• Windows 9 Hinted to Win Over Windows 7 Users
    529 replies, posted
[QUOTE=CrumbleShake;45388885]That's what it's going to be in 9. You get a choice over the start screen or that start menu. Personally, I'd prefer the screen. That thing looks ugly.[/QUOTE] I'd go with the screen too, much more customization and it's tidy as hell.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;45387953][img]http://i.cubeupload.com/LL0aQa.jpg[/img] Shamelessly stolen from Panda X's thread on [url=http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1409122]Hardware and Software[/url].[/QUOTE] It's a start. I could [i]get used[/i] to Win9. There better be an option to apply a legacy Win98 skin, though. With the quick launch. That's what I'm using on 7(Why? I prefer it simple as that). Aero is too flashy for my tastes but I can live with it if I have no other choice.
I love watching people fight over Windows 7 vs Windows 8 from my ivory tower of supreme OS choice. Long live Vista
[QUOTE=TestECull;45390029]It's a start. I could [i]get used[/i] to Win9. There better be an option to apply a legacy Win98 skin, though. With the quick launch. That's what I'm using on 7(Why? I prefer it simple as that). Aero is too flashy for my tastes but I can live with it if I have no other choice.[/QUOTE] Those complains never end now do they? Just fucking stay on your 98 colored 7
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45390480]Those complains never end now do they? Just fucking stay on your 98 colored 7[/QUOTE] I probably will. Why the fuck would I spend money on a shitty reskin that I don't like? Also what's even your point?
So, does Windows 9 address more RAM than 8 or 7? That's the main thing I'm interested in alongside the UI.
[thumb]http://puu.sh/acPhK/fc86203e72.png[/thumb] You can use the search functionality of the W8 start menu by just pressing Windows+S anyway, so the whole "fullscreen to search for an application" argument is moot. I agree that Metro going fullscreen is annoying though, especially when reading something, or programming.
[QUOTE=FalconKrunch;45400219][thumb]http://puu.sh/acPhK/fc86203e72.png[/thumb] You can use the search functionality of the W8 start menu by just pressing Windows+S anyway, so the whole "fullscreen to search for an application" argument is moot. I agree that Metro going fullscreen is annoying though, especially when reading something, or programming.[/QUOTE] It would be perfect if you could populate win+s menu with default apps if no search term is entered. Would solve most issues.
[QUOTE=ironman17;45400185]So, does Windows 9 address more RAM than 8 or 7? That's the main thing I'm interested in alongside the UI.[/QUOTE] Is 128TB not enough for you?
They will have to really blow me away for me to upgrade windows.
[QUOTE=Buck.;45400381]They will have to really blow me away for me to upgrade windows.[/QUOTE] Please don't turn 7 into next XP where everyone is outdated as shit
[QUOTE=Amiga OS;45303047]I really don't understand you Windows 7 luddies, this is far tidier and more attractive... [t]http://u.cubeupload.com/chrishind10/Screenshot140.png[/t] Than this tacky, glossy vestigiary which uses unwieldy nested directories. [img]http://winsupersite.com/site-files/winsupersite.com/files/archive/winsupersite.com/content/content/128696/win7/vxp_18.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] I just press Windows Key and search whatever I am looking for and press ENTER. Works same in 7 and 8. Press Windows Key + R for Run (like cmd, msconfig etc) Press Windows Key + E for my computer Also 8 is faster than 7 but buggier.
[QUOTE=TestECull;45400127]I probably will. Why the fuck would I spend money on a shitty reskin that I don't like? Also what's even your point?[/QUOTE] I don't like it, so it's objectively terrible!
