• Windows 9 Hinted to Win Over Windows 7 Users
    529 replies, posted
[QUOTE=dgg;45318745]Really really strange. Apparently the transparency check box was present in Windows 8 but seems to have been removed in 8.1 or in updates.[/QUOTE] This is probably why I remember it then. I spent a lot of time on 8, not as long on 8.1 before moving to Fedora on my laptop to keep it going for another year or so. What the hell purpose did that one serve MS?
[QUOTE=Punchy;45318148]There is no feasible advantage to one that uses windows for games. W8 is essentially just reworking the system into big colorful buttons rather than compact menus. Hence why so many users tend to stay on the desktop.[/QUOTE] Just because you don't use the advantages doesn't mean they don't exist.
[QUOTE=RautaPalli;45318635]If sub 30 FPS is enjoyable to you then good for you. It's not for me, so the game is effectively unplayable. The entire time my complaint was that you can't play the game at a decent framerate:[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=RautaPalli;45318635]Actually [B]you simply can't play some older games on Windows 8 because Microsoft decided to remove hardware support for DirectDraw[/B], it's just emulated with software now. So some older games run [B]so slow that they are [U]unplayable[/U][/B] (Swat 3 for example). Windows 7 doesn't have this issue.[/QUOTE] Honestly, 25-30fps is not so slow it's unplayable (I honestly don't know what the framerate is, but it is a minimum of 25). It's so slow you don't want to play it. Huge difference. Unplayable framerate is ~20 and down. [QUOTE=RautaPalli;45318635]Meanwhile on Windows 7 the game runs 60FPS@1080P.[/QUOTE] That's fine and all. My point is only that SWAT3 and all old games are perfectly playable on Windows 8 and you made it sound otherwise. [QUOTE=RautaPalli;45318635]I don't really know why we're still even arguing about this, my point is that Windows 8 lacks hardware DirectDraw support, which it does. There is no "fix" for this (Other than the WINE DLL trick I mentioned earlier, but that doesn't work with most games). If you want to play old DirectDraw games properly then use Windows 7.[/QUOTE] I would again personally recommend Windows XP for playing older games. It will run pretty much everything flawlessly as long as it's compatible with newer hardware.
[QUOTE=Amiga OS;45317502][B]Windows 7's UI is objectively hideous[/B], I always skinned the everloving shit out of it to remove all the nasty gloss.[/QUOTE] No one can take you seriously if you're going to say that an aesthetic can be objective. [editline]7th July 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Sgt Doom;45315401]The point is, the faster boot time is not an indication of optimisations that have improved Win8's functionality at all; it's a singular trick to make it boot faster that has no bearing on the rest of the OS. I personally don't give a rat's arse about boot times because i've got the thing on for most of the day, even if i'm not using it. The optimisations made to the rest of the OS are far more interesting and a much worthier point in Win8's favour to tout than shaving a few seconds off the boot time.[/QUOTE] Doesn't matter how it does it; it still does it. But alright, admitting ignorance for a second here: what exactly is a cold reboot, and how do I do it on my PC? I'm curious to see firsthand just how long Windows 8 will start for me.
[QUOTE=LegndNikko;45318904] But alright, admitting ignorance for a second here: what exactly is a cold reboot, and how do I do it on my PC? I'm curious to see firsthand just how long Windows 8 will start for me.[/QUOTE] Do a hard reset by pressing physical restart or shut down button so windows can't hibernate. I am not sure, but I think a soft restart also does cold boot since it does that after installing updates. Dunno about others, but for me cold boot speeds are about the same on both OSes.
[QUOTE=LegndNikko;45318904]Doesn't matter how it does it; it still does it. But alright, admitting ignorance for a second here: what exactly is a cold reboot, and how do I do it on my PC? I'm curious to see firsthand just how long Windows 8 will start for me.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.thewindowsclub.com/force-full-shutdown-fully-reinitialize-windows-8[/url] Restarting will always cold boot the system. You can also [url=http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/tr-dojo/delete-hiberfilsys-by-disabling-windows-hibernate-function/]remove Hibernation[/url] (I do, saves disk space and I have no need for it).
