• Windows 8
    8,715 replies, posted
Installing Win8 on my laptop once it arrives Do you have to spend a few hours doing artistic stuff in photoshop making Metro icons so you don't get the weird legacy icons or is there a bank of premade icons for metro?
[QUOTE=fishyfish777;37132243]Installing Win8 on my laptop once it arrives Do you have to spend a few hours doing artistic stuff in photoshop making Metro icons so you don't get the weird legacy icons or is there a bank of premade icons for metro?[/QUOTE] Worse than that, start screen icons are irreplaceable, to my knowledge.
[QUOTE=woolio1;37132976]Worse than that, start screen icons are irreplaceable, to my knowledge.[/QUOTE] It wouldn't take hours to make a metro icon for non-metro apps, but adding the functionality of right-clicking a program's shortcut in the start screen, and opening the options to set a manual "metro" icon override, would be damn nice, and would make the start screen less horrific when spammed with a million non-metro application shortcuts. [editline]8th August 2012[/editline] Found another thread related to my post: [url]http://www.eightforums.com/customization/4594-custom-photo-icons-metro.html[/url]
[QUOTE=woolio1;37132976]Worse than that, start screen icons are irreplaceable, to my knowledge.[/QUOTE] You can change the icons of Metro apps. You just have to do some digging. You can even run Metro apps (at least some) outside the Start screen environment.
[QUOTE=Panda X;37133199]You can change the icons of Metro apps. You just have to do some digging. You can even run Metro apps (at least some) outside the Start screen environment.[/QUOTE] Yea but the whole tile, and not just the icon.
Some of the default apps's colors are (or were) in the registry if I recall correctly.
Anyone upgraded to RTM? If so, is everything running fine? ALSO... where did you get it and what method did you install it?
I'm gonna upgrade now, as soon as it's downloaded. I'm excited. RMT that is.
Thinking about downgrading from windows 8 RP until windows 8 is released. but still keep it on a VM. [QUOTE=SynisterSilen;37133884]Anyone upgraded to RTM? If so, is everything running fine? ALSO... where did you get it and what method did you install it?[/QUOTE] You can get it from several places, but I'm not gonna post a link. You can find it, by using google. And to install it, you should burn it to a DVD, and boot from the DVD.
Posting from W8 RTM, it's fucking amazing. [editline]8th August 2012[/editline] It's freaky how fucking fast it is, literally starts in 5-10 seconds.
[QUOTE=SweFox*;37135115]Posting from W8 RTM, it's fucking amazing. [editline]8th August 2012[/editline] It's freaky how fucking fast it is, literally starts in 5-10 seconds.[/QUOTE] I would like to see a comparison using an SSD. I already know it's faster but you know statistics are sexy
[QUOTE=woolio1;37132976]Worse than that, start screen icons are irreplaceable, to my knowledge.[/QUOTE] wat I'm not upgrading to win8 until someone hacks that in then because I love the metro interface but the legacy icons just look [I]wrong[/I]
So how do I go about activating Win 8 Pro RTM?
You don't ask here.
I apologise for the typos in my previous statement. Anger messes up my typing. [QUOTE=Elements;37119839]Have you ever thought that, maybe, if you are the only one who hates it, its not such a bad thing?[/QUOTE] Well, I'll start by asking why you enjoy using a touch screen UI with mouse? I mean, the icon don't even get smaller as you can't change the size (such a big square for such a small icon) and the start menu takes up the entire screen (If I'm going need the entire screen for start why can't I see most of my icons?) I'm sorry if I'm missing something here but I just don't see how it's 'more advanced'. I suppose I have to accept that people love the idea, but I can't see why? Or why I'm the only who can see the problems. It would fine it was a version of Windows CE or something, but this is something I'm not going to be able to avoid forever. I mean there are so many things I hate about that metro interface I'm actually think about using mac in the future and I've never bought an Apple product in my life. I really wish at least one person agreed that this Metro interface is a bad idea if we're being forced to use it, I'm in the dark here. I also had the Vista RC1 version in 2006 and I could see at the time where that OS was going.
[QUOTE=RoboChimp;37139716]I mean, the icon don't even get smaller as you can't change the size (such a big square for such a small icon) and the start menu takes up the entire screen ([B]If I'm going need the entire screen for start why can't I see most of my icons?[/B]) [/QUOTE] Because having the equivalent of a fully expanded start menu is supremely ugly and confusing.
[QUOTE=RoboChimp;37139716] Well, I'll start by asking why you enjoy using a touch screen UI with mouse? I mean, the icon don't even get smaller as you can't change the size (such a big square for such a small icon) and the start menu takes up the entire screen (If I'm going need the entire screen for start why can't I see most of my icons?) I'm sorry if I'm missing something here but I just don't see how it's 'more advanced'. I suppose I have to accept that people love the idea, but I can't see why? Or why I'm the only who can see the problems. It would fine it was a version of Windows CE or something, but this is something I'm not going to be able to avoid forever. I mean there are so many things I hate about that metro interface I'm actually think about using mac in the future and I've never bought an Apple product in my life. I really wish at least one person agreed that this Metro interface is a bad idea if we're being forced to use it, I'm in the dark here. I also had the Vista RC1 version in 2006 and I could see at the time where that OS was going.[/QUOTE] The Start Screen is not a touch UI. Large icons and touch screens are mutually exclusive things, it doesn't mean a touch screen needs big buttons, and big buttons don't mean it was designed for touch screens. It was designed to be easier to navigate than any iteration of the Start system yet. And it damn well looks like they pulled it off. No more trawling through folders to find something, no more precise movements to click a menu option (Start Menu items are fucking tiny, what? 16px tall?). Having the menu take up the entire screen allows it to display more, and it does scale based on resolution, you see more icons on larger resolutions, less on smaller. The Start Screen is a very usable interface, I can tell this without even touching the damn thing just because it looks more approachable. You can sort the items in it if you desire, having things you use the most show up on the first "page", saving you having to scroll. You can group items as well if you need groups of programs easily accessible. It adds a lot of new features, and improves on the existing search functionality a ton based on MSDN blog entries. You lose no functionality at all using it, you gain functionality and all you sacrifice for that? A menu being in a compact form factor. A menu you won't even look at half the time, let alone use most of the time. Oh, and please, do tell me where Vista "went", it was a pretty fine operating system for its time, not perfect, but not as awful as people make it out to be. And it only got better as time went on. Wait, don't tell me, you believe in the "alternating quality of Windows" shit too as well right?