Windows 8 is way easier to use than most people want to admit. I haven't installed any addons, and I was getting along with it just fine pre 8.1, but with 8.1 in place, it's easily their best operating system. The pro's of it as I see it are: Faster boot up Awesome dual screen support Improved search functions Hotkeys like windows key + E or W or R, or other various ones. Better UI(I understand this is my opinion entirely but I do like it a lot more than Aero) Metro interface is entirely avoidable Right click on Start in desktop mode brings up every option you could possibly need quickly and easily Some Apps work well split screening between desktop and App mode quite well(Acrobat readers or the default microsoft reader being the mains ones here) Cons as I see it are: Metro is fullscreen Apps are mostly annoying There is a lot of changes between Win 7 in terms of where somethings can be found and little of this is mentioned Apps are never as useful as desktop versions of things Overall though Windows 8.1 is a much better operating system than so many people act or talk about and I feel like that's probably from it changing in small ways rather than major ways.
Windows 8 is perfect for Phones, Tablets and whatever Surface is trying to be. Otherwise not really any point in upgrading from 7 IMO.
[QUOTE=TheTalon;45401556]Windows 8 is perfect for Phones, Tablets and whatever Surface is trying to be. Otherwise not really any point in upgrading from 7 IMO.[/QUOTE] It's faster and it looks better. That's good enough for me.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;45401423]Windows 8 is way easier to use than most people want to admit. I haven't installed any addons, and I was getting along with it just fine pre 8.1, but with 8.1 in place, it's easily their best operating system. The pro's of it as I see it are: Faster boot up Awesome dual screen support Improved search functions Hotkeys like windows key + E or W or R, or other various ones. Better UI(I understand this is my opinion entirely but I do like it a lot more than Aero) Metro interface is entirely avoidable Right click on Start in desktop mode brings up every option you could possibly need quickly and easily Some Apps work well split screening between desktop and App mode quite well(Acrobat readers or the default microsoft reader being the mains ones here) Cons as I see it are: Metro is fullscreen Apps are mostly annoying There is a lot of changes between Win 7 in terms of where somethings can be found and little of this is mentioned Apps are never as useful as desktop versions of things Overall though Windows 8.1 is a much better operating system than so many people act or talk about and I feel like that's probably from it changing in small ways rather than major ways.[/QUOTE] About three of the cons can be solved by just not using those features and grabbing alternatives if you need them really. Though the stupid divide between settings in Aero and Metro needs sorting out, the Metro settings app has a couple of things I can't find in the control panel, and the control panel has almost everything else.
I just want to break into this discussion / debate, by saying as someone who has used Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, Windows 8(.1) and now further moved on to Linux, I think they all have their pros and cons. Here's my contribution (mostly opinion from myself, I'm not really in favour of anything now). + Pro - Con [B]Windows XP / Server 2003[/B] + Didn't require a high specification of computer + Theming (this was new at the time, remember) + The ~new~ which everyone adopted due to stability. - Everything ran as administrator (Less secure, more prone to viruses - Took a while to adopt, as all Windows releases do. People still wanted to hold on to 2000, if I'm correct. - No inbuilt antivirus - Hard to find 64 bit compatible drivers [B]Windows Vista / Server 2008[/B] + New "aero" design / theming capability, more aesthetically pleasing + UAC, meaning a more secure system (not everything is run as the adminstrator) + Promotion of 64 bit computing + Better auto driver searching / PnP, eventually - Sidebar - Slow on most PCs, most manufacturers weren't particularly ready - Rewritten the system for drivers, causing huge incompatibilities with everything [B]Windows 7 / Server 2008 R2[/B] + "Superbar" - what's now known as the standard taskbar + Far better driver compatibility, Vista prepared the manufacturers. + Vista drivers mostly compatible with 7 + UAC improvements + Windows Defender (not the best, but it's still there) + Slightly adjusted aero theming - ? [B]Windows 8 / Server 2012[/B] + Far better performance on computers + Fast bootup + Tablet support + Multiple monitor support - Metro causes lower productivity - Flat design, it was nice at first but everything's caught onto it (iOS / Mac OS, Android) [B]Windows 8.1 / Server 2012 R2[/B] + Disabling metro interface + New store + Start button + More options to the start context (right click) menu Okay, so I think we all need to take some deep beaths before posting and consider my above points perhaps, before this developers into a further heated argument like most Windows related threads do. I jumped from Windows OS to Windows OS every six months or so, just to keep up variety. I like them all, though they all have their cons. While this is rather irrelevent to the thread, I'm quite happy with Linux now. I'm not constrained by interface issues, I can (un)install anything on here within reason, without having to worry about further issues. I hope I've made a helpful contribution to this thread, I'm not really on any side in terms of this argument now (despite my posts in other threads, I've found out there's really no point in arguing with people as stubborn as yourself, and it's easier to think of the common / neutral ground in discussions like this).