[QUOTE=LegndNikko;45318904] Doesn't matter how it does it; it still does it. But alright, admitting ignorance for a second here: what exactly is a cold reboot, and how do I do it on my PC? I'm curious to see firsthand just how long Windows 8 will start for me.[/QUOTE] You can turn off hybrid boot completely somewhere in the settings, but you probably don't want to do that. Selecting restart instead of shutdown actually does a proper cold boot and doesn't hibernate the kernel. I believe holding shift while clicking the shutdown option does the same thing, it disables hybrid boot for that one shutdown.
[QUOTE=Korova;45318299]That looks ugly as piss compared to Metro[/QUOTE] That jpeg compression doesn't help really [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a3/Dash_pequeno_en_Ubuntu_12.04.png[/t] I'm not sure that Ubuntu is a 100% viable replacement for windows yet, but once it ubiquitously breaks that threshold I don't see any reason to stick with windows, really. Nobody should feel obliged to be a "consumer loyalist" to Microsoft, if their QA and design teams begin to slip up, people should drop ship to make them step up their game and offer better features/prices.
Ubuntu has never looked good imo. It's like it is stuck in 2007
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45318987]Do a hard reset by pressing physical restart or [B]shut down button so windows can't hibernate. [/B] I am not sure, but I think a soft restart also does cold boot since it does that after installing updates. Dunno about others, but for me cold boot speeds are about the same on both OSes.[/QUOTE] Oh, that's what I always do, anyway. Boot times are still about half a minute, tops.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45319136]Ubuntu has never looked good imo. It's like it is stuck in 2007[/QUOTE] One could say the same thing about windows 7 though, and even windows 8 when you exclude Metro and are working on the desktop.' I do dislike the size of the icons and text in Ubuntu, mind you though I'm sure a lot of that can be adjusted
[QUOTE=dgg;45318903] That's fine and all. My point is only that SWAT3 and all old games are perfectly playable on Windows 8 and you made it sound otherwise.[/QUOTE] Ehh, I wouldn't really call them [B]perfectly[/B] playable since you'll be stuck on software renderers, but whatever, it's just arguing semantics now. [QUOTE=hypno-toad;45319116] I'm not sure that Ubuntu is a 100% viable replacement for windows yet, but once it ubiquitously breaks that threshold I don't see any reason to stick with windows, really. Nobody should feel obliged to be a "consumer loyalist" to Microsoft, if their QA and design teams begin to slip up, people should drop ship to make them step up their game and offer better features/prices.[/QUOTE] I don't think that a lot of people would be using Windows just to be a "consumer loyalist", it's just that Linux doesn't have the software support yet when it comes to games and some other industry standard software like Photoshop. I actually use Mint on my laptop since I don't really play anything on it except for Dwarf Fortress, but it's really far from being at the point where I'd use it on my desktop.
[QUOTE=LegndNikko;45319215]Oh, that's what I always do, anyway. Boot times are still about half a minute, tops.[/QUOTE] So are times on 7. [QUOTE=hypno-toad;45319232]One could say the same thing about windows 7 though, and even windows 8 when you exclude Metro and are working on the desktop.[/QUOTE] 7 came out in 2009 so that's close enough 8 desktop is a lot closer to what I'd imagine as modern.
[QUOTE=RautaPalli;45319002]You can turn off hybrid boot completely somewhere in the settings, but you probably don't want to do that. [B]Selecting restart [/B]instead of shutdown actually does a proper cold boot and doesn't hibernate the kernel. I believe holding shift while clicking the shutdown option does the same thing, it disables hybrid boot for that one shutdown.[/QUOTE] Just did this. Took about a minute, this time. [editline]7th July 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=itisjuly;45319250]So are times on 7. 7 came out in 2009 so that's close enough 8 desktop is a lot closer to what I'd imagine as modern.[/QUOTE] I've honestly never seen a computer running 7 boot that quickly, unless it was on an SSD.
[QUOTE=LegndNikko;45319262] I've honestly never seen a computer running 7 boot that quickly, unless it was on an SSD.[/QUOTE] Strange. My laptop from 2006 boots to 7 in under 30 seconds. Key is to not fill it with shit that starts on autorun. - My bad, took me 42s including entering password to boot to desktop so it is slower.
