# windows 8 beta is now out



## cabinfever1977

windows 8 beta is now out and i downloaded it,it is available from the microsoft site,2.3gb,took me 15-20minutes at 2mb per sec,thats fast.
im going to put it on a flashdrive and install it on a spare harddrive to try out,its good until jan 2013,thats like a year.

anyone else download it and try it out yet?


----------



## voyagerfan99

The internet connection at school is too crappy. It said it would take 10 hours. So I'll wait until this weekend. John downloaded it. Don't know if he got around to doing anything with it yet or not.


----------



## wolfeking

going to download it now. will post any major issues or qualms when I install it.


----------



## jamesd1981

Got windows 8 installed no problems so far, index score all up and the maximum score has been raised from 7.9 to 9.9, i am getting faster internet connection.

still a pain to navigate to places like control panel.

You do need the product key to install so take note of it when you download.

You can install from boot disc or from within windows.


----------



## cabinfever1977

if you download the setup file you wont need the key but may have to install from within windows.
i downloaded the iso so i could boot from a thumb drive and install o na spare drive, and microsoft provides a key on the site where you downlaod and i also wrote it down.

but i have not tryed it yet,i will when i have time later.


----------



## Kesava

How usable is the beta, in general?

I just did something that effected the stability of my Windows 7 and so if I have to reformat, I wouldn't mind giving Windows 8 a try, but only if it's worthwhile...

Do most programs run on it?


----------



## Hyper-Threaded

Look it up on you tube, they ruined it. It looks like an I phone, no desktop, only "tiles" filled with adds and apps, its terrible. I wouldn't run it on a phone let alone a computer. And its designed for touch screen and tablets.  




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd1wvZvarFM&list=HL1330562056&feature=mh_lolz 



Id rather run windows 2000 or 98 than this bs. And I really want to tap 3 fishheads to unlock my computer? come on.


----------



## Kesava

That's what I was thinking, it definitely does seem to benefit touch screen users and although everything is displayed in a pretty way, it actually seems like more work to get anything done.


----------



## cabinfever1977

When i used win xp it was good all around not many problems but started to run slow, now i just started using windows 7 and runs faster and pretty good except for a few bugs even after updateing, but i would only use win 8 on a spare drive,it sounds pretty bad, but could be ok if you could mod it a little.


----------



## Hyper-Threaded

Exactly, for a tablet it looks good, I think apple will still prevail, but for desktop and business computers, come on are you serious? XP is great, heck my grandma can figure it out easy, and Ive heard good things from 7 from friends. But this looks so complicated.   

Also, I want to play BF3, not cut the rope, they made a simple flash game look like its a technological marvel. And to get into someones account press all over the photo and your bound to get it right...


----------



## johnb35

voyagerfan99 said:


> John downloaded it. Don't know if he got around to doing anything with it yet or not.



Not yet, won't be getting to that for awhile yet.  I did try the developer preview and hated it.  Frankly, I don't see any reason for this version to be available for desktops/laptops.  Should be for tablets and similar.  I mean, what's wrong with Windows 7 that they had to come out with a new one within 2 years?


----------



## strollin

For those that don't like the new Metro interface, it's simply 1 mouse click from there to the desktop.


----------



## strollin

jamesd1981 said:


> Got windows 8 installed no problems so far, index score all up and the maximum score has been raised from 7.9 to 9.9, i am getting faster internet connection.
> 
> still a pain to navigate to places like control panel.
> 
> You do need the product key to install so take note of it when you download.
> 
> You can install from boot disc or from within windows.


You can setup a shortcut from the Start Screen to Control Panel very easily.  Right-click, select AllApps, find Control Panel icon, right-click, select Pin to Start and now you have a "tile" on the Start screen that takes you directly to the Control Panel.


----------



## cabinfever1977

i still would have liked to see windows 7 bugs fixed before coming out with windows 8,lol.
I like windows 7,it makes my old computer that had xp faster,windows 8 should have been better and i hate to see what they did to it,i hope theres options to make it look normal,lol


----------



## Shane

I think its horrible,I can see why microsoft gave it the Metro GUI if they really want to push windows 8 to Tablets,But for a regular desktop i think all that metro crap would get annoying to be honest.

Just looks like a re-skinned version of windows 7,Very much doubt i will upgrade.


----------



## DMGrier

cabinfever1977 said:


> i still would have liked to see windows 7 bugs fixed before coming out with windows 8,lol.
> I like windows 7,it makes my old computer that had xp faster,windows 8 should have been better and i hate to see what they did to it,i hope theres options to make it look normal,lol



Bug fixes? I think Windows 7 is more stable then XP was when Vista came out.

Plus what is everyone complaining about, from my understanding you do not have to use the Metro UI. I am going to give it a shot tomorrow.


----------



## cabinfever1977

Ok i went and loaded the win 8 iso using a virtual drive on a spare harddrive.
Around 15-20minutes to install.
During install needed to use e-mail,tryed to use a aol e-mail but it wouldnt let me,so i was forced to register a microsoft live account,no big deal,but a pain in my butt.
Once windows 8 loaded i see the Metro interface hello win 3.1 ugly,cartoon crap,ok maybe with a tablet but i dont have one.
Then by acident i found that you can turn the Metro interface off by pressing the windows key on keyboard and now it looks like windows 7 without a start button.
I was going to fool around some more but i didnt feel like loading all the drivers for my computer. so i yanked out that harddrive and switched back to my windows 7 harddrive for now.

* windows 7 bugs: mouse cursore freezes in place during typing,1 random blue screen,2 or 3 computer freezes when viewing pics with win viewer,never happened in win xp


----------



## wolfeking

ok, here is what I think so far. 

1. metro has changed much from the DP when I tried it before. The tiles are far smaller. 
2. The options in the installer did pretty much nothing. I choose keep nothing, but it kept everything, so now I literally have 300 MB of free space. I don't have space to download the .iso to format the drive so I am screwed in this regard. 
3. the windows store IS STILL DOWN. That was my main reason for trying this, to see how it worked, see what is there. but nope. it is down, so it is a useless tile. 
4. Setup speed. double the time of windows 7 on this laptop (HP G61). 
5. The fish tile during installation. If you are a multi billion dollar company, hire a god damned artist to draw your aquatic life, not a third grader. Or better yet, put your company badge. 
6. its not really a windows 8 qualm, but IE10 needs to be a touch more conventional. It has never, in 15 or so years of using a computer, taken me more than 10 seconds to figure out how to browse the net before. 
7. There are xbox things on the tiles. this is connected to xbox live, right? Do I need to do anything else to set this up? some documentation would be nice mr. gates. 
8. Had to download the installer 3 times to get it to work. Might be my internet, but given the issues I have ran across I do not feel like trying again to see if it was just a bad internet connection. 

Good things. 
1. I see IE10 ha spell check. Bout time M$. 
2. recognized all the hardware out of the box. 
3. Does not seem to take quite as much power to run, but I am basing that onon the reduced CPU fan speed on IE10 just typing this. 
4. It is redundant, but files are there if there was anything you forgot to back up. But that wasn't a problem with me, so WTF M$ keep nothing is not keep everything.


----------



## DMGrier

cabinfever1977 said:


> Ok i went and loaded the win 8 iso using a virtual drive on a spare harddrive.
> Around 15-20minutes to install.
> During install needed to use e-mail,tryed to use a aol e-mail but it wouldnt let me,so i was forced to register a microsoft live account,no big deal,but a pain in my butt.
> Once windows 8 loaded i see the Metro interface hello win 3.1 ugly,cartoon crap,ok maybe with a tablet but i dont have one.
> Then by acident i found that you can turn the Metro interface off by pressing the windows key on keyboard and now it looks like windows 7 without a start button.
> I was going to fool around some more but i didnt feel like loading all the drivers for my computer. so i yanked out that harddrive and switched back to my windows 7 harddrive for now.
> 
> * windows 7 bugs: mouse cursore freezes in place during typing,1 random blue screen,2 or 3 computer freezes when viewing pics with win viewer,never happened in win xp



Very interesting, After having five computers in the house running Windows 7 have never seen the bugs you describe and they are all different models. Plus you have to be joking to compare XP to 7, have you used XP since it was released? I bought a desktop on the day XP was released and that thing was so buggy and to be honest was one of my worst Window experiences. Took about a year or two for them to get XP running right in my opinion. Not to mention security was so bad on that thing the moment you click on IE you where bound to catch a viruse.

As for the look of Windows 8, I am going to be installing it when I get home from work today but I think the look we are just going to have to get use to. It does not look bad and honestly I think it was one of the better decisions MS made considering they say the Tablet market is going to out sell laptop's in about the next 2-3 years and as for the desktop market well laptop's already out sell those on the personal consumer level.


----------



## wolfeking

ok, I am going to give it another try. Got the German 32 bit and English 64 bit downloading right now (glad I am at school, averaging 600+ Kb/s downloads). Just one question, I noticed, quite by retarded accident, after writing them down, that they both have the same key. Do all of them have the same key? 

and another thing, is there a article or something giving an ETA on more languages? or are we stuck as is till market release?


----------



## spirit

I am downloading the Consumer Preview now as we speak, reckons there's 2-3 hours left to go (downloading x64 ISO at around 300KB/s). Will be trying it out in VMware Workstation 8 (may need to update VMware though) to see what it's like. I tried the Developer Preview back in September and wrote a review on it (I've still got it somewhere) so it will be interesting to see what's changed after just under 6 months. Regarding the product key, I'm not sure if they have the same key or not, I suspect they do though.


----------



## jamesd1981

Just for the benefit of those that don`t have it, this is the product key for windows 8 english version

DNJXJ-7XBW8-2378T-X22TX-BKG7J


----------



## johnb35

jamesd1981 said:


> Just for the benefit of those that don`t have it, this is the product key for windows 8 english version
> 
> DNJXJ-7XBW8-2378T-X22TX-BKG7J



Every key is different, they won't be the same.


----------



## cabinfever1977

Everywhere i went on the website listed this key: NF32V-Q9P3W-7DR7Y-JGWRW-JFCK8
i downloaded the 32-bit iso


----------



## spirit

I've got two serials because I downloaded the ISO twice, you get the serial when you download the ISO. It's installing now in VMware, so far so good!


----------



## WeatherMan

I would like to try out the beta, although the last time I touched the Developer Preview I couldn't install my printer drivers (brand new HP Wireless All-in-One)

That was the ONLY problem I found 

I know HP will not yet have drivers available for Windows 8, and I doubt Microsoft have rectified this issue in their beta so far.

I would really like to try something new, and do need to reformat, I just don't really fancy getting my system virtually setup and then run into a problem


----------



## spirit

I don't like the new OS really. It's pretty stable, but Windows Explorer does crash now and then, and whilst installing it was easier than installing the Developer Preview, I still don't like the fact you need to make and use a Live ID to create a user account for yourself. They ask for a lot of personal information off you such as your postcode and your phone number just to make sure it's you creating the account and to make sure you don't fill in false information. VMware Tools installed fine the Consumer Preview, unlike the Developer Preview when VMware Tools would install but cause the VM to blue screen upon reboot, speaking of which I've had no blue screens yet. I installed a trial copy of the Adobe CS5.5 suite, seems to work OK on Windows 8 CP. I don't like the lack of a Start Menu button and I've found that to get to the Metro UI you have to click on the taskbar next to the Internet Explorer quick launch icon, and very often when you want to get back to the Metro UI, you end up accidentally opening up IE. Overall though I'm a great fan of the new OS and I have a horrible feeling that this going to be the "next Windows Vista"...


----------



## GaryCantley

johnb35 said:


> Not yet, won't be getting to that for awhile yet.  I did try the developer preview and hated it.  Frankly, I don't see any reason for this version to be available for desktops/laptops.  Should be for tablets and similar.  I mean, what's wrong with Windows 7 that they had to come out with a new one within 2 years?



Nothing but MS have to bring out a new OS even when not required.

I wont be buying Windows 8 for a while after its release. Look at History.

Win 95, Bad.

Win 98, Good

Win ME, Bad

Win XP, Good

Win Vista, Bad

Win 7, Good.

Looking at the above list, would you now seriously consider the next OS from MS?


----------



## spirit

I wouldn't just say that because Windows 8 is the successor to Windows 7, which has done very well, that it's going to be rubbish just because in the past Microsoft has had a tendency to make a great OS, then a not so good one, then a better one. Some people for example liked Vista, and I'm sure some people liked Me too. 

Another thing I'd like to point about about the CP is that I really don't think the Metro UI works on the desktop, it's more suited for tablets and phones I think. I can't find any of the programs I use almost everyday such as Notepad or Wordpad or Paint or even a Command Prompt, but interestingly, even due to a lack of Start Menu, if you press the Winkdows Key + R when at the desktop you get the Run box.


----------



## Okedokey

Im downloading a consumer preview, is that the same one as you blokes are talking about?


----------



## spirit

bigfellla said:


> is that the same one as you blokes are talking about?


Yes that's the one.


