Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Oct 15, 2012.
If it has DX12 I'll give it a go. I just don't see ANY upside to spend aforementioned $100.
I have my OS on a Revodrive X2 so the it-is-faster argument doesn't apply and the only other argument so far is that "it's new!!"
More secure also.
Oh, I'll get it right now, then.
At the expense of another running process with potential bugs. I don't run any kind of shell, desktop or start menu replacements/tools. The only person being childish here is you at this point. You seem to be the only one resorting to name calling because people don't share your opinion. News flash skippy, people don't have to share your opinion.
You have made some valid points, but those points aren't strong enough to change my mind. I've used 8. I don't like it on my desktop. That's really all you need to know. It doesn't provide enough benefits for me to make the switch.
Actually, I don't use ANY third party software that alters my desktop AT ALL. Not even things like Rainmeter.
And comparing third party OCing tools to tools that alter the desktop is ridiculous. They're not even remotely related in concept.
Besides, the only thing I use in that respect are gpu OCing tools, and that's only because OCing GPUs via BIOS requires flashing. (Which I do after I find my optimal OC anyway.) All CPU and memory OCing is done via BIOS.
I accept it's the future. Just not my future. At least until it either does what I need out of the box, or I can get the peripheral I need to use it to it's full potential. Otherwise, I just can't justify it. An SSD or better gfx card would serve me much better than upgrading to 8.
It wont be used here till as said 7 is discontinued or they update the UI for non Touch Users (PUT AERO BACK IN!)
Most of my favourite games won't work [well] on Windows 8.
i'm not trying to change anybody's mind to go buy it, i am trying to help people understand why some of us do indeed use and enjoy windows 8.
windows 8 is faster and more secure than windows 7. there is no argument against that simple fact. is it $100 faster? well for me it is because buying an OS once every 3 or 4 years is chump change when I spend thousands in that time on hardware that BARELY gives me any improvement in today's games or desktop applications.
and since i am willing to spend 5 minutes to go and download a free start menu that is actually MORE configurable than the standard windows start menu provided in windows 7 and xp then I can enjoy a great classic UI with no metro hassle and still get the benefits of a faster and more secure OS. if you still think i am "stupid" or that microsoft is "fail" for implementing the metro ui in windows 8 then you still belong in your mom's basement with your windows 7 machine.
if you are spending $100 for very little speed increase, you are doing something wrong. The last $100 i spent got me a SSD and it is worlds apart from the old HDD i had.
As for the other comments, i noticed windows 8 was slower especially when using the start menu and more prone to program crashes. I am not against upgrading to windows 8, but not until it gets the kinks worked out. I do dislike the "feel"or windows 8, but i said that about vista and windows 7, after getting used to them, i find both miles better than xp so i am sure i would get used to using windows 8.
That's true, I had issues with War Rock crashing and detecting phantom hacks. Hope MS or game developers improve this.
you bought an SSD for $100 ??? anyway, my point is that $100 once every 3 or 4 years is nothing when you spend thousands over that time period on hardware.
and have you tried a custom start menu that disables metro? it feels EXACTLY like windows 7 . it is literally the same thing...
please don't turn this into reddit...
Got any info on how it's more secure?
I would like a phone with Windows 8, for when my SGS3 gives out. I also believe that a sharply negative response and lack of sales will make Microsoft think twice about putting a touchscreen interface on a desktop operating system, like Windows 9.
for security read this...
also, i would bet that at some point microsoft does implement a start menu for windows 8. if they don't then they are not listening to their customers.
considering most still dont have a touch screen monitor, and besides whos going to sit close to a big tv just to touch it?
SP1, hopefully. The current fixes are done through a simple registry edit, unfortunately that same entry edited is also used in other system functions, leading to minor instability (read: 99.98%).
ELAM looks to fill the gap between the point of installation and the point of getting anti-malware software. If you're a sane, educated person you have a usb stick for drivers/software for offline installation after doing a fresh reinstall.
Sounds allright. I may be reading this wrong but does this prevent rootkits from loading registry edits and software additions during boot, or will it force a system unbootable as altered firmware is rejected rather than booting with the rootkit?
UEFI needs to have a capability as a Read Only Mode so windows cant make changes to it
I sure hope so
But most people have a smartphone and/or tablet.
Microsoft went for the one size fits all concept. With the touchscreen interface being the centre marketing point, desktop users are neglected.
Imagine Android 4.0 on a desktop. This is the fuel behind the Win8 hate wars.
That's funny, I still mainly launch applications from the start menu. I only have 4 or 5 shortcuts on my desktop, because I don't want it cluttered up. I guess most other people are just fucking slobs then?
Hey people, you'd better upgrade, and quickly, otherwise in a few days you will be LEGACY USERS!!!![ shock horror!!!!!} YOUR TARDY OLD WIN 7 IS USELESS, what? no touchscreen, how backwards of you.
Cant have that lol.
if you have win 7, it's a pointless waste of money at this point in time.
Why on earth would a digital photographer/gamer/video editor etc etc want smudge marks all over they're monitor?
Now if there was a way to implement a secondary small touchscreen tablet/monitor in addition to your regular monitor for tools, i might be interested, but at this stage, i dont want touch, dont want tiles, dont need to spend 100$ for a few minor improvements but less overall control, and im sceptical of why there is such a big push to get everyone onto touchscreens all of a sudden, think about it for a moment, what are you giving away when you "touch" a touchscreen monitor???? hmmmmm.banghead:
I don't use the start menu that much.
I thought of another way I would use Windows 8 with the start screen. Allow me to get rid of the tiles, and use tiny icons and a list or details view like explorer, but with folder nesting like in the left hand pane of explorer.
Essentially, a full screen classic Start Menu. That sounds like a decent compromise.
I use start menu hundreds of times a day, even with my most common used ones pinned to taskbar (empty desktop). But I suppose to MS I'm nobody because I don't clag on to every new OS they bring out.
Separate names with a comma.