[QUOTE=waxrock;37139878]Because having the equivalent of a fully expanded start menu is supremely ugly and confusing.[/QUOTE] Maybe he meant something kinda like this: [img]http://static.arstechnica.net/04-20-2012/windows-8-desktops/all-apps.png[/img]
[QUOTE=Mooe94;37135562]I would like to see a comparison using an SSD. I already know it's faster but you know statistics are sexy[/QUOTE] Not an exact comparison buuut [video=youtube;OTtT3GSiueY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTtT3GSiueY[/video] [editline]8th August 2012[/editline] I don't have the fastest SSD in the world, and it's connected via SATA-II anyway, so if you have a more up to date SSD, and SATA-III (along with no external drives plugged in. Should have unplugged those :v:) it'd probably boot even faster
[QUOTE=RoboChimp;37139716]I apologise for the typos in my previous statement. Anger messes up my typing. Well, I'll start by asking why you enjoy using a touch screen UI with mouse? I mean, the icon don't even get smaller as you can't change the size (such a big square for such a small icon) and the start menu takes up the entire screen (If I'm going need the entire screen for start why can't I see most of my icons?) I'm sorry if I'm missing something here but I just don't see how it's 'more advanced'. I suppose I have to accept that people love the idea, but I can't see why? Or why I'm the only who can see the problems. It would fine it was a version of Windows CE or something, but this is something I'm not going to be able to avoid forever. I mean there are so many things I hate about that metro interface I'm actually think about using mac in the future and I've never bought an Apple product in my life. I really wish at least one person agreed that this Metro interface is a bad idea if we're being forced to use it, I'm in the dark here. I also had the Vista RC1 version in 2006 and I could see at the time where that OS was going.[/QUOTE] [url]http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/11/reflecting-on-your-comments-on-the-start-screen.aspx[/url] Read that. It explains the math behind designing the new start screen (tl;dr: you find things faster).
[QUOTE=Dr Egg;37140033]Not an exact comparison buuut [video=youtube;OTtT3GSiueY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTtT3GSiueY[/video] [editline]8th August 2012[/editline] I don't have the fastest SSD in the world, and it's connected via SATA-II anyway, so if you have a more up to date SSD, and SATA-III (along with no external drives plugged in. Should have unplugged those :v:) it'd probably boot even faster[/QUOTE] Is this a "cold" boot or are you using hybrid booting? My laptop with a 5400RPM HDD is about as fast.
[QUOTE=kaukassus;37134308]And to install it, you should burn it to a DVD, and boot from the DVD.[/QUOTE] Why? Just use EasyBCD. -Extract the contents of the iso into one of the partitions that you won't format/delete. (This step is needed if the installer cannot find the required files. Sounds weird, but it's heavly recommedet!!) -Add a new boot entry in EasyBCD, choose ISO booter or something then give it the path of the downloaded ISO -Save changes, reboot, and choose your installer from boot menu For an extra tip, you can do that on winXP too, just google "bootmgr for win xp" before using EasyBCD. I know it works because I installed win8 this way from winXP.
Did a Win8 RC boot-up video of my own, off an SSD [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIMhElKnAx8[/media]
[QUOTE=Im Crimson;37140745]Did a Win8 RC boot-up video of my own, off an SSD [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIMhElKnAx8[/media][/QUOTE] Something's wrong with the tech world when POSTing takes longer than booting into the OS.
Damn it Panda, whatever Windows 8 site I go on, I always find posts by you. ALWAYS.
[QUOTE=ichiman94;37140473]Why? Just use EasyBCD. -Extract the contents of the iso into one of the partitions that you won't format/delete. (This step is needed if the installer cannot find the required files. Sounds weird, but it's heavly recommedet!!) -Add a new boot entry in EasyBCD, choose ISO booter or something then give it the path of the downloaded ISO -Save changes, reboot, and choose your installer from boot menu For an extra tip, you can do that on winXP too, just google "bootmgr for win xp" before using EasyBCD. I know it works because I installed win8 this way from winXP.[/QUOTE] If you have any virtual drive software, just mount the image and run setup from the disk. This doesn't let you change between 32 and 64bit though.
[QUOTE=Ezhik;37141389]Damn it Panda, whatever Windows 8 site I go on, I always find posts by you. ALWAYS.[/QUOTE] What sites? I only post on a few.
[QUOTE=Foda;37140289][url]http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/11/reflecting-on-your-comments-on-the-start-screen.aspx[/url] Read that. It explains the math behind designing the new start screen (tl;dr: you find things faster).[/QUOTE] Nice read, cheers. This is an interesting point they bring up [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts%27_law[/url]
My motherboard refuses to boot if any USB devices other than mouse and keyboard are plugged in, which means I can't install Windows 8 by USB. This makes me a sad panda. (I shall never again buy an ASRock motherboard. The day after I purchased it, they announced the anomaly on their website and, instead of doing a recall, they offered a 10% off voucher for a new motherboard.)
[QUOTE=Panda X;37141758]What sites? I only post on a few.[/QUOTE] latest one was winunleaked
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.