----------



## turbodiesel

Hyper-Threaded said:


> Look it up on you tube, they ruined it. It looks like an I phone, no desktop, only "tiles" filled with adds and apps, its terrible. I wouldn't run it on a phone let alone a computer. And its designed for touch screen and tablets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd1wvZvarFM&list=HL1330562056&feature=mh_lolz
> 
> 
> 
> Id rather run windows 2000 or 98 than this bs. And I really want to tap 3 fishheads to unlock my computer? come on.



i know removing the start menu that's a very bad idea!

i tried windows 8 developer preview but it was rubbish but really its just windows 7 tablet PC edition with a start screen instead of the menu


----------



## turbodiesel

Hyper-Threaded said:


> Exactly, for a tablet it looks good, I think apple will still prevail, but for desktop and business computers, come on are you serious? XP is great, heck my grandma can figure it out easy, and Ive heard good things from 7 from friends. But this looks so complicated.
> 
> Also, I want to play BF3, not cut the rope, they made a simple flash game look like its a technological marvel. And to get into someones account press all over the photo and your bound to get it right...



windows 7 complicated 

i don't think so


----------



## turbodiesel

when does windows 8 come out properly because i heard it would be somewhere in 2012


----------



## jamesd1981

They haven`t really removed the start menu it just looks different, if you are on the ordinary desktop on windows 8 if you go to the bottom left corner and click that is the start menu it is just in the tile form.


----------



## cabinfever1977

in windows 8: if you press the windows key on keyboard it will change to look like windows 7,it will have a taskbar at bottom, but no start button, and there is nothing to click on left side where the start button was,might be something on the right side now,i forget.


----------



## Junglist0682

I am interested at taking a look at Windows 8


----------



## cabinfever1977

Junglist0682 said:


> I am interested at taking a look at Windows 8



http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/iso


----------



## Junglist0682

cabinfever1977 said:


> http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/iso



oh I am at work atm, but when I get my internet connection back up I will take a look :good:


----------



## spirit

Junglist0682 said:
			
		

> I am interested at taking a look at Windows 8


I would only recommend doing it on a spare PC or a Virtual Machine, I wouldn't want to use this CP as my main OS, there's still quite a few bugs in it, for example, Windows Explorer keeps crashing for me still.


----------



## Junglist0682

vistakid10 said:


> I would only recommend doing it on a spare PC or a Virtual Machine, I wouldn't want to use this CP as my main OS, there's still quite a few bugs in it, for example, Windows Explorer keeps crashing for me still.



Right on, I may just refer to youtube to take a look... I won't be installing windows 8 at all since I don't have a spare PC atm :good:


----------



## speedyink

seems all good, though it will take some getting used to.. I'm curious to see whether or not I can find ways to access my software efficiently.  Loving the bootup time though.


----------



## wolfeking

bootup time I will give it a 10/10 as it is definitely fast. 

As for everything else, I have barely touched it. I think I have booted to it twice and got mad both times. It is a good system, don't get me wrong, but it is just a flop for me. I may toy around with it some more, but it is doubtful. 
Might end up getting a tablet, or whatever they are called, the laptops with touch screens, and try it out on that. Seems to be where it would shine.


----------



## Okedokey

Im running it, not issues whatsoever so far.  Bit faster I think too anecdotally.


----------



## byteninja2

I installed windows 8 64-bit via virtual box on my friends dell Inspiron. I honestly do not think I like it as it is not very friendly with a keyboard and mouse.


----------



## byteninja2

wolfeking said:


> bootup time I will give it a 10/10 as it is definitely fast.
> 
> As for everything else, I have barely touched it. I think I have booted to it twice and got mad both times. It is a good system, don't get me wrong, but it is just a flop for me. I may toy around with it some more, but it is doubtful.
> Might end up getting a tablet, or whatever they are called, the laptops with touch screens, and try it out on that. Seems to be where it would shine.



+1 except boot up time is slower than expected for me (maybe oracle vm's fault?)


----------



## spirit

byteninja2 said:
			
		

> I honestly do not think I like it as it is not very friendly with a keyboard and mouse.


I have to agree with you. For example when you put a CD or DVD in the tray (or load an ISO in my case as I'm using Windows 8 in VMware) it says "Tap to select to what to do" (or something along those lines - the word "tap" is definitely used instead of "click"), and also I find that even with VMware Tools installed, my mouse is very slow and laggy in Windows 8, whilst the OS itself is pretty fast. Maybe it's just VMware, I don't know, but it seems Microsoft are deliberately trying to kill the mouse. I've already tried a touchscreen monitor and I didn't like it very much, and besides, you can't press Ctrl+Alt+Delete on a touchscreen apparently (or at least not the ones I tried), which surely is the most important key combination for Windows? Also, I REALLY don't like why Microsoft are now calling programs 'apps' - isn't this an Apple trend? As far as I'm concerned, an 'app' is what we call a program which runs on a handheld device such as a smartphone or tablet, and of course, Apple computers (ie - Macs). A 'program' is what we use on desktop computers and laptops, why do they now have to be called 'apps'?


----------



## speedyink

vistakid10 said:


> and also I find that even with VMware Tools installed, my mouse is very slow and laggy in Windows 8, whilst the OS itself is pretty fast. Maybe it's just VMware



It's just VMware.  Mouse is fine on standard install.

I agree though, this does seem aimed more for touchscreen computers.  I might not upgrade, but if there is a way to get rid of the metro rubbish and get my start menu back, I do like the other features it comes with such as bootup time, improved task manager, copy window transfer graphs etc.


----------



## spirit

speedyink said:
			
		

> I do like the other features it comes with such as bootup time, improved task manager, copy window transfer graphs etc.


Yes I like the new task manager and the file copy transfer graphs. Can't really say about the boot time though because in VMware it is slower than it is going to be on a real PC, just the nature of VMs. If we could get rid off the Metro UI and bring back the proper start menu and get rid off the Windows Live ID rubbish you need to simply make a user account for yourself and aim it more towards the desktop then it would be a pretty good OS.


----------



## claptonman

So I'm trying to run the google chrome installer, which is an .exe, and it asks me what program I want to open it with. What the hell?

Nevermind, it was named chromeinstaller_exe for some reason.

Well, I like the Dev version much better, right now. But I installed it on my p4 1.4ghz and 512mb RAM laptop and its not hitting the pagefile like XP did.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

claptonman said:


> But I installed it on my p4 1.4ghz and 512mb RAM laptop and its not hitting the pagefile like XP did.



Now THAT'S awesome! 
Because I have 512 MB of RAM memory and 1.4 ghz hahaha 
So I guess Windows 8 would be perfect for me ^.^

Still I will rather use Windows XP at least until 2020. year.Probably even more lol 
Hell there are still people using WIndows 95 so I guess I am the "modern" user xD


----------



## strollin

vistakid10 said:


> Yes I like the new task manager and the file copy transfer graphs. Can't really say about the boot time though because in VMware it is slower than it is going to be on a real PC, just the nature of VMs. If we could get rid off the Metro UI and bring back the proper start menu and get rid off the Windows Live ID rubbish you need to simply make a user account for yourself and aim it more towards the desktop then it would be a pretty good OS.


You can setup non Windows Live ID accounts in Win 8 if you wish.  

It's really only a single-click from Metro to the desktop so I don't understand what the big deal is regarding that.  I think the release version will probably have it configurable whether to start with Metro or the desktop.

I've only run Win 8 in a VM but it doesn't seem laggy or slow to me so it's probably quite responsive on physical hardware.


----------



## wolfeking

it is from what I can tell. I like the setup now that I installed it 32 bit with a clean install from the .iso file. It only takes up 10GB on the HDD, and does not seem to hit the RAM too close. Easy to work with if you set down and study it for ~5 minutes or so. The install worked well, and was fairly intuitive. 

Seems to be as responsive as one would hope for, but this might be because of them adding ARM support, meaning it is made for low power processors maybe? I don't know, but a full install to a Athlon II x2 M300 with 7200RPM HDD and 2GB DDR2-800 in single channel mode does not seem to take a performance hit at all for a modern OS.


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

They really need to stop coming out with new operating systems. All it is, is a money making scandal, windows 7 is just fine we don't need a new one.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

wolfeking said:


> ...It only takes up 10GB on the HDD, and does not seem to hit the RAM too close...



Wow.Just take a look at Windows XP.Windows XP takes about 2 GB and now Windows 8 needs 8 GB more loooooool.That is a huge difference.Microsoft put a LOT LOT LOT of stuff in Windows 8 than they did in Windows XP considering it needs 10 GB lol.

Just one question since I still did not try Windows 8.Does Windows 8 have Movie Maker and things like that or did they remove it just like they did in Windows 7?
Because if they removed those things then that just sucks lol.
Also how big is ISO file of Windows 8?Does it need regular DVD of 4.7 GB or double layer DVD of 8.5 GB or even bigger? 



slipx44 said:


> They really need to stop coming out with new operating systems. All it is, is a money making scandal, windows 7 is just fine we don't need a new one.



Well Microsoft makes a lot of money right now and their OS is the most used one world wide so they always want to be number one I guess.Even though they always were lol.At least to me =)

I agree Windows 7 is more than enough for the next few years at least.Hell to me Windows XP is more than enough and I will be using it AT LEAST until 2020. year,but I guess some people are just dying for the new technology all the time lol 
When you take a look at the history of ALL Windows operating systems made by Microsoft,it is going to be a HUGE list lol.And that list as we all can see is increasing like nuts lol.


----------



## cabinfever1977

windows 8 32bit iso is 2.5GB and i put it on a 4gb thumbdrive to install
windows 8 64bit iso is 3.3GB

the link is where you can download either iso from:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/iso


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> Wow.Just take a look at Windows XP.Windows XP takes about 2 GB and now Windows 8 needs 8 GB more loooooool.That is a huge difference.Microsoft put a LOT LOT LOT of stuff in Windows 8 than they did in Windows XP considering it needs 10 GB lol.
> 
> Just one question since I still did not try Windows 8.Does Windows 8 have Movie Maker and things like that or did they remove it just like they did in Windows 7?
> Because if they removed those things then that just sucks lol.
> Also how big is ISO file of Windows 8?Does it need regular DVD of 4.7 GB or double layer DVD of 8.5 GB or even bigger?
> 
> 
> 
> Well Microsoft makes a lot of money right now and their OS is the most used one world wide so they always want to be number one I guess.Even though they always were lol.At least to me =)
> 
> I agree Windows 7 is more than enough for the next few years at least.Hell to me Windows XP is more than enough and I will be using it AT LEAST until 2020. year,but I guess some people are just dying for the new technology all the time lol
> When you take a look at the history of ALL Windows operating systems made by Microsoft,it is going to be a HUGE list lol.And that list as we all can see is increasing like nuts lol.



Ya, although I don't like xp, windows 7 will do fine, and one would think that Microsoft would have enough with the billions they have.


----------



## speedyink

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> Wow.Just take a look at Windows XP.Windows XP takes about 2 GB and now Windows 8 needs 8 GB more loooooool.That is a huge difference.Microsoft put a LOT LOT LOT of stuff in Windows 8 than they did in Windows XP considering it needs 10 GB lol.



Windows XP is 11 years old.  11 Years ago 2 gb was huge.  

And yes, there is a lot more in the newer windows, Windows XP is pretty archaic.


----------



## voyagerfan99

Finally got around to installing it on a virtual machine. It is complete and utter garbage. Microsoft needs to go back to the drawing board and create a real OS; none of this tile screen garbage.

And yes, XP is 11 years out and very out of date. It's time for it to go away. It's been clinging on for far too long. If Vista had not been so buggy and power hungry when it came out then we would not have seen XP around this long.

And S.T.A.R.S. they did not REMOVE Movie Maker per se, but rather it is now part of Windows Live. And it's much improved. The XP version was so buggy and crashed far too often to actually be of any real use to anyone.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

voyagerfan99 said:


> Finally got around to installing it on a virtual machine. It is complete and utter garbage. Microsoft needs to go back to the drawing board and create a real OS; none of this tile screen garbage.
> 
> And yes, XP is 11 years out and very out of date. It's time for it to go away. It's been clinging on for far too long. If Vista had not been so buggy and power hungry when it came out then we would not have seen XP around this long.
> 
> And S.T.A.R.S. they did not REMOVE Movie Maker per se, but rather it is now part of Windows Live. And it's much improved. The XP version was so buggy and crashed far too often to actually be of any real use to anyone.



Yes I know that,but I just hate Windows live lol.Especially when you need to download all the things which before were a part of Windows OS itself 
I guess I am just old fassion lol.

By the way when I read what you wrote:

"And yes, XP is 11 years out and very out of date. It's time for it to go away. It's been clinging on for far too long."

My first reaction was:"HOW DARE YOU?!" 
To tell you honestly,just because XP is 11 years old,that doesn't make it any more "out of date" how you people say lol.Just because something is 11 years old doesn't automatically make it a bad OS.XP is a GREAT operating system to me and every single thing I do works perfectly on it so why on Earth should I waste money AND time on upgrading lol...
I said this many times and I will say it again...I am going to use XP until 2020. year AT LEAST,but considering how great XP is,I am probably going to use it even longer than until 2020. year =D




Cheers Windows XP!!!


----------



## voyagerfan99

XP does not fully utilize today's modern dual, quad, and 6-core CPU's. That's one reason to ditch it.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

One core is more than enough for me.
Besides who the hell needs 6 cores lol...


----------



## wolfeking

honestly for the average user I don't think we would see a big difference anyway. XP, 2000 and Vista all seem to use about the same processing power on my Core 2 Dual laptop. I can't say for sure about the SB lineup, but I did not see a difference in power between xp and 7 on a i3-380m either.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

That's because differences are so damn small that they cannot be noticed by a human eye.

