the steep learning curve, I've found it to be a sleek and elegant OS. The only thing I don't like is how fractured the desktop and Windows 8 app environments are. For example, your default PDF reader may be a Windows 8 app when you want to open it on desktop or vice versa. I think everybody needs to give this OS a real shot before slamming it.

 

When your biggest win is your cold boot time, then maybe you aren't going to steamroll the market. Still, I am very impressed by the YouTube vids I see of PC's with SSD's booting to the metro interface is under 10 seconds.

 

Well, I got news for you: Any modern Windows 7 UltraBook with an SSD, Ivy Bridge chipset and Intel Rapid Start support in its BIOS can do the exact same thing. My Samsung Series 9 that I bought last June does it: roughly 8 seconds to the Welcome Screen. Wakes up from sleep by the time you have the lid open. No Windows 8 required.

 

He is doing more test then you are willing to show us? FACT.....

And how do you know I don't? You don't...know...

You didn't even watch the video did you-I just stated what he said......really and you claim to know what O/S I use???

If you can't say or make a rational reply don't.....

Most people want to buy and power up and start using the computer not take Physics Course 600 to use it. That's not hard to ask is it?? Must be in your case...

Since when did I say I hated W8???

 

Look, making personal attacks is not going to help your argument. Neither is not presenting data that supports you're claim; I can't go to physics lab and just say "I disagree with the results, therefore I'm right"... I'd rightfully fail that lab if I did so.

What happened to good-old testing?

 

In case of 7 vs 8 tests results are pretty close, somewhere 7 beats 8 and somewhere 8 wins over 7.
So it all comes down to these pointless GUI discussions.

I leave you with this:
Windows 8: Double-Checking Performance On Core i7-3770K : A Performance Check With Core i7-3770K

 

That's really not my responsibility. Probably not yours either.

I said I guessed.

I did watch it.

No I don't.

Well if it was me I'd swallow the pride, press F1, and get it over it. It'd help me more than any Physics course.

If you want to keep on doing this, send me a PM instead. I don't think anyone here is interested in reading this, me included.

 

I don't know why people even bother. There is not, and cannot be, any meaningful difference in performance between the two OSes. On the other hand, one has a GUI that sucks, and the other doesn't. So which one should we choose?

 

Actually there can be a meaningful difference. While primarily there is not here the OS can control resource assignment etc. Controlling priority, affinity, shared resources, latency and lowering resources (IE Aero Glass disabled) can all have effects. Windows 7 though is so well tweaked it really can't get much better. This is shown by the fact in gaming there is no real statistical significance...............

 

Aero glass hasn't been of any resource significance since even Vista was introduced. The hit on resources is negligible. And not sure what you mean by controlling priority, affinity, shared resources? You can set affinity and priority in Windows 7 through the task manager. I honestly don't see anything you can do in Windows 8 that can't be done just as effectively in Windows 7, period.

 

Actually I am talking bios manipulation of IRQ assignments etc................

 

I agree that Microsoft should kill Windows RT and focus on x86 Windows tablets and convertible tablets...but I'm not sure why that's "bad news." My prediction is that convertible tablets like the XPS 12, Thinkpad Helix, and Vaio Duo 11 are going to be more and more important in the next five years, and I'm not sure how that's bad for Microsoft. A convertible tablet offers portable functionality that a mobile-OS-based tablet like the iPad and the Kindle Fire HD just don't offer. I think that's a good place for Microsoft to focus its efforts as traditional laptops start to become less popular like desktops did a few years ago.

 

Then do a test like the Video and show the rest of us why you think as such that will at least demonstrate that you done the test and can show the results as such then....

That's the M$ problem they don't care...it's about $$$$ and nothing else more. Otherwise they would ask for the end-users input into redesigning a O/S that would suite the populous and will keep them ahead of the pack. Feed-back can hurt but can also improve the O/S and even make it the Universal O/S that all other will be judge by and play catch up to.

 

Windows RT is their attempt to break into the mobile part of the market. This meaning small tablets and windows phone with live tiles etc. or in other words the ARM market. This is the market they are trying to break into. The same market they are so hot on breaking into they have risked upsetting their current PC based consumers to show a potential customer base for Modern apps to developers.

IMHO those other PC based tablets are they way to go as well for Windows 8. I would have wanted one as well but am not going to use Windows 7 on the DTR and windows 8 on my tablet device. Now if they fix windows 8 I might reconsider................

 

As Microsoft is first and foremost a software company and their biggest software is the Windows operating system, they need to keep making new versions in order to keep their profit margins. Supporting 90% of the world's computer systems for free, with only the revenue from slowing sales of new products, is not a sustainable option. The only way Microsoft will be a truly customer-focused company is if they switch to a service subscription model in which their primary source of income matches their primary business objective of supporting the world's computer usage. They have tried to do this and are continuing efforts to do so, but it is difficult. Windows 8 appears to be an attempt by Microsoft to use their leverage in operating systems to make people more familiar and comfortable with their less popular products (i.e. Windows Phone) and thus spur sales in the important areas in which they have no meaningful presence. However, current response has indicated a backlash against the heavy-handed tactics that forced poor UI implementation in Windows 8, and that backlash is likely to carry over to the other Microsoft products. In this, Microsoft has inadvertently exacerbated the problem they were attempting to fix. And as a result, there is now an opening that there has not been for a number of years for a different software company to emerge as a wide-scale operating system alternative.