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;45319116]That jpeg compression doesn't help really [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a3/Dash_pequeno_en_Ubuntu_12.04.png[/t] I'm not sure that Ubuntu is a 100% viable replacement for windows yet, but once it ubiquitously breaks that threshold I don't see any reason to stick with windows, really. Nobody should feel obliged to be a "consumer loyalist" to Microsoft, if their QA and design teams begin to slip up, people should drop ship to make them step up their game and offer better features/prices.[/QUOTE] I still prefer the direction of Metro. It looks really good, it's full screen, it combines file search/setting search and application searching. I just don't understand why Metro is given such a bad image when it's really better than the start menu in every single way.
[QUOTE=RautaPalli;45319235]I don't think that a lot of people would be using Windows just to be a "consumer loyalist", it's just that Linux doesn't have the software support yet when it comes to games and some other industry standard software like Photoshop. [/QUOTE] I'm fairly sure I said "it's not a 100% viable replacement yet" Even if it is though there will be an element of consumer loyalism and personal prestige, it's always the case with open source stuff, at a certain point it doesn't matter how good the software is.
I bet if OSX wasn't MAC only(not counting hackintosh), most of us would be on OSX now.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45319399]I bet if OSX wasn't MAC only(not counting hackintosh), most of us would be on OSX now.[/QUOTE] Why? Beyond game support the only real difference between OSX and Windows is the user interface. It's mostly just a matter of preference and price which one you go with.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45319399]I bet if OSX wasn't MAC only(not counting hackintosh), most of us would be on OSX now.[/QUOTE] It's still seriously lacking in game support so no. That said, I probably would be.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;45319598]It's still seriously lacking in game support so no. That said, I probably would be.[/QUOTE] If it was available to everyone then game support would rise a huge amount too. The reason for lower game support is due to lower userbase, making it an afterthought.
[QUOTE=dgg;45303238]Workflow workflow workflow workflow workflow workflow. The start menu is a press on the button, a quick swipe to the left, pick what you want and back to it. The start screen is a giant fucking screen that uses 10x more space than necessary that forces you to move your mouse around all over the screen depending on where you program is, centering your visual attention at wherever that program is placed, pick that and then settle your eyes back where you're supposed to be for what you did previously and then back to it. It's not a huge thing, but it's still quite the huge thing. It completely changes how you focus and where you focus. The start menu is always in the lower left, the programs are always in that small portion of the left side on your screen. With the start menu EVERYTHING changes, your entire screen changes, nothing looks the same anymore, it's not something sliding and covering up a part of your screen, it's more like a game when it boots up and blocks your entire screen forcing you to give your undivided attention to it, and then your program could be literally anywhere on the screen within a pretty big set area. Start menu: small overlap that is always in the same place Start Screen: changes the entire screen forcing you to explicitly focus on it and your program could be anywhere. [editline]6th July 2014[/editline] Is dual monitors a new concept to you? Watching a movie and browsing the internet at the same time is entirely possible.[/QUOTE] You should consider seeing a doctor about that short term memory loss, because when I'm working there are plenty of times when I need to actually look away from the screen and shift my focus somewhere entirely different and then return to what I was doing moments ago. If having a new screen pop up for like two seconds, tops, utterly destroys the way you use your computer then that sounds like PEBKAC to me. Though I guess that comes down to accessibility; not everyone is able to look at something for two seconds and remember what was happening before or they otherwise become utterly confused, especially for those who are at an advanced age. Maybe for people suffering from this problem, such as yourself, Microsoft has an obligation to cater to you to ensure everyone has a good time in the same way they include TTS and colorblind modes. In the same way they include support for those who are hard of hearing and have vision deficiencies, maybe they should support those with mental deficiencies.
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;45319676]You should consider seeing a doctor about that short term memory loss, because when I'm working there are plenty of times when I need to actually look away from the screen and shift my focus somewhere entirely different and then return to what I was doing moments ago. If having a new screen pop up for like two seconds, tops, utterly destroys the way you use your computer then that sounds like PEBKAC to me. Though I guess that comes down to accessibility; not everyone is able to look at something for two seconds and remember what was happening before or they otherwise become utterly confused, especially for those who are at an advanced age. Maybe for people suffering from this problem, such as yourself, Microsoft has an obligation to cater to you to ensure everyone has a good time in the same way they include TTS and colorblind modes. In the same way they include support for those who are hard of hearing and have vision deficiencies, maybe they should support those with mental deficiencies.[/QUOTE] You are a funny funny man.