Example:

One computer has QUAD CORE CPU with XP installed.
Other computer ALSO has QUAD CORE CPU but with Windows 7 installed.

A game let's say Crysis 2 is being played on both computers.Do you think there will be ANY speed differences???
Well the answer is NO.Crysis 2 will work at THE SAME SPEED ON BOTH COMPUTERS.

Maybe Windows 7 does hande multiple core CPU a little bit better,but people come on!!!
The differences are SOOOOOOO SMALL that they cannot even be seen by a human eye.And don't tell me that you used a software which showed you better results on Windows 7 than it did on Windows XP.The hell with the software results!!!Those results that those kind of programs (designed for that) show you are just a SMALL DIFFERENCES and when I say "SMALL DIFFERENCES" I mean that those differences are soooooooooo small that a human eye can't see a difference.And if a human eye can't see a difference,WHAT IS THE POINT IN WASTING MONEY AND TIME ON UPGRADING FROM XP TO WINDOWS 7???
Hey you people use whatever you want lol,but if I ever get a computer with quad core or 6 core CPU (lol),I will still use XP and NOT Windows 7.
Why?
Well:

1. I don't want to waste any extra money.I would rather spend it on buying flowers to the person I like (hopefuly I am gonna meet her in September.(Shut up STARS))...

2. All of my programs work perfectly on Windows XP...

3. Every single detail I am doing works perfectly on Windows XP including everything else...

4. When it comes to playing games,the game speed differences CANNOT be noticed by a human eye AT ALL...


So when it comes to let's say playing games and their speeds and you people tell me that Windows 7 handles CPU better than Windows XP and that the game will work faster and better on Windows 7 then all I can tell you is:

AS LONG AS THE SPEED DIFFERENCES CANNOT BE NOTICED BY A HUMAN EYE THEN THERE ARE NO SPEED DIFFERENCES AT ALL.THE ONLY SPEED DIFFERENCES ARE THE ONE IN YOUR HEADS.

But hey if you want to spend more money on newer OS just because it works faster for a fraction of a second which human eye can't notice then be my guest.I am surely not going to waste my money on every single Windows OS which come out.Hell Microsoft already made Windows 8.One year from now there will be Windows 9 and that will require to spend money AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN!!!
And all that "AGAIN SPENDING MONEY" goes to MICROSOFT lol.

Well who can blame them.They are pretty smart when it comes to have more money as much as possible in a shortest period of time as possible.

But I am sticking to Windows XP for the next 10 years minimum.Everything 100% what I am doing works on Windows XP.So what's the point in spending money EVERY SINGLE TIME when new OS comes out???
Just because it has nice shiny Windows and effects and sounds???
If you want those shiny Windows,effects and sounds then make or use the theme for that and problem solved.
If you buy new OS every time just because it has newer features and you "need them" (but actually you don't need them AT ALL) then use programs for that.It is usually free and will do ALL the job the SAME way instead of spending SOOOO much money AND time on something you do NOT need and if you REAAAAAAALY need it then use freeware programs to do the job.If they are not free,then buy one,but it is STILL a LOT cheaper than buying an entire OS just because of few SMALL things which cost a LOT less than an entire OS,not to mention that you spend a LOT of money by buying new OS every time which seems to me Microsoft is making faster,faster and faster.

Jesus Christ lol.What's the rush? xD
Take it easy


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> That's because differences are so damn small that they cannot be noticed by a human eye.
> 
> Example:
> 
> One computer has QUAD CORE CPU with XP installed.
> Other computer ALSO has QUAD CORE CPU but with Windows 7 installed.
> 
> A game let's say Crysis 2 is being played on both computers.Do you think there will be ANY speed differences???
> Well the answer is NO.Crysis 2 will work at THE SAME SPEED ON BOTH COMPUTERS.
> 
> Maybe Windows 7 does hande multiple core CPU a little bit better,but people come on!!!
> The differences are SOOOOOOO SMALL that they cannot even be seen by a human eye.And don't tell me that you used a software which showed you better results on Windows 7 than it did on Windows XP.The hell with the software results!!!Those results that those kind of programs (designed for that) show you are just a SMALL DIFFERENCES and when I say "SMALL DIFFERENCES" I mean that those differences are soooooooooo small that a human eye can't see a difference.And if a human eye can't see a difference,WHAT IS THE POINT IN WASTING MONEY AND TIME ON UPGRADING FROM XP TO WINDOWS 7???
> Hey you people use whatever you want lol,but if I ever get a computer with quad core or 6 core CPU (lol),I will still use XP and NOT Windows 7.
> Why?
> Well:
> 
> 1. I don't want to waste any extra money.I would rather spend it on buying flowers to the person I like (hopefuly I am gonna meet her in September.(Shut up STARS))...
> 
> 2. All of my programs work perfectly on Windows XP...
> 
> 3. Every single detail I am doing works perfectly on Windows XP including everything else...
> 
> 4. When it comes to playing games,the game speed differences CANNOT be noticed by a human eye AT ALL...
> 
> 
> So when it comes to let's say playing games and their speeds and you people tell me that Windows 7 handles CPU better than Windows XP and that the game will work faster and better on Windows 7 then all I can tell you is:
> 
> AS LONG AS THE SPEED DIFFERENCES CANNOT BE NOTICED BY A HUMAN EYE THEN THERE ARE NO SPEED DIFFERENCES AT ALL.THE ONLY SPEED DIFFERENCES ARE THE ONE IN YOUR HEADS.
> 
> But hey if you want to spend more money on newer OS just because it works faster for a fraction of a second which human eye can't notice then be my guest.I am surely not going to waste my money on every single Windows OS which come out.Hell Microsoft already made Windows 8.One year from now there will be Windows 9 and that will require to spend money AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN!!!
> And all that "AGAIN SPENDING MONEY" goes to MICROSOFT lol.
> 
> Well who can blame them.They are pretty smart when it comes to have more money as much as possible in a shortest period of time as possible.
> 
> But I am sticking to Windows XP for the next 10 years minimum.Everything 100% what I am doing works on Windows XP.So what's the point in spending money EVERY SINGLE TIME when new OS comes out???
> Just because it has nice shiny Windows and effects and sounds???
> If you want those shiny Windows,effects and sounds then make or use the theme for that and problem solved.
> If you buy new OS every time just because it has newer features and you "need them" (but actually you don't need them AT ALL) then use programs for that.It is usually free and will do ALL the job the SAME way instead of spending SOOOO much money AND time on something you do NOT need and if you REAAAAAAALY need it then use freeware programs to do the job.If they are not free,then buy one,but it is STILL a LOT cheaper than buying an entire OS just because of few SMALL things which cost a LOT less than an entire OS,not to mention that you spend a LOT of money by buying new OS every time which seems to me Microsoft is making faster,faster and faster.
> 
> Jesus Christ lol.What's the rush? xD
> Take it easy



OK 2 things, one: How long did it take you to write all that. 2: The only things better with win 7 are that the new driivers work better on it, and it looks nicer. That's all.


----------



## wolfeking

slipx44 said:


> and it looks nicer. That's all.


that is a matter of opinion. Given 7 or XP, I would take XP in looks. XP or Vista, vista. The looks are always just opinion.


----------



## Hyper-Threaded

XP is gonna stay awhile because peoples computers are good enough. A computer with a p4, winXP, and 512mb of ram is all they need for surfing the web pretty fast so why should they get a quad core possessor and all that fancy high dollar stuff when they dont need it? Something to think about.


----------



## Okedokey

Hyper-Threaded said:


> XP is gonna stay awhile because peoples computers are good enough. A computer with a p4, winXP, and 512mb of ram is all they need for surfing the web pretty fast so why should they get a quad core possessor and all that fancy high dollar stuff when they dont need it? Something to think about.



Windows 7 runs better on low spec computers, you just let windows determine what candy is enabled.  XP is old, obsolete and completely unnecessary.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

slipx44 said:


> OK 2 things, one: How long did it take you to write all that. 2: The only things better with win 7 are that the new driivers work better on it, and it looks nicer. That's all.


 
1. It took me a century 
2. Drivers always work good on any OS if you know how to work with them properly.And as for the look,everyone has different opinion on that.To me Windows 95 look is a lot nicer and better than the one Windows Vista and Windows 7 have.You can't really judge an OS on it's look and colors lol.



Hyper-Threaded said:


> XP is gonna stay awhile because peoples computers are good enough. A computer with a p4, winXP, and 512mb of ram is all they need for surfing the web pretty fast so why should they get a quad core possessor and all that fancy high dollar stuff when they dont need it? Something to think about.


 
Exactly.Most of the people use computer just for WEB surfing and they surely do not need super strong CPU,GPU,RAM,HDD/SSD and God knows what lol.
Because I am pretty sure WEB pages do not require super strong system xD
So yea I agree with you.To them there is no point in wasting so much money because it will not make any difference.
The ONLY reason why would they wanna spend so much money on the upgrades is if they are crazy gamers who want to play the LATEST games on the BEST graphic quality level lol.But most users don't do that and they just surf the WEB,edit some text documents or images,watching movies,listening the music and so on.So in that case just like you said THEY SURELY DON'T NEED SUPER STRONG SYSTEM ON WHICH SO MUCH MONEY MUST BE SPENT.



bigfellla said:


> Windows 7 runs better on low spec computers, you just let windows determine what candy is enabled. XP is old, obsolete and completely unnecessary.


 
Hehehe lol if you ask me XP is still a winner.There are 75% of computers and users still running Windows XP.Sure it's 11 years old,but it is still the most used OS and will be the most used one for years to come.
Most of the people do not even like the way things are organized in Windows 7 plus a tons of other things.Sure they try Windows 7 because it's newer and "better",but very soon they revert back to XP because they see it works and suits a lot better for them...75% of the people including me 
I will continue using Windows XP for the next 10 years minimum.





Cheers!


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> 1. It took me a century
> 2. Drivers always work good on any OS if you know how to work with them properly.And as for the look,everyone has different opinion on that.To me Windows 95 look is a lot nicer and better than the one Windows Vista and Windows 7 have.You can't really judge an OS on it's look and colors lol.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly.Most of the people use computer just for WEB surfing and they surely do not need super strong CPU,GPU,RAM,HDD/SSD and God knows what lol.
> Because I am pretty sure WEB pages do not require super strong system xD
> So yea I agree with you.To them there is no point in wasting so much money because it will not make any difference.
> The ONLY reason why would they wanna spend so much money on the upgrades is if they are crazy gamers who want to play the LATEST games on the BEST graphic quality level lol.But most users don't do that and they just surf the WEB,edit some text documents or images,watching movies,listening the music and so on.So in that case just like you said THEY SURELY DON'T NEED SUPER STRONG SYSTEM ON WHICH SO MUCH MONEY MUST BE SPENT.
> 
> 
> 
> Hehehe lol if you ask me XP is still a winner.There are 75% of computers and users still running Windows XP.Sure it's 11 years old,but it is still the most used OS and will be the most used one for years to come.
> Most of the people do not even like the way things are organized in Windows 7 plus a tons of other things.Sure they try Windows 7 because it's newer and "better",but very soon they revert back to XP because they see it works and suits a lot better for them...75% of the people including me
> I will continue using Windows XP for the next 10 years minimum.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers!



I bet.


----------



## strollin

According to this site: OS Statistics, Win 7 pulled even with XP as of July of 2011 but since then has passed XP so the statement that XP is installed on 75% of computers is a little off.

Even with all its patches in place, XP is less secure than 7.  I still run XP on a few machines but prefer Win 7.  I have the Win 8 preview installed and have an open mind about it.  I personally don't care for the Metro GUI but can't really say I miss the Start button.  I boot Win 8 then click the tile for the desktop and spend my time there.  I'm hopeful that when Win 8 is released you'll be able to configure it to start with the desktop if that's your preference.


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

strollin said:


> According to this site: OS Statistics, Win 7 pulled even with XP as of July of 2011 but since then has passed XP so the statement that XP is installed on 75% of computers is a little off.
> 
> Even with all its patches in place, XP is less secure than 7.  I still run XP on a few machines but prefer Win 7.  I have the Win 8 preview installed and have an open mind about it.  I personally don't care for the Metro GUI but can't really say I miss the Start button.  I boot Win 8 then click the tile for the desktop and spend my time there.  I'm hopeful that when Win 8 is released you'll be able to configure it to start with the desktop if that's your preference.




meh...


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

strollin said:


> Even with all its patches in place, XP is less secure than 7.


 
If you want security,use a good non-free antivirus program and problem solved lol.I haven't got a single virus since 2004. lol.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

As long as there are old computers around, XP will live.
I have some old comps that would have hardware issues trying to run W7.

I installed W8 64 bit several days ago.
Driver issues for ATI is a big issue as many are complaining (most be MS still hates AMD).
Yes, It is set for a touch screen environment but the metro tiles can be turned off to give the W7 look. 
I did not need to use a e-mail account, I just left that blank.
All the ISO's use the same key #.

I quit playing with it for now because of the vid driver issue, If I can't have full screen the heck with it.

I have it on a separate partition on a secondary drive in single boot mode so I am not in a rush to delete it.

Also if you want AV other than MS you are limited to about 5-6 different brands.
I found my normal will not install.

Overall so far I would say unless you have a touch screen stick with W7.


----------



## DMGrier

So I just installed the beta, I personally like it. No doubt it still needs a lot of work but I guess that is why it is called a beta. My computer seems to run a little faster with it. 