[quote]- Flat design, it was nice at first but everything's caught onto it (iOS / Mac OS, Android)[/quote] If anything it's a plus now that more UIs go into less flashy more productive UI
-Metro causing productivity to go down I'd really like to argue that it improved my productivity. During the 95/98/ME/XP/Vista/7 days, I hated navigating menus just to do that one thing but now with the Metro screen, everything is consolidated into one menu and neatly organized by application/file/setting. Now there's five different ways to do every single thing too which is really nice. [editline]16th July 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=TestECull;45390029]It's a start. I could [i]get used[/i] to Win9. There better be an option to apply a legacy Win98 skin, though. With the quick launch. That's what I'm using on 7(Why? I prefer it simple as that). Aero is too flashy for my tastes but I can live with it if I have no other choice.[/QUOTE] I'm all for personal preference but I'll never understand why you're using a legacy 98 skin. You wouldn't use anything else from 1998, why is this any different? That classic look is 14 years old (last seen in ME). 15 by the time Windows 9 comes out. I hope they stop supporting that aesthetic because that's a waste of their time.
[QUOTE=Coyoteze;45336888]Another thing I love about Windows 8 is its support for dual monitors. Windows 7 and beyond was fucking awful at that. Second screen didn't have a taskbar, you needed external programs to set different wallpapers - all that comes natively in Win8.[/QUOTE] I just noticed the other day when I got dual screens at work on my Work Windows 8 laptop, it's really neat.
It has to be good to keep with the pattern: ME- Shit, XP- Good, Vista- Shit, 7- Good, 8- Shit
why do I always purchase PCs when the Windows era is crap: I had Windows 95, Windows 2000, Windows Vista and Windows 8...
[QUOTE=AK'z;45405719]why do I always purchase PCs when the Windows era is crap: I had Windows 95, Windows 2000, Windows Vista and Windows 8...[/QUOTE] Blasphemy. 95 was leaps and bounds better than 3.1 and XP was basically an incrementally improved 2000.
[QUOTE=AK'z;45405719]why do I always purchase PCs when the Windows era is crap: I had Windows 95, Windows 2000, Windows Vista and Windows 8...[/QUOTE]The crap/not crap Windows timetable hypothesis is basically bollocks tbh.
[QUOTE=AK'z;45405719]why do I always purchase PCs when the Windows era is crap: I had Windows 95, Windows 2000, Windows Vista and Windows 8...[/QUOTE] 2000, Vista and 8 are all good OS'es.
[QUOTE=darkedone02;45342716]I love the ability to right click a shortcut and take me to the main installation folder, which is a very useful feature for me when installing mods and addons on certain games and programs.[/QUOTE] This still exists
[QUOTE=AK'z;45405719]why do I always purchase PCs when the Windows era is crap: I had Windows 95, Windows 2000, Windows Vista and Windows 8...[/QUOTE] Whats wrong with 2000? Its a solid and incredibly reliable OS.
[QUOTE=samuel2213;45407293]Whats wrong with 2000? Its a solid and incredibly reliable OS.[/QUOTE] none of them were bad, just not as good as 98, XP, 7 or 9 (potentially).
Vista wasn't too bad if you didn't have a cheap PC. It's mainly because MS forced OEMs to put Vista on shitty budget PCs that weren't nearly powerful enough to handle it's graphics that it was so badly received. I mean, there were other problems but the performance was the big one.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.