[QUOTE=Doomish;45303676]but saying "as long as you use third party programs to get rid of the bad stuff, it's good!!" is retarded and flawed win 8 ui will never be good, sorry[/QUOTE] And yet, here you are using Google Chrome because you prefer it. Some people like using Windows Media Player, some people prefer foobar. A lot of people here, upon installing Windows, will go straight to Ninite.com and install Chrome or Firefox to replace Internet Explorer, Notepad++ to replace Notepad and Wordpad, CCCP + MPC:HC and foobar to replace Windows Media Player, 7-zip to replace Windows' built in compression utility, they will get Avast and replace MSE, and etc. They understand that computers are meant to be customized with a variety of different programs, that they will have to tweak their individual experience to get the most out of their computers. Yet the moment somebody suggests that maybe there's an external program that lets them tailor the UI to their exact tastes and preferences, the same people as before freak the fuck out. If people complain about having to install an external program to replace the UI, why do they go out and install Chrome to replace Internet Explorer? Why do they get all these other programs to replace Windows' built in functionality? What's with this hypocrisy? Why are people suddenly against customization when it comes time to discuss the Windows start menu?
[QUOTE=Satane;45320822]Except the new start menu is not the only problem. Honestly if it was JUST the start menu I might be ok with windows 8, probably not. But the way they force more fullscreen shit down your throat is fucking terrible. Some settings are only avalible in fullscreen mode, the menu that pops up when u touch the right side, etc etc. In fact anything fullscreen is just bad because it fucks multitasking no matter how you put it. They fucked up, you can't deny that shit is optimized for tablets. Not having a separate desktop ui is not excusable.[/QUOTE] Lol, listen to yourself. The desktop is the same way it has always been. You never ever have to use the Metro screen, it's just a replacement for the Start Menu that serves as a good environment for tablets whilst still retaining the same functionality it always has had for desktop users. You can remove all of the side-bars with Classic Shell and get the normal Start Menu back, and even use both if you want. Your complaints are ignorant, miss-informed and simply wrong. [t]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3655193/Windows8Desktop.jpg[/t]
also to the people complaining about the start screen's buttons being "too big", you can resize them to make them smaller.. and you can fit 100 items on the menu before you even have to scroll, then there's a scroll so you can fit even more so on it. don't say "omfg why would i ever put that much on it anyway", it's unlimited, and because it's unlimited it doesn't mean you should fill it as much as you can, it just means you can if you wanted to.. and people arguing that it being full screen is the biggest issue? it takes half a second (literally half a second, unless you are a 70yo autist) to click and open any program you have pinned to it. and if you genuinely don't want to use full screen just pin it to your taskbar instead. and if you genuinely don't want to use the taskbar (which is convoluted and confusing and too hard to set up!!!!) you can also download software to make it the way you want! holy fuck!!!! the pros outweigh the "cons" in every comparison between windows 7/8
[QUOTE=endorphinsam;45321854]just pin it to your taskbar instead.[/QUOTE] Applications I pin to my taskbar are not the same ones I pin to my start. I wouldn't want to mix them up.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45321876]Applications I pin to my taskbar are not the same ones I pin to my start. I wouldn't want to mix them up.[/QUOTE] i dont know if this is supposed to be a joke or not when arguing about anything at all using anecdotal evidence as a counter argument/argument is a really stupid idea.
[quote]a bunch of stuff about boot times[/quote] What are you people doing that causes your computer to take more than a minute to boot? My laptop on a massively fragmented 5400 rpm drive used to boot fully in 50 seconds. Its faster now with a 7200 rpm drive and some periodic cleaning. My desktop has an SSD and it takes about as long for my BIOS and RAID to initialize than for the actual OS to boot. Total time is around 20 seconds from cold boot to fully idle at the desktop on windows 7, and maybe 1 second faster on 8. How the fuck do you make 7, let alone 8, take more than a minute to boot? No seriously. How? If I can get a machine even older than my laptop with a first generation core duo and a sub 5400 rpm hard drive too boot in under a minute, what the actual fuck are you doing to your computer?
[QUOTE=endorphinsam;45322004]i dont know if this is supposed to be a joke or not when arguing about anything at all using anecdotal evidence as a counter argument/argument is a really stupid idea.[/QUOTE]Arguing about purely opinionated things is pointless in on itself. You can't argue about preference by using scientific papers and sources. This entire thread is full of personal opinions and anecdotes. We're arguing windows, not science or social issues.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.