As for XP being less secure this is only truth. It gives admin permissions without you knowing about it which is the main issue it has with malware. Viruses they are all the same. 

My question since we are on the subject of security is when I installed my beta version it had me un-install MSE, should I try to install it again or is it built into windows 8?


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

DMGrier said:


> So I just installed the beta, I personally like it. No doubt it still needs a lot of work but I guess that is why it is called a beta. My computer seems to run a little faster with it.
> 
> As for XP being less secure this is only truth. It gives admin permissions without you knowing about it which is the main issue it has with malware. Viruses they are all the same.
> 
> My question since we are on the subject of security is when I installed my beta version it had me un-install MSE, should I try to install it again or is it built into windows 8?



I agree... partly anyway.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

DMGrier said:


> So I just installed the beta, I personally like it. No doubt it still needs a lot of work but I guess that is why it is called a beta. My computer seems to run a little faster with it.
> 
> As for XP being less secure this is only truth. It gives admin permissions without you knowing about it which is the main issue it has with malware. Viruses they are all the same.
> 
> My question since we are on the subject of security is when I installed my beta version it had me un-install MSE, should I try to install it again or is it built into windows 8?


It does have a form of MSE called Windows Defender built in, IIRC, check the control panel.
Also you can get alternate AV here:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/downloads/antivirus-partners


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

These were good old days:

























And of course if you did not use them properly,you would get what you deserve:





HA! 





Cheers!


----------



## strollin

Yeah, the good old days of Win 95 with no support for USB. 

If I get nostalgic for Win 95, I have it installed in a VM on this machine and can fire it up anytime I want but I don't get the urge that often.

Can you actually say you like the look of Win 95 better than Win 7?






Win 7 looks much cleaner with better graphics and much better fonts.


----------



## wolfeking

I always wanted to run 98se again, but I can't seem to figure out large drive support (only looking to fill 20 GB) without the boot floppy (I don't have that module bay). Well either way, Seems that windows 8 is a flop to me. I tried to dual boot it with with free BSD, and it broke the boot loader. I can not boot to either now. I am going to try again this evening, but I am just going to wipe the drive for BSD and install it.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

strollin said:


> Yeah, the good old days of Win 95 with no support for USB.
> Can you actually say you like the look of Win 95 better than Win 7?



USB support was an easy problem to solve.Just put the right drivers on the right location and problem solved.Sure there would be BSODs here and there,but hey...that's the beauty of Windows 

And yes.Believe it or not,*I DO LIKE THE LOOK OF WINDOWS 95 MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE THAN ANY OTHER WINDOWS INCLUDING WINDOWS XP,WINDOWS VISTA AND WINDOWS 7.*
Maybe that is hard for anyone to believe me,but I am telling you the truth lol.To me that kind of look is so damn great lol.It's so clean,not killing my eyes,easy to read,tidy and what not 
Why else do you think I am using that old Windows look in Windows XP lol?
Because I just love it.Most of the people hate it,but I wouldn't change it no matter what!

You know...many people ask me:"How the hell can you stand that look?!It's so awful and old and ugly!"
And I tell them:"It doesn't matter how windows,buttons and the rest of the controls look like.It matters what magic is behind them."





Cheers!


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

strollin said:


> Yeah, the good old days of Win 95 with no support for USB.
> 
> If I get nostalgic for Win 95, I have it installed in a VM on this machine and can fire it up anytime I want but I don't get the urge that often.
> 
> Can you actually say you like the look of Win 95 better than Win 7?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Win 7 looks much cleaner with better graphics and much better fonts.



OHHHHH. ya


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

If you are saying OHHHH YA to the look of Windows 7 then you should be forbidden to have sex for the rest of your life because liking Windows 7 look is a MISATKE!!!

OHHH YA TO WINDOWS 95!!!OHH YEA BABY!GIVE IT TO ME!GIVE ME THAT SEXY LOOK!

LoL sorry xD...I am currently on drugs xD


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> If you are saying OHHHH YA to the look of Windows 7 then you should be forbidden to have sex for the rest of your life because liking Windows 7 look is a MISATKE!!!
> 
> OHHH YA TO WINDOWS 95!!!OHH YEA BABY!GIVE IT TO ME!GIVE ME THAT SEXY LOOK!
> 
> LoL sorry xD...I am currently on drugs xD



Lol I can tell. sorry I'm gonna have to report that though


----------



## spirit

S.T.A.R.S. said:
			
		

> OHHH YA TO WINDOWS 95!!!OHH YEA BABY!GIVE IT TO ME!GIVE ME THAT SEXY LOOK!


Everybody knows that grey boxes and teal green wallpapers are sexier than transparent boxes with rounded edges and beautiful hi-res wallpapers of animals, buildings, etc etc.  It's a known fact!

No I'm joking of course. I look back at Windows 9.x now and think it's hideous but I'm sure in 15 years time I'll be looking back on Vista and 7 and thinking they're hideous too. By that time I'll be thinking "oh my god - Windows 95 looked like Frankenstein's Creation!"


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

vistakid10 said:


> Everybody knows that grey boxes and teal green wallpapers are sexier than transparent boxes with rounded edges and beautiful hi-res wallpapers of animals, buildings, etc etc.  It's a known fact!
> 
> No I'm joking of course. I look back at Windows 9.x now and think it's hideous but I'm sure in 15 years time I'll be looking back on Vista and 7 and thinking they're hideous too. By that time I'll be thinking "oh my god - Windows 95 looked like Frankenstein's Creation!"



Wow, lol.


----------



## 2048Megabytes

The Windows 8 Graphic User Interface is something I do not like.  Why reinvent the wheel?  If something is working why go back to square one?

The blatant advertising in this operating system is something I also find to be annoying.

Windows 8 will be one operating system I will skip.  Many businesses aren't going to be interested in it either.


----------



## spirit

2048Megabytes said:
			
		

> Windows 8 will be one operating system I will skip. Many businesses aren't going to be interested in it either.


I'm going to see what the Release Candidate has to offer when it comes out (because this 'Consumer Preview' is more like a beta isn't it?) and if things haven't improved then I likely will be skipping Windows 8 too and sticking with 7 for a while. The businesses won't be interested in it for the same reasons as they weren't interested in Vista, and also the fact that Windows 8 is aimed more towards tablets than desktops. Hopefully Microsoft will learn their lesson and Windows 9 will be more like Windows 7 again.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

I was just wondering when will Microsoft start giving the NAMES to their future operating systems again.For example Windows 5 was XP,Windows 6 was Vista and now all they give is Windows 7 then Windows 8 lol.
It would be cool if they start giving them names again 

At the beginning it was also like that.The first was Windows 1.0 then Windows 2.0 and so on...

It's like we are going back to 1985. lol.


----------



## spirit

S.T.A.R.S. said:
			
		

> I was just wondering when will Microsoft start giving the NAMES to their future operating systems again.For example Windows 5 was XP,Windows 6 was Vista and now all they give is Windows 7 then Windows 8 lol.
> It would be cool if they start giving them names again


I'm wondering the same. I believe Microsoft called Windows 7 "Windows 7" because the whole idea of Windows 7 is that it is meant to be all nice and simple so Microsoft probably wanted to use a nice and simple. Anybody with a retail copy (likely not OEM) of Windows 7 on hand will know that the user guide has "your PC, simplified" written all over it. I always thought Windows 8 was an imaginative name though.  No I'm joking again, but it would be nice if the successor to Windows 7 wasn't called 'Windows 8', it's a bit predictable really isn't it?


----------



## MyCattMaxx

How about Windows OSX? ...


----------



## jamesd1981

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/opinion/...-half-who-have-tried-os-wouldnt-recommend-it/


----------



## spirit

I agree with all the complaints mentioned in the article especially the annoying way of shutting down Windows 8. When I first tired the Dev it took me about 5 minutes to figure out how to shut Windows down. I forgot to mention this earlier.

Not surprised that half of those who have tried Windows 8 would not recommend it, including myself. I think Microsoft have bitten off more than they can chew here...


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

vistakid10 said:


> I think Microsoft have bitten off more than they can chew here...



LoL they usually do that


----------



## Feuerfrei.x

Tryed it at work today... not too good with a normal tower, i think its more aimed at tablets or touchscreens... theres something that I don't like about it... i dont know what


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

I know what I don't like about it ---> It's not Windows XP


----------



## Feuerfrei.x

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> I know what I don't like about it ---> It's not Windows XP




Nyer, Im personally over XP now, I thought I would never be... but then i got weened onto Windows 7.. the only thing i don't like is on disc defragment it doesnt have the liney picture  I WANT MY LINEY PICTURE


----------



## wolfeking

you can use a 3rd party program to get the picture back.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

Feuerfrei.x said:


> the only thing i don't like is on disc defragment it doesnt have the liney picture  I WANT MY LINEY PICTURE



See what I am saying?

Nah lol I am just kidding.Besides I don't care about the disk defragmenter picture because I ALWAYS defragment in SAFE MODE WITH COMMAND PROMPT.

This might sound shocking to you all,but to me...EVERY SINGLE WINDOWS OPERATING SYSTEM is good.
Why?
Well because it is possible to do almost anything on any of them if you know how.Knowledge is the ONLY limit.




Cheers!


----------



## Okedokey

Try and run a SSD on Win XP with junk collection.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

bigfellla said:


> Try and run a SSD on Win XP with junk collection.



May I ask why?

(Wow I am the 100. post winner on this thread.Cool =D )


----------



## DMGrier

So for me Windows 8 is going good so far but one of the problems I keep running into is the new internet explorer. It is fast and has added spell check which I really enjoy but I cannot figure out how to get to my favorite list or even save my favorites on it. It is a little confusing.


----------



## User0one

Why don't you just Add the Menu Bar, then it will be more like old IE versions. Otherwise Favorites are hidden under the Star.


----------



## NyxCharon

Upgraded to this from windows 7 today. Used the dev preview before, didn't like it. Still don't like it. Only upgraded from 7 because of a serious java problem, and I didn't want to wipe and re install.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

NyxCharon said:


> ...Used the dev preview before, didn't like it. Still don't like it. Only upgraded from 7 because of a serious java problem...



So why not simply use Windows XP and all your troubles will be over?


----------



## NyxCharon

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> So why not simply use Windows XP and all your troubles will be over?



Pretty sure I can't downgrade from windows 7. I was trying to avoid a clean install.


----------



## wolfeking

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> So why not simply use Windows XP and all your troubles will be over?


Not everyone has this option. I don't know what his specs are, but I know for Nvidia they do not have XP drivers for above the GTX460m. This includes the GTX470m, GTX580m, and the whole GT(x) 500 line. I am not sure for AMD or other components, but I think most manufacturers are missing the XP driver support these days. Sad day, but it is coming. 


NyxCharon said:


> Pretty sure I can't downgrade from windows 7. I was trying to avoid a clean install.


 Is that personal opinion, or lack of driver support?


----------



## jamesd1981

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/bits/2012/03/13/fixing-windows-8/1


----------



## spirit

S.T.A.R.S. said:
			
		

> So why not simply use Windows XP and all your troubles will be over?


XP is not really suited for modern hardware. The guy states he has a GT540M and an i5 in his signature - why would you want to run XP on an i5? I think the problems with Java the guy is having is probably more to do with conflicting software and/or bad Java installs than it is to do with his OS, in which case downgrading to XP won't help.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

When I had issues with Java on W7, I uninstalled all the Java, then cleaned the registry, then reinstalled the newest Java and all was great.


----------



## NyxCharon

wolfeking said:


> Is that personal opinion, or lack of driver support?



I couldn't do a clean install simply because I don't have the space. I have about 500GB's of data that I have nowhere to put until I can get another storage drive to put in my computer. Because of that, I just migrated to win8, and simply kept my files and just reinstalled all my programs. 



vistakid10 said:


> XP is not really suited for modern hardware. The guy states he has a GT540M and an i5 in his signature - why would you want to run XP on an i5? I think the problems with Java the guy is having is probably more to do with conflicting software and/or bad Java installs than it is to do with his OS, in which case downgrading to XP won't help.



Yeah, It was just bad java installs. OS doesn't matter, I just needed to wipe/upgrade and get something fresh. Sadly, wipe wasn't a option



MyCattMaxx said:


> When I had issues with Java on W7, I uninstalled all the Java, then cleaned the registry, then reinstalled the newest Java and all was great.


tried it. Uninstalled all my jre's and jdk's, and cleaned the registry. Re-installed, and my browser stuff started working again, but any java programs just wouldn't.


----------



## wolfeking

NyxCharon said:


> I couldn't do a clean install simply because I don't have the space. I have about 500GB's of data that I have nowhere to put until I can get another storage drive to put in my computer. Because of that, I just migrated to win8, and simply kept my files and just reinstalled all my programs.


ok, fair enough. And I did not take time to read your siggy either. Even if you did go to XP, you would not have driver support for the 540m, so not a good option at all.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

NyxCharon said:


> I couldn't do a clean install simply because I don't have the space. I have about 500GB's of data that I have nowhere to put until I can get another storage drive to put in my computer. Because of that, I just migrated to win8, and simply kept my files and just reinstalled all my programs.
> Yeah, It was just bad java installs. OS doesn't matter, I just needed to wipe/upgrade and get something fresh. Sadly, wipe wasn't a option
> tried it. Uninstalled all my jre's and jdk's, and cleaned the registry. Re-installed, and my browser stuff started working again, but any java programs just wouldn't.



I really don't see what's the rush.Windows 8 is not finished operating system and it is just a beta.And using beta operating systems is never a good idea and no wonder why you might have problems.I am not saying everyone has problems with Windows 8,but many people do.Windows 8 is under the development and you should wait until it's completely finished and THEN use it.Until then use Windows 7 or whichever you prefer.


----------



## NyxCharon

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> I really don't see what's the rush.Windows 8 is not finished operating system and it is just a beta.And using beta operating systems is never a good idea and no wonder why you might have problems.I am not saying everyone has problems with Windows 8,but many people do.Windows 8 is under the development and you should wait until it's completely finished and THEN use it.Until then use Windows 7 or whichever you prefer.



I haven't a problem yet with windows 8, I just don't like it. At least the metro aspect of it. All my problems were with windows 7. Honestly, if it wasn't for gaming and some schoolwork I'd be linux only.


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

NyxCharon said:


> I haven't a problem yet with windows 8, I just don't like it. At least the metro aspect of it. All my problems were with windows 7. Honestly, if it wasn't for gaming and some schoolwork I'd be linux only.



All I can say is...COMPUTER GEEK!!!!!!!!!


----------



## NyxCharon

slipx44 said:


> All I can say is...COMPUTER GEEK!!!!!!!!!



I have no problem being a computer geek, a starting salary of 60K a year with upwards of 100K after experience is fine with me. I'd love to get paid that much to be a geek.


----------



## DMGrier

The way I look at it like this, this last year or more we have seen some big UI changes and honestly I think Windows 8 is the only one that has been getting positive reviews. I like it but Like S.T.A.R.S. said it is a Beta. It still has a lot of work to go and I am curious to see what the future is going to be. I am excited to see the update for my phone cause I guess Zune is being phased out and I see the new music player but it currently does support my phone.


----------



## spirit

S.T.A.R.S. said:
			
		

> I really don't see what's the rush.Windows 8 is not finished operating system and it is just a beta.And using beta operating systems is never a good idea and no wonder why you might have problems


I agree. I think Windows 8 has been rushed out too soon, Windows 7 isn't even 3 years old yet and it is perfectly usable. Microsoft tend to rush new products out before the old ones have really taken, I mean, they're planning on bringing in Office 15 Beta this summer, and most people have only just upgraded to Office 2010. It's getting kind of ridiculous now. 



			
				DMGrier said:
			
		

> I like it but Like S.T.A.R.S. said it is a Beta. It still has a lot of work to go and I am curious to see what the future is going to be.


When the Release Candidate is released shortly before the final product goes on sale, I will download it and see if anything has improved. 

I forgot to say I was intrigued to see the bootscreen in Windows 8 CP now some weird fish (or something of the like) on it and the default wallpaper is the same. Why?


----------



## DMGrier

The weird fish is a Beta, so it is kind of a creative things from Windows with them saying this is a Beta without calling it a Beta.


----------



## 2048Megabytes

vistakid10 said:


> I agree. I think Windows 8 has been rushed out too soon, Windows 7 isn't even 3 years old yet and it is perfectly usable. Microsoft tend to rush new products out before the old ones have really taken, I mean, they're planning on bringing in Office 15 Beta this summer, and most people have only just upgraded to Office 2010.  It's getting kind of ridiculous now.



Microsoft Office 2007 is such a great program.  Office 2010 didn't add too many more features.  Pretty much Microsoft just rearranged the graphic user interface from Office 2007.  I think a lot of businesses are just going to stick with Office 2007 for several more years.

Windows 7 is definitely in it's prime.  I am likely going to hold on to the Windows 7 operating system for at least another 5 years.  I just upgraded from Windows XP.  Windows XP is definitely a dying operating system.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

2048Megabytes said:


> Windows XP is definitely a dying operating system.



*HOW DARE YOU?!





Say that one more time and I will do this with your Windows 7 computer:





*And yes I am serious


----------



## spirit

2048Megabytes said:
			
		

> Windows XP is definitely a dying operating system.


I'm sorry S.T.A.R.S., but you can't deny the truth, XP will be 11 years old this year and very soon most software will require at least Vista SP2 to run. XP is kind of becoming obsolete now and it really is showing its age, so I'd say 2048Megabytes is definitely right here. XP's had a long run, I think it's time you moved on. 

You can't punch my Windows 7 laptop though because I'm actually on a desktop and I don't own a laptop anymore.  and if you punched through my monitor your fist would hit a solid wall.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

vistakid10 said:


> I think it's time you moved on.



NEVER!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## wolfeking

vistakid10 said:


> I think it's time you moved on.


I am going to have to agree with him here. Stars that is. As long as XP will boot, and I don't really have a need for anything else I will keep a XP partition on my machine. I don't see the need for a newer version. I do keep Vista SP2 around, but that is more for networking (seems easier, but 2000 was easiest).


----------



## MyCattMaxx

I am a XP fan, but I find that I use it less as time goes on.
Much in the same way I weaned away from 98se to XP.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

BECAUSE:


----------



## Des_Zac

I honestly have to say, (Don't hurt me) I really like it. I'm running it on my laptop, and while this touch pen doesn't work, I find it really nice. The quick search feature is very easy to access so I don't need to have a start menu, the metro menu makes it really easy to get from program to desktop, and it's compatible with all the Windows 7 programs I've tried with it, even games. I don't have any problems with it really. I find it very nice.

I plan on installing it on my desktop too.

*Holds up shield to protect self from all the hate*


----------



## spirit

Des_Zac said:
			
		

> I honestly have to say, (Don't hurt me) I really like it. I'm running it on my laptop


Interesting. Most of us guys round here including myself have tired it on a desktop and found it to be very "desktop unfriendly". Windows 8 seems to have a hatred for the mouse at the moment. I had suspected it was aimed more towards laptops/tablets so it's interesting to hear that a laptop user likes the OS. 



			
				Des_Zac said:
			
		

> it's compatible with all the Windows 7 programs I've tried with it, even games.


I tried it with a bunch of modern programs such as Visual Studio 2010 and Office 2010 and that latest VLC Media Player and they worked fine so the compatibility is there. I just don't really like the whole Metro UI and the fact that it's very tablet friendly but very desktop un-friendly.

And S.T.A.R.S., I gather that you love Windows XP, but I think all the pictures are perhaps a bit OTT.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

I like all Windows operating systems as I already said before.
It's just that Windows 98 and Windows XP are somehow the best to me simply because I find them easy to use and the way things are organized is very good...at least to me.
And yes as I already said before,I more like the look from Windows 95 than the look from Windows 7 or 8.
Call me SUPER-OLD fashion if you want lol,but I just like that a lot more.

Windows 7 and 8 really are great.They really are.I guess I just got used to the previous organization of things and the way tihngs work so I guess there is nothing that can change that lol.

WINDOWS 98 and XP FOREVER!!!

And hey let's be honest.What kind of Windows is that if you don't have THIS:





That is the MOST BEAUTIFUL part of Windows xD xD xD
Hopefully Microsoft will include BSODs in new Windows OS xD xD xD

I am crazy I know xD


----------



## spirit

S.T.A.R.S. said:
			
		

> And hey let's be honest.What kind of Windows is that if you don't have THIS:


Image not working for me. :/ 



			
				S.T.A.R.S. said:
			
		

> Hopefully Microsoft will include BSODs in new Windows OS xD xD xD


Oh yeah! Windows 8 has an "all new" BSOD! It looks like this. I saw the new BSOD many times with the Developer Preview but in my experience the Consumer Preview has been much more stable and I haven't seen it once...yet. 



			
				S.T.A.R.S. said:
			
		

> I am crazy I know xD


You don't say. 

Seriously, you're like this at 21, what were you like as a kid?


----------



## jdtcomputer

do u guys have the product key or the crack for the window 8


----------



## NyxCharon

jdtcomputer said:


> do u guys have the product key or the crack for the window 8


...it's free. 

Regardless, we don't discuss that topic(cracks) on this forum. So don't ask for one.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

If you have downloaded the "FREE" un-altered iso from Microsoft the # is
DNJXJ-7XBW8-2378T-X22TX-BKG7J

If you have a copy from some flim flam site, get the real thing here:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/iso

It is FREE and untouched by some hacker.


----------



## NyxCharon

Realllllly happy with windows 8 now. saw this:
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/add-start-menu-windows-8-consumer-preview-installation-vistart/

Works great, no more need for metro on a regular basis


----------



## spirit

NyxCharon said:
			
		

> Realllllly happy with windows 8 now. saw this:
> http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/add-sta...ation-vistart/
> 
> Works great, no more need for metro on a regular basis


meh, would be good if you didn't need to install third-party software to enable a start menu. :/


----------



## claptonman

Simple registry fix gives you the start menu.

HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer

Change "RPEnabled" to 0, and restart. Bam, windows 7.


----------



## NyxCharon

claptonman said:


> Simple registry fix gives you the start menu.
> 
> HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer
> 
> Change "RPEnabled" to 0, and restart. Bam, windows 7.



That doesn't work in the consumer preivew...


----------



## MyCattMaxx

NyxCharon said:


> Realllllly happy with windows 8 now. saw this:
> http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/add-start-menu-windows-8-consumer-preview-installation-vistart/
> 
> Works great, no more need for metro on a regular basis


I finally got around to it.
I like it.
I wasn't using W8 much as my wireless card doesn't work on W7-8 and I only have 1 cat cable from the router in to here but I fixed that with a spare router so I could run 2 wired comps plus it extended the wireless range.


----------



## tremmor

Now im curious. I never installed a beta before. If i did and when it was  on the market can i just buy the key and good and receive the install disc for retail? 
Or would I be required to go buy it and a clean install.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

I suspect you will be able to buy the key and download the iso from Microsoft.
I suspect there will different prices for the different versions they will release.
I read somewhere there will be about 8 versions.
I will do a clean install once I decide to buy it, but I suspect you may be able to do an over the top install.


----------



## claptonman

NyxCharon said:


> That doesn't work in the consumer preivew...



Oh yeah, forgot to mention it only works in the Dev preview...


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

Meh to win 8, Like said before" we don't need a new os" 


Who on cf agrees that, we could do fine with win 7, vista and xp for long time still?


----------



## claptonman

slipx44 said:


> Meh to win 8, Like said before" we don't need a new os"
> 
> 
> Who on cf agrees that, we could do fine with win 7, vista and xp for long time still?



7 and vista, sure, but not XP. Majority of users I know only have 32-bit, support is ending, and some games are not playable on XP, like BF3.

If windows 8 gets a desktop look and is the same price as win 7, if I ever need another copy, I would absolutely get windows 8.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

I've got spare comps to play with.
2 are twins. I moved the W8 drive to the twin, now that I can hook up more than one comp at a time in this room.
I'm messing around with ATI drivers right now trying to get my video to work right.
I got my network set up so the comps will share since I took the 3rd drive from my normally used comp.


BTW, XP will be just fine.
If you have good AV/internet software there is nothing to fear unless you like to do shady things with your comp.


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

Yes!!!!! Thank goodness!!!!!! people agree!!!!!!!! woot!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think people should all go to linux, then maybe if everyone stop Microsoft, they he might stop making new os's. I hate Microsoft.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

You hate Microsoft?
LoL I bet you used Windows OS to write that


----------



## MyCattMaxx

slipx44 said:


> Yes!!!!! Thank goodness!!!!!! people agree!!!!!!!! woot!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think people should all go to linux, then maybe if everyone stop Microsoft, they he might stop making new os's. I hate Microsoft.


Agree with what?
I have Linux, but I still prefer Windows for most things.
Microsoft needs the new OS for tablets etc.


----------



## wolfeking

that he probably did. I don't exactly agree with microsoft, I would rather sit on Linux than 7, but if choice comes down to it and drivers exist for it, I would use windows 2000 over them all. Why? I feel that it was the best ever even over XP.

I won't say I hate them though, as there are some things that Linux can't do without major workarounds, like gaming. And the schools servers refuse flat out to recognize Crunchbang and Fedora to connect to the internet.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

You use Windows 2000 for most things?
With SP1,SP2,SP3 and SP4 I suppose?

Yea that is a good OS.Even though XP is the same thing only the NT version jumped from 5.0 to 5.1 and many things are enhanced.But Windows 2000 and Windows XP are both very good.
Some people say that XP is a disneyland version of Windows 2000 lol.I guess that is because of default XP theme look.
But I use classic Windows 95/98 theme look anyway.I like that one the most.




Cheers!


----------



## Geoff

slipx44 said:


> Yes!!!!! Thank goodness!!!!!! people agree!!!!!!!! woot!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think people should all go to linux, then maybe if everyone stop Microsoft, they he might stop making new os's. I hate Microsoft.


Do you think before you post?


----------



## wolfeking

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> You use Windows 2000 for most things?
> With SP1,SP2,SP3 and SP4 I suppose?
> 
> Yea that is a good OS.Even though XP is the same thing only the NT version jumped from 5.0 to 5.1 and many things are enhanced.But Windows 2000 and Windows XP are both very good.
> Some people say that XP is a disneyland version of Windows 2000 lol.I guess that is because of default XP theme look.
> But I use classic Windows 95/98 theme look anyway.I like that one the most.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers!


Actually, yes. I love 2000, and as long as what I am doing will work on it, I am happy. I don't like XP. The looks just ain't there, it looks like a toy to me. But i feel that soon I will have to move to XP permanently, as Flash is no longer supported in 2000 (without modding system files), and I use youtube a lot. But then again, I always got Linux for that. 



WRXGuy1 said:


> Do you think before you post?


This too.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

wolfeking said:


> But i feel that soon I will have to move to XP permanently, as Flash is no longer supported in 2000 (without modding system files), and I use youtube a lot.



Don't give up from Windows 2000!
If you like it so much,do whatever it takes to make things work on it!



That is what I say for Windows XP.Windows XP is my favorite and will use it at least until 2020. and WILL do WHATEVER IT TAKES to make things work on it 


Let's say it together wolfeking:

WINDOWS 2000 AND WINDOWS XP FOREVER!!!


----------



## MyCattMaxx




----------



## wolfeking

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> Don't give up from Windows 2000!
> If you like it so much,do whatever it takes to make things work on it!
> 
> 
> 
> That is what I say for Windows XP.Windows XP is my favorite and will use it at least until 2020. and WILL do WHATEVER IT TAKES to make things work on it
> 
> 
> Let's say it together wolfeking:
> 
> WINDOWS 2000 AND WINDOWS XP FOREVER!!!


2K forever! Or until there is no more workarounds. 



MyCattMaxx said:


> http://i1250.photobucket.com/albums/hh534/A-10WH/W8Desktop1.jpg


How are you liking it so far?


----------



## MyCattMaxx

Not too bad.
Seems quicker than W7.
I have it in a twin computer of one I have W7 on.
Right now drivers seen to be a bit of an issue, I had to use some older Vista 64 vid driver.
I assume by release time more drivers will be available.
I don't care for the metro as I use a desktop and not a mobile.
I have been working on getting W7 and W8 as close as I can then see if it would be worth buying, but this is just a preview so the final is sure to be different.
You can see I added the start button to it.

I suspect with the feedback Microsoft is getting that there will be an option on install if you want metro or not.


----------



## wolfeking

or maybe they could make it a login screen option. That way if you want metro you get it or if you want desktop you get it, but are not limited to one or the other.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

What's a log-in screen...


----------



## wolfeking

the screen where you input your username and password.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

I was joking.
I don't use them and never had a problem.
I have nothing to hide and am the only one who uses them without my being present.

Besides, I use Predator for times I'm away.


----------



## wolfeking

Well not  all of us are so lucky, and The login screen is always there weather or not you enter your info. If you don't have a password set it just bypasses it via auto login. That is assuming that windows does something similar to linux in that regard.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

Yup, about the same.
I don't use the log-in screen on Mint either.


----------



## wolfeking

fair enough. But there could be an option for it. Just have it ask for your preferred, like metro or classic. Then if you want to change for whatever reason, just log out and pick the other and be back without a reinstall.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

It's really not much of an issue so far with W8.
I just click on the tile for desktop and I forget metro is there until I reboot.


----------



## wolfeking

ok.

I don't know why Im even worrying about it, cause it will be a good 30 years before I need to think about using it. Until then I got XP, Vista and 7 to go through first.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

wolfeking said:


> 2K forever! Or until there is no more workarounds.



There are always going to be workarounds.


----------



## wolfeking

not really. There is going to be a point where the hardware will not support it anymore, and a point when you have to modify the base code of practically everything to run it. I personally love it, but I also know there will be a day when it will no longer be logical to use as my primary OS.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

wolfeking said:


> ...it will be a good 30 years before I need to think about using it...



In my case it will be 30 years of XP 
Besides I don't have to worry about the hardware support since my computer is 15 years old and still works great and if it FINALLY after 15 years dies in the next few days then that is not going to be a problem since there are TONS TONS TONS of computers with hardware apcapable of working with Windows XP.
So if EVERY system lasts for at least 15 years to me then just 2 computers are more than enough for me to last 30 years on Windows XP lol.

I am not one of those who buy new system every 2 years or more often anyway...

God I still can't believe it's been 15 years...sh!t man


----------



## wolfeking

That is all well and good. But I try to stay somewhat up to date when I go for upgrades. But that is not to say that I need to loose 2k because of it. It will run on my hardware for now. Hardware being: Dell motherboard running 915PM/ICH7, Quadro FX2500m, T7200, 3GB RAM, IDE mode, 120 GB HDD. Battery and all the other basic hardware.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

wolfeking said:


> That is all well and good. But I try to stay somewhat up to date when I go for upgrades.



I forgot to say I get them for free so I cannot complain wether the hardware is weak or super strong.It's important that XP works on it
I don't really do any gaming.I more lose time on programming.
And as long as I am not playing the most modern games,I do NOT need strong hardware.

Everything is about the optimizations.If you do everything correct in the correct order then ANY program can work on a very very very old and weak hardware just great and stable 100%.
I tryed the newest programs on my 15 years old system and they run so damn great.
Not to mention I installed XP in 2004. and until 2004. I used Windows 98.
And now it's 2012. and everything still works so damn great.
Of course like I said...modern games are the ONLY thing which do not work good/fast/at all,but that's logical since games DO require strong hardware to work good.But then again that is not a problem to me at ALL since I don't really play any games.
If I ever decide to play games,I will get myself a good and strong laptop...for free of course.Always for free 
How?.............Does it matter?

But until I become a crazy gamer,I am staying with my 15 years old system.

By the way the thing I like the most are the people to who new programs barely work on their STRONG systems and on mine they work great.Explain that lol.
The answer is simple: They do not know how to properly use computers...

Of course they say that they DO know how to use it properly...
But if that's true then why would they need 16 GB of RAM to run a simple program and I with just 512 MB of RAM can run the SAME program just fine?

Plus I have about 30 background programs running at the same time all the time and about 70 active processes total running at the same time all the time too and STILL every single thing works so damn good and stable 100%...

They on the other hand have about 20 processes or less running and maybe 2 or 4 programs running in the same time in the background and ALREADY their system works slow and they need to upgrade from 8 GB to 16 GB of RAM???

All I can say on that is: "LOL!"




Cheers!


----------



## Okedokey

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> Everything is about the optimizations.If you do everything correct in the correct order then ANY program can work on a very very very old and weak hardware just great and stable 100%.
> 
> ...
> 
> By the way the thing I like the most are the people to who new programs barely work on their STRONG systems and on mine they work great.Explain that lol.
> The answer is simple: They do not know how to properly use computers...
> All I can say on that is: "LOL!"
> 
> Cheers!



^Pretty much somes up everything he has ever said on the topic.  But seriously Stars, most of us game.  Your computer would give birth to a perhistoric ram-manbitch if you tried to run Battlefield 3.  Thats the point of the extra RAM and processing horsepower.  We wouldn't have that if we didn't need it.  You clearly don't, so yes, that computer in my wall clock should be able to run aero somehow....


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> In my case it will be 30 years of XP
> Besides I don't have to worry about the hardware support since my computer is 15 years old and still works great and if it FINALLY after 15 years dies in the next few days then that is not going to be a problem since there are TONS TONS TONS of computers with hardware apcapable of working with Windows XP.
> So if EVERY system lasts for at least 15 years to me then just 2 computers are more than enough for me to last 30 years on Windows XP lol.
> 
> I am not one of those who buy new system every 2 years or more often anyway...
> 
> God I still can't believe it's been 15 years...sh!t man



Sadly, xp won't work with the new soft ware in prob even 10 years.


----------



## Geoff

slipx44 said:


> Sadly, xp won't work with the new soft ware in prob even 10 years.


Windows XP has been out for 11 years and still support 99% of the Windows software released, and will for years to come.  Mac on the other hand is the complete opposite, Snow Leopard has only been out for a couple years and a lot of the new Mac software won't run fully on anything less then Lion.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

slipx44 said:


> Sadly, xp won't work with the new soft ware in prob even 10 years.



There is TONS of software for Windows XP for ANYTHING you could possibly need to.
There are at least few hundreds software for EVERY SINGLE THING you could possibly need.
So that is not really worrying me lol.

I do not change my programs very often anyway.And if there is ever going to be a program I need which doesn't work on Windows XP,you can always make your own that works under XP.

Besides almost all programs work just great under Windows XP so it is going to be a LOOOOOOOOONG time before 99% of the programs will not work under Windows XP.

Hell newest Microsoft Office and Visual Studio work under Windows XP so I am pretty sure that other a LOT smaller programs made by someone else will work under Windows XP too.
And those programs which work only under Windows 7 are so damn rare.But even if they become often,you can ALWAYS find a replacement program for the SAME thing since there are TONS of software for the same thing which DO work under Windows XP and even Windows 2000 and 98 lol.

This is I guess one of the reasons why every single program I make MUST work on Windows 98 first edition and newer...
I never release the program if it doesn't work under Windows 98 first edition or newer...
The more program(s) is/are compatible with old and new operating system(s),the better it is and the bigger profit you will get.

Take a look at it this way.Not EVERY computer uses Windows 7.MANY MANY MANY of them still use Windows 98,ME,2000 and XP.
So if you want to sell your software MANY times,it is a bigger chance you will sell it if it works on MANY Windows operating systems than just on one or two.And the users surely won't spend a lot of money on new hardware AND new operating system just to be able to run your program lol.They will rather buy the program which does exactly the same thing from someone else who DOES support older hardware and Windows operating systems.

The software I am working on currently already for about 8 months is the UAC keyboard spy 1.0 and it WILL be completely supported on Windows 98 first edition or newer.

I always say: The more compatible your software is,more money you will earn on it.


----------



## Okedokey

S.T.A.R.S. said:


> Take a look at it this way.Not EVERY computer uses Windows 7.MANY MANY MANY of them still use Windows 98,ME,2000 and XP.



Theres issues with most of your argument, but the main one (to save time) is that the figures don't agree with you.

Windows XP makes up 45% of the total.  About the same marketshare as Windows Vista and Windows 7 combined (8.22% and 36.4% respectively).  So Windows XP represents less than half the developer market at best (February 2012 figures), but unfortunately its nose-diving. 

For productivity you're correct in some cases, for gaming you're not.  Many games that look better with DX11, need Windows 7 (rightly or wrongly).  The point is, Windows 7 is more stable, supports more hardware straight out of the box, faster and does more.  XP looks like its Fabre Castle 1985 style.  I use both, XP for work, Win 7 at home.  XP is painful in comparison to a nice machine running Win 7.  And don't give me this BS about me not knowing computers.

But essentially the trend is XP down at the same rate as Windows 7 goes up.  At current trajectory the trend shows about 18 months -  3 years left of XP market share mattering to anyone, thus developer interest.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

1. I never said you do not know how to use computers.I really do not see where you dragged out that information from lol.All I said is that there are many people who do not know how to properly use computers,but they think they do.I never mentioned you...

2. Yes Windows 7 IS better for games because of new DirectX 10 and 11,but I was not talking about the games at all...I was talking about the programs and their compatibility...

3. You said that Windows XP makes 45% of the total.Ok so?
I honestly do not care what percentage usage for every OS is since my programs are always compatible with any OS.So even if Windows 7 is 100% and XP is 0%,to me it's still the same.All I said is that MANY computers still use old OS...that's it...



Cheers!


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

Yes, but in the speed that new software and whatnot comes out, xp will not run on it anymore. I give it 10, 15 years max before xp will not work with anything. Look now for example, There are already computers that will not run xp anymore. And I was not talking about programs, I was talking about drivers.

Btw S.t.a.r.s , Why do you like xp so much? Vista Is more my type, but why is it that people like xp so much? Will be pleased to hear from you.


----------



## wolfeking

Having used 2000, XP, Vista, and 7 (these pics to prove it in the post your desktop thread http://www.computerforum.com/search.php?searchid=3418849) I personally like 2000 so much because of its small footprint. XP too to some degree, but it just looks too funky to me. 
Vista and 7 are ok for what they are, but I think they went too far with the eye candy. I don't feel that it is faster on my machines (Athlon II x2 M300, Core 2 T7100, T7200, and i3-380m) at least not noticeably. 

To each his own, but I am not changing because your arguments weather based in fact or in research, or in opinion does not take into account one thing. The fact that I Don't Care. Windows 7 could automate the house and drive my truck, I still would not care, as 2000 will do everything I need, so why upgrade to more than you need, and have to relearn the steps to do things and such?


----------



## Geoff

slipx44 said:


> Yes, but in the speed that new software and whatnot comes out, xp will not run on it anymore. I give it 10, 15 years max before xp will not work with anything. Look now for example, There are already computers that will not run xp anymore. And I was not talking about programs, I was talking about drivers.
> 
> Btw S.t.a.r.s , Why do you like xp so much? Vista Is more my type, but why is it that people like xp so much? Will be pleased to hear from you.



Do you mean 10-15 years from now?  If so, getting 20-25 years from an OS is unheard of.

The reason people like XP is because it just works.  Especially in corporate environments, which are still primarily running XP, there is no need to change to Windows 7 when your current OS works just fine and handles all the apps you need.  Licensing is also more of a pain with Windows 7.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

I like ALL Microsoft Windows operating systems.They are ALL great to me and there is not a SINGLE ONE I hate lol.

But Windows XP is the best to me for many reasons.Some of them are normal,some of them are stupid and some of them are weird.Of course that is just me lol.Here are few:

-Windows XP was the last OS that fits on the CD-ROM disk...
(Like I said...weird reasons)

-It has built-in nice and useful things...
(Nice and useful tools which you can use without using extra programs)

-It is compatible with almost any software...
(Most of the things work great on it with no problems.And if in the future programs stop supporting XP,there are still TONS of software for the same thing)

-It has nice classic look...
(It has nice classic look which is almost the same as the one from Windows 95/98 and you can also modify it to look the way you want to)

-Many things are easy to perform and easily found...
(The organization of how things are arranged is simple and logical)

-Problems...
(Easy to fix ANY problem.Of course that's easy on ANY OS if you know how to fix it lol)

-I like using older software to perform something...
(Newest is not always the best )

-Habit...
(If you are used to something and it works great and does everything you need great,there is no point in changing it)

-Cost...
(It would be a fortune if I decide to buy a new OS for all computers I have.Especially when here where I live Windows 7 costs around 300 dollars minimum.So 300 x TheNumberOfAllComputersIHave = A LOT OF MONEY)

-Less problems...
(Less problems with the functionality and stability.But I guess that's just me lol)

-It uses a lot less space than newest OS...
(XP uses only around 2 GB when it's installed while newest OS takes more.Sure that's not a problem for you,but imagine your HDD is 30 GB lol)

-Visual Studio 2002 support...
(Older versions of Visual Studio INCLUDING the newest ones work perfectly on XP while on Windows 7 for example Visual Studio 2002 and 2003 do not work at all or do not work properly.Of course there is always a way,but the hell with that lol)

-RAM memory...
(Just 128 MB of RAM memory is enough to run XP smoothly)

-OS family...
(The way things work and the way they are organized are the same as in older Windows such as Windows 95/98 only in XP they are just a little bit enhanced.And I just like that way)

-Driver support...
(It's easy to find drivers for XP OS.But of course that applies for newer OS too)

-Simplicity...
(The way how things work in XP is great and simple while in let's say Windows 7 it is totally different and I just don't like it.Of course that doesn't mean OS is bad.It's just different and I am an old fashion I guess)

-And a LOT more...
(Blablabla)



CONCLUSION:

All Windows operating systems are great.To some Windows 98 is great,to some it's Windows 2000,to some it's Windows XP,to some it's Windows Vista,to some it's Windows 7 and so on......

So which Windows OS is the best?
The answer is: NONE.They are all good.The best one is the one which does the job right for YOU on the way YOU want.

Like I said...I will be using Windows XP until at least 2020. simply because it does the job right on the way I want it to.
On the other hand to many OTHER people Windows 7 is the best and does the job right for THEM on THEIR way.
Same applies for ANY OS...




Cheers!


----------



## MyCattMaxx

And all this time I thought this was a Win 8 thread.

You have done a fine job of hijacking this thread S.T.A.R.S.


----------



## wolfeking

Pretty much everything about windows 8 has been said here within the first 5 pages. 

If there is a real problem here, I am sure that one of the mods could move the post onto a thread of their own.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

I don't mind people doing a little off topic, but STARS has gone way over the top in this thread.

I see a new post has been made and just find it is more crap about XP.
It's kind of a let down.

STARS could just start a thread about why XP is so great.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

I took my W8 comp and dropped the RAM to 1 gig.
It still boots and shuts down quicker than W7.

I am going to drop it to 512 megs later and see what happens.

I am wondering if one of my older comps will be able to run this where I had issues trying W7 on it.


----------



## wolfeking

there is always a possibly that it will boot when 7 wont. But 7 will boot on 256MB with DX7 graphics and a 2.53GHz P4m.


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

WRXGuy1 said:


> Do you mean 10-15 years from now?  If so, getting 20-25 years from an OS is unheard of.
> 
> The reason people like XP is because it just works.  Especially in corporate environments, which are still primarily running XP, there is no need to change to Windows 7 when your current OS works just fine and handles all the apps you need.  Licensing is also more of a pain with Windows 7.


Yes it is, but still it won't work for long anymore.Yes it is, but still it won't work for long anymore.


S.T.A.R.S. said:


> I like ALL Microsoft Windows operating systems.They are ALL great to me and there is not a SINGLE ONE I hate lol.
> 
> But Windows XP is the best to me for many reasons.Some of them are normal,some of them are stupid and some of them are weird.Of course that is just me lol.Here are few:
> 
> -Windows XP was the last OS that fits on the CD-ROM disk...
> (Like I said...weird reasons)
> 
> -It has built-in nice and useful things...
> (Nice and useful tools which you can use without using extra programs)
> 
> -It is compatible with almost any software...
> (Most of the things work great on it with no problems.And if in the future programs stop supporting XP,there are still TONS of software for the same thing)
> 
> -It has nice classic look...
> (It has nice classic look which is almost the same as the one from Windows 95/98 and you can also modify it to look the way you want to)
> 
> -Many things are easy to perform and easily found...
> (The organization of how things are arranged is simple and logical)
> 
> -Problems...
> (Easy to fix ANY problem.Of course that's easy on ANY OS if you know how to fix it lol)
> 
> -I like using older software to perform something...
> (Newest is not always the best )
> 
> -Habit...
> (If you are used to something and it works great and does everything you need great,there is no point in changing it)
> 
> -Cost...
> (It would be a fortune if I decide to buy a new OS for all computers I have.Especially when here where I live Windows 7 costs around 300 dollars minimum.So 300 x TheNumberOfAllComputersIHave = A LOT OF MONEY)
> 
> -Less problems...
> (Less problems with the functionality and stability.But I guess that's just me lol)
> 
> -It uses a lot less space than newest OS...
> (XP uses only around 2 GB when it's installed while newest OS takes more.Sure that's not a problem for you,but imagine your HDD is 30 GB lol)
> 
> -Visual Studio 2002 support...
> (Older versions of Visual Studio INCLUDING the newest ones work perfectly on XP while on Windows 7 for example Visual Studio 2002 and 2003 do not work at all or do not work properly.Of course there is always a way,but the hell with that lol)
> 
> -RAM memory...
> (Just 128 MB of RAM memory is enough to run XP smoothly)
> 
> -OS family...
> (The way things work and the way they are organized are the same as in older Windows such as Windows 95/98 only in XP they are just a little bit enhanced.And I just like that way)
> 
> -Driver support...
> (It's easy to find drivers for XP OS.But of course that applies for newer OS too)
> 
> -Simplicity...
> (The way how things work in XP is great and simple while in let's say Windows 7 it is totally different and I just don't like it.Of course that doesn't mean OS is bad.It's just different and I am an old fashion I guess)
> 
> -And a LOT more...
> (Blablabla)
> 
> 
> 
> CONCLUSION:
> 
> All Windows operating systems are great.To some Windows 98 is great,to some it's Windows 2000,to some it's Windows XP,to some it's Windows Vista,to some it's Windows 7 and so on......
> 
> So which Windows OS is the best?
> The answer is: NONE.They are all good.The best one is the one which does the job right for YOU on the way YOU want.
> 
> Like I said...I will be using Windows XP until at least 2020. simply because it does the job right on the way I want it to.
> On the other hand to many OTHER people Windows 7 is the best and does the job right for THEM on THEIR way.
> Same applies for ANY OS...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers!


You are right in alot of ways, but I have to say... HOW LONG DID it TAKE YOU TO WRITE THIS!? But still, I am more like a kind of person who likes the newer looks of os's. 


MyCattMaxx said:


> And all this time I thought this was a Win 8 thread.
> 
> You have done a fine job of hijacking this thread S.T.A.R.S.


Yes he has.


----------



## wolfeking

slipx44 said:


> You are right in alot of ways, but I have to say... HOW LONG DID it TAKE YOU TO WRITE THIS!? But still, I am more like a kind of person who likes the newer looks of os's.


Exactly. There are plenty of people that do not like the looks of new OSs. It wouldn't be so bad, vista gave us an option of Windows Classic. 7 forces it on you. 8 is even worse, it looks like something that a 3rd grader on NCC1701D would be using. 

I guess what I am saying is At least give us an option M$, as long as we have only one style, I will stick to 2000/XP/vista until someone else knocks you from your pedestal.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

This is still a beta version.
We will see what the RC will look like later.

But I am sure it won't take long before people will have skin kits for it just like there are for XP and W7.


----------



## wolfeking

Maybe I am not getting my point across, or something. 

Windows 7 is what I am talking about mainly. Windows 8 is not really on my radar. 

And yea, there are all kind of kits out there, rainmeter and the like, but if I remember right, they only work for 30 days before you have to buy it. In this case thats $100 for windows, the cost of the program, I think it was like $19 or $29, and if you in my case, the cost of a hard drive and the trouble of setting it up. This is because 100/120 GB are used on 2000 with programs and data that I would want to keep. ok, since 7 takes up like 20GB or something (at least more than the 2 Gb that 2000 does at most) it will not fit all of my data and 7 too. Its bloated to say the least. 

My point is that windows should allow the classic theme again. You should not have to spend yet again more money after the fact to have something different.


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

Exactly, Thus the reason I say We need to stick to xp and vista.


----------



## spirit

MyCattMaxx said:


> I took my W8 comp and dropped the RAM to 1 gig.
> It still boots and shuts down quicker than W7.
> 
> I am going to drop it to 512 megs later and see what happens.
> 
> I am wondering if one of my older comps will be able to run this where I had issues trying W7 on it.


I ran Windows 7 on 1GB RAM once with an old IDE 5400RPM HDD, Athlon 64 3700+ CPU and a Radeon X800 XT Platinum, it ran fast enough, so I'd say Windows 8 should be all right on 1GB RAM and even 512MB.

I agree with STARS' continuous posts about XP though - everybody has their own opinions, some people like XP, some don't. I'm more on the "XP is getting old now" side, and please don't write another lengthy post mostly in capitals with random pictures in it to explain why XP is still good, we get the message now. :/


----------



## Geoff

slipx44 said:


> Exactly, Thus the reason I say We need to stick to xp and vista.


Vista?  Are you joking?  Vista has been the worst OS in over 10 years from Microsoft.  Windows 7 is far superior.


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

WRXGuy1 said:


> Vista?  Are you joking?  Vista has been the worst OS in over 10 years from Microsoft.  Windows 7 is far superior.



That's what you think. I like vista more win 7 sometimes. I don't know where you pull that nonsense from that vista is bad.


----------



## voyagerfan99

Vista itself is not bad. If you have a capable machine and all the service packs installed, it is a perfectly capable OS. If I had to choose between XP and Vista, I'd choose Vista. Though I run 7 on all my machines these days.


----------



## Geoff

slipx44 said:


> That's what you think. I like vista more win 7 sometimes. I don't know where you pull that nonsense from that vista is bad.


Vista has been plagued with problems, granted many have been fixed in the latest service pack but it's still a crappy OS, compared to Windows 7.  Windows 7 is what Vista should have been.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

I agree that Vista had many issues when it was rushed to release.
Even when I heard most of the bugs were worked out I didn't use it because they had W7 in the works.

It kind of reminds me of Win ME, it was plagued with a lot of issues.
I had a computer that came with ME and it wasn't long before I upgraded it to 98se.

XP was what ME was supposed to be like W7 is what Vista was supposed to be.

But these are just my opinion.

So far W8 doesn't seem buggy but it is fairly based on a stable W7.


----------



## voyagerfan99

MyCattMaxx said:


> *Beginning snip*
> 
> XP was what ME was supposed to be like W7 is what Vista was supposed to be.
> 
> But these are just my opinion.
> 
> So far W8 doesn't seem buggy but it is fairly based on a stable W7.



Everything you said is true. Windows 8 IS stable, but the GUI is just total garbage, especially when being used on a desktop or non-touchscreen laptop.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

I suspect there will be a graphic change for non touch screen desk top users.
I'm even wondering if maybe they will do a second beta cp release to help address the feedback they are getting from users.
I have sent a couple of my complaints already.

The biggest issue I have with W8 is that there is a "Kill Switch" built into it.
But I assume once the final version is released someone will come up with a hack for it.
Now this is a suspicion and I am not talking about how to hack anything so I shouldn't be in violation of the rules.


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

WRXGuy1 said:


> Vista has been plagued with problems, granted many have been fixed in the latest service pack but it's still a crappy OS, compared to Windows 7.  Windows 7 is what Vista should have been.



It had probs when it came out, but now you can do stuff to make like any other os. To me vista is great.


----------



## tremmor

With all the comments about Vista and Me im glad i missed them. 
Loved XP Pro and 7 Pro. May goto windows 8 Pro. 
When i get bored and looking for another adventure. Don't need to now though. 
Enjoying 7 now and will be supported for a while. Wasn't like that in the beginning. 
Another learning curve for me when started.


----------



## spirit

WRXGuy1 said:


> Vista?  Are you joking?  Vista has been the worst OS in over 10 years from Microsoft.  Windows 7 is far superior.


Vista is by no means the worst OS ever, and whilst I agree Windows 7 is much better than Vista, if I had the choice between say XP or Vista, I'd go for Vista.



			
				voyagerfan99 said:
			
		

> Vista itself is not bad. If you have a capable machine and all the service packs installed, it is a perfectly capable OS. If I had to choose between XP and Vista, I'd choose Vista. Though I run 7 on all my machines these days.


I'd rather have Vista over XP too, and yes I run Windows 7 on all my machines bar two older ones which Windows 7 would struggle on. 



			
				MyCattMaxx said:
			
		

> So far W8 doesn't seem buggy but it is fairly based on a stable W7.


The Consumer Preview is much more stable than the Dev was. Not been BSOD'ed once with the CP whereas with the Dev I was getting like two or three BSODs in an hour. So far stability and speed-wise, Windows 8 is looking to be pretty good, but I've got to agree with the guys here who say the UI is horrible - it is! I think maybe Microsoft are perhaps trying to hard. We all know the good old saying - "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", I think the same applies for the Start Button/Menu. Metro is horrible on my 24" monitor, it just doesn't feel right.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

Well look at it this way people.
Microsoft NEEDS to make new things ALL THE TIME and that is not an easy task.
Sometimes their ideas are good,sometimes not.
All in all it's not easy.

You should try making SO MANY new things in a such short period of time and you would see that it's harder than it may seem.

Until now Microsoft has made MANY operating systems and each one of them has SOMETHING what is useful to people.
To some people it's this,to some people it's that,to some people it's something else and so on...
All in all I think they are doing a pretty good job because they have made many different operating systems and EVERY PERSON on this planet Earth CAN find an OS that fits their need GREAT especially considering they do this to fit the needs of all the people on this planet...

There is/are no bad operating system(s).Only bad user(s) with small amount of knowledge in order to use them properly...




Cheers!


----------



## spirit

S.T.A.R.S. said:
			
		

> Microsoft NEEDS to make new things ALL THE TIME and that is not an easy task.


I don't think they do. Windows 7 is a very stable product, works well, and most people like it and recommend it, so why does Windows 8 need to come out so soon after the release of 7? The same goes for Office 2010, a beta for the next version of Office is apparently going to be here this summer. If anything, the constant software upgrades/replacements are were Microsoft are going wrong. Most people haven't bought the latest release of their software before the next release is thrown into their face. I know many people who have only just upgraded from Office 2007 to 2010 and now not two years after the release of 2010, a beta for the next release is on its way. It's a bit ridiculous really. I can see why Windows 7 got released so quickly after Vista though, and the same goes for why XP was released quickly after Me.



			
				S.T.A.R.S. said:
			
		

> Until now Microsoft has made MANY operating systems and each one of them has SOMETHING what is useful to people.


Yes, I do agree with this, for something for everybody in each edition of Windows.



			
				S.T.A.R.S. said:
			
		

> There is/are no bad operating system(s).Only bad user(s) with small amount of knowledge in order to use them properly...


I kind of agree with you here too. Usually though it's bad software and drivers as well as bad hardware which can cause OS instability and make believe that their OS is "bad". Mind you though, the user decided to install that software and/or hardware so you can't blame the OS for that. Some people just demand too much from an OS too, I guess.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

They need W8 because they are losing market share without a metro based touch screen app.
They are way behind the competition without it


----------



## Geoff

vistakid10 said:


> I don't think they do. Windows 7 is a very stable product, works well, and most people like it and recommend it, so why does Windows 8 need to come out so soon after the release of 7? The same goes for Office 2010, a beta for the next version of Office is apparently going to be here this summer. If anything, the constant software upgrades/replacements are were Microsoft are going wrong. Most people haven't bought the latest release of their software before the next release is thrown into their face. I know many people who have only just upgraded from Office 2007 to 2010 and now not two years after the release of 2010, a beta for the next release is on its way. It's a bit ridiculous really. I can see why Windows 7 got released so quickly after Vista though, and the same goes for why XP was released quickly after Me.
> 
> 
> Yes, I do agree with this, for something for everybody in each edition of Windows.
> 
> 
> I kind of agree with you here too. Usually though it's bad software and drivers as well as bad hardware which can cause OS instability and make believe that their OS is "bad". Mind you though, the user decided to install that software and/or hardware so you can't blame the OS for that. Some people just demand too much from an OS too, I guess.



If you think this is bad look at Mac, they release a new OS every year now.  Not to mention all of their software only works on the latest OS, so if you want iCloud you need their latest OS.  I do agree though that they need to slow down.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

Yes I also agree that Microsoft should slow down a little bit.
But the reason why they are probably doing this is because there is a BIG competition in the world and they always try to beat them all to be number ONE so that they can make a lot of money...more than anyone else.


----------



## spirit

S.T.A.R.S. said:
			
		

> But the reason why they are probably doing this is because there is a BIG competition in the world and they always try to beat them all to be number ONE so that they can make a lot of money...more than anyone else.


I suppose so, Microsoft always want to be the leaders.



			
				MyCattMaxx said:
			
		

> They need W8 because they are losing market share without a metro based touch screen app.
> They are way behind the competition without it


I suppose so too, Microsoft don't currently have an OS for the latest tablets really. But what I don't get is why they just don't make a modified version of Phone 7 for the tablets? Us regular laptop/desktop users don't need or want all the extra stuff Windows 8 comes with to make it more tablet-friendly.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

I now have W8 set up just like a desktop.
It looks and acts the same as W7 does.


----------



## Dragunov IV 424

MyCattMaxx said:


> They need W8 because they are losing market share without a metro based touch screen app.
> They are way behind the competition without it



We do not need Win8. They can just update win7.


----------



## Des_Zac

WRXGuy1 said:


> If you think this is bad look at Mac, they release a new OS every year now.  Not to mention all of their software only works on the latest OS, so if you want iCloud you need their latest OS.  I do agree though that they need to slow down.



But you have to look at it from the price point too. You could buy Snow Leopard, Lion, and the upcoming Mountain Lion, and it still costs less than Windows 7. I think you're looking at it the wrong way.

Edit: 500 posts!


----------



## MyCattMaxx

slipx44 said:


> We do not need Win8. They can just update win7.


You are not thinking again, are you?

Microsoft needs Windows 8 because they are way behind in the mobile browser area, that has already been brought up in this thread.
If you don't want W8 there isn't going to be anyone putting a gun to your head to get, unless you buy a new store bought comp.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

MyCattMaxx said:


> ...there isn't going to be anyone putting a gun to your head to get...



Why do you think I still use Windows XP? 





That moment I just told him: ALRIGHT ALRIGHT I WILL USE WINDOWS XP JUST DON'T KILL ME I HAVE A WIFE AND KIDS!!!

And he told me: You don't have a wife and kids!

And me: .........some day I might...


LOL!


----------



## tremmor

There is a lot of people involved in the development that goes on and on. 
Its strictly a beta ver. People that do install welcome the challenge and they feedback and fix and fix. One day it will be released to the market. If my Windows 7 Pro is obsolete and getting near the end of the road i will upgrade. Not yet.......


----------



## MyCattMaxx

So far I have found W8 to be easier on resources than W7.
It also boots and shuts down faster, but that is not a really big issue to me.
Windows Explorer is set up different, I kind of like the way they set some of it up.
This is a pic of part of a tutorial I made, but shows the changes.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

OTHERWISE:





(And a lot more...hehehe)...

MUHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


----------



## byteninja2

It would be good idea if it was called windows tablet and windows 7 will still be for sale for laptops and desktops. Windows 8 isn't good with a keyboard and mouse.


----------



## tremmor

Ya have to understand that windows is not updated for a lifetime. Just like a program and no diff. one or two yr updates. then expired and buy again. As with many programs. 

think the updates for all ver's have been around 6 or 8 yrs before expiring. Not bad.


----------



## MyCattMaxx

byteninja2 said:


> It would be good idea if it was called windows tablet and windows 7 will still be for sale for laptops and desktops. Windows 8 isn't good with a keyboard and mouse.


I have made several minor changes and it is easy to use with a mouse and keyboard.
I even changed start-up so it boots into the desktop instead of the metro tiles.
I am a desktop kind of guy and don't care for the Metro crap.

But so far I see no need to pay to have W8 for myself.
I do like some of the changes, but so far it is not worth the cost to move over for the differences.
But this is just a beta release and we shall see what changes will be made in the RC release.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

Well this is just a beta.They will probably give an option to choose between metro and desktop.
I hope...

If not,I will bomb the Microsoft =D


----------



## Okedokey

Microsoft are trying to socialise the new tablet GUI (Windows 8) to their base of customers.  In many people's eyes that’s the future.  Im not so sure.  

Mobile computing is the future in all likelihood, and Windows has always been the default.  That is a massive strategic risk for Microsoft .  So Windows has to do something to make their system the standard in a changing use pattern.  That’s Windows 8.  Pretty basic stuff.  And Stars, commercial reality and "need" have nothing to do with one another, so enough with the XP is all you need argument.  If you were God we'd be driving Model T's.  Better for the environment I guess, although probably not


----------



## spirit

Just tried Windows Phone 7 on the my Dad's new Nokia Lumina 710. The whole "Metro" UI works really well for Phone 7 on the smartphone and I imagine it also works well for the tablets, but it just doesn't work on a 24" monitor with Windows 8...  Nice concept for mobile devices, but not good for the desktop. 



			
				bigfella said:
			
		

> Mobile computing is the future in all likelihood


I agree. People are already starting to rely on their tablets and smartphones more. I've got a friend who recently ditched his laptop for an iPad 2 and uses that as his PC. He does all his homework on it, all his emails on it, it's basically just like his PC. In the future everybody's probably going to be doing this, apart from the gamers who'll stick with the good old desktop PCs.  



			
				bigfella said:
			
		

> Mobile computing is the future in all likelihood, and Windows has always been the default. That is a massive strategic risk for Microsoft .


Yes, Windows has always been the 'default' for desktops/laptops, but Microsoft have never really taken off in the mobile world. More people have Android and iOS based phones than they do WinMo. I think Windows 8 is their opportunity to get some market share in the mobile world and in order to get some market share Microsoft have made sure that Windows 8 is as phone/tablet-friendly as possible. That means making use of touchscreens and having an "app store" and having the whole Metro UI (which does work well on Phone 7 on smartphones), but by adding these 'improvements' to Windows, it makes it less friendly for the desktops and laptops, which do not use touchscreen but rather keyboards and mice. Microsoft must've had a hard time deciding whether to make Windows 8 as phone and/or tablet-friendly as possible or making Windows 8 as desktop and/or laptop-friendly as possible - and I think they went for the tablet-friendliness option. I think this may have been a mistake because just by reading this thread and reading people's opinions on both the Dev and Consumer Previews on the internet, people don't seem to really like Windows 8 on their desktops and laptops. Some people reckon Windows 8 is going to be like the next Windows Vista - tries to introduce new ideas but fails in doing so. However, whilst Microsoft may lose out on the desktop/laptop (I'm just going to say "PC" market) market here, they main gain some market share in the mobile world, so maybe it's a good idea for the "tablet-friendliness" option. Who knows? Only time, and ultimately user opinions and sales figures, can answer the question. 

They're just my thoughts. 



			
				bigfella said:
			
		

> so enough with the XP is all you need argument


S.T.A.R.S., please stop with all the XP nonsense. :/ We get the message you like it. I think it's safe to call you "a Windows XP fanboy".


----------



## strollin

vistakid10 said:


> Just tried Windows Phone 7 on the my Dad's new Nokia Lumina 710. The whole "Metro" UI works really well for Phone 7 on the smartphone and I imagine it also works well for the tablets, but it just doesn't work on a 24" monitor with Windows 8...  Nice concept for mobile devices, but not good for the desktop.  ...


I've seen this same statement over and over about Metro "doesn't work on a desktop monitor".  While I'm not a fan of the Metro interface, it seems to work fine on my desktop.  I have all the tiles set to small so they're all uniform in size and I uninstalled virtually all of the Metro apps since they are pretty pathetic.  I can scroll back and forth with the mouse and can add as many new tiles as I wish.  It is completely functional although ugly and I spend very little time using Metro since I almost always click on the desktop tile and use Win 8 from there.  Metro might be OK if it was more customizable. 

I don't miss the Start menu in Win 8 much since I rarely use it in other versions of Windows either.  I prefer to add links to my desktop, then hide the icons and use a desktop toolbar on the taskbar to be able to access my apps.


----------



## scopestech

cabinfever1977 said:


> windows 8 beta is now out and i downloaded it,it is available from the microsoft site,2.3gb,took me 15-20minutes at 2mb per sec,thats fast.
> im going to put it on a flashdrive and install it on a spare harddrive to try out,its good until jan 2013,thats like a year.
> 
> anyone else download it and try it out yet?



I hated every piece of it. I loved it to start with, until it wouldnt run any programs of mine that needed net framework, then decided to bar me out of my other operating system (XP OEM) and then decided, once I ran recovery disks for XP, to kill my entire pc off and just tell me that windows 8 did not exist on boot.

I will be sticking with my 5 favourite OS for a lot longer methinks!

Windows 2000 Server (x86) \
Windows XP MCE (x86)       |  ONE PC, Multi O.S
Windows 7 Pro (x32)          /
Windows 7 Starter x64 (Netbook)
Windows 7 Home Premium x64 (Laptop)


----------



## MyCattMaxx

scopestech said:


> I hated every piece of it. I loved it to start with, until it wouldnt run any programs of mine that needed net framework,


I added the .net framework versions I needed.
It comes with V4.
I have V2, 3, 3.5 and 4 IIRC, I'm not at that comp to check.


----------



## spirit

scopestech said:
			
		

> it wouldnt run any programs of mine that needed net framework


It runs all my software OK inside VMware, so not sure what your problem is. My software is fairly new though, I'm talking about stuff like Visual Studio 2010 and Office 2007 and 2010. It comes with .NET Framework 4.0 so should work with anything that uses that or less.


----------



## S.T.A.R.S.

That is one of the reason why I make programs under .NET 1.0 so that people do not need to always install the newest versions and their service packs.


----------

