Keeperos

Member
  • Content count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Keeperos

  1. Since there are a lot of users saying how sorting apps first and folders bellow them isn't how it was done in XP, can I just say that I PREFER it NOT doing it like XP? This is Windows 8 after all. Personally, I PREFER the apps being on top and the folders bellow them JUST THE WAY THEY ARE NOW. After 15 years of using the various Windows iterations I actually find this the more preferable way. I don't see why it should be changed simply because "that's not how it was done in Windows XP".
  2. Here's another screen edges issue. After installing 1.3b0 the desktop icons flicker issue I had reported back at the pre-1.0 beta3 reappeared briefly. Again, with the "Top Screen Edge (snap) disabled, when I moved the mouse pointer at the top of the4 screen on the desktop the desktop icons would flicker. Enabling the Top Screen Edge, hitting the Apply button and then re-disabling it fixed it AFAICT but this together with the above post seem to indicate a possible reverting of the bug(s).
  3. Does logging out and back in help?
  4. Same as in Windows 7. Yep, reproduced both with StartIsBack under Windows 8 as well as with Microsoft's original Start Menu under Windows 7. It's in Microsoft's code, not Tihiy's (well, either that or he intentionally reproduced said behaviour). Personally I am not bothered by it but I wouldn't mind it being "rectified" either, definitely not a showstopper though or sth that should be given priority over other improvements already planned.
  5. You can always just use a blank 1x3 pixel start orb image That doesn't remove the spacing , Its more we need a option to remove the button and use the hotspot corner instead, you can also access the settings from right clicking on the start menu its self. I tried it just for laughs and it actually works just fine, there is not orb space left, what's more, when I click on the bottom down I still get the start menu to open! Cool!
  6. You were absolutely right. To test I set IE as the default browser and next time I opened the Start Screen it appeared with a Metro-style tile. I clicked it and it opened in Metro view. I then set Firefox as default and again, it was Desktop only view once more. Huh!
  7. I suspect I know why IE isn't in the recent list. This start menu cannot start Metro apps and even though IE has a desktop view it was originally designed to be a Metro app as well. Strangely enough, now when I open it from Start Screen it still switches to the desktop but I remember originally starting in Metro view.
  8. One very very minor issue I've encountered with a couple of games, sometimes when I start a game and click on the desktop (thus switching focus there) BEFORE the game has loaded and switched to fullscreen the start button orb stays as an overlay over the fullscreened game. Clicking once while in the game switches the focus back to the game and the orb disappears. I would hardly even consider it a bug as it has no appreciable effect but I thought I'd put it out there.
  9. You quoted the wrong post, for the full info answering your questions in detail as I have personally experienced it you should have read post #633. Now, understanding what that means and evaluating the importance of said improvements is a personal matter but for me they were a valid enough reason for the upgrade. Also, yes, in my personal experience, using my main and most powerful machine, Windows 8 made better use of my hardware and resulted in not only faster loading/shutting-down times but in all-around faster response times. YMMV. As for out-of-the-box-experience, you might be lucky with your machines but with my Gigabyte Sniper G1, after a fresh windows installation absolutely nothing works out of the box. The SATA3 controller needs a driver loaded to be recognized (even harder considering that's where the old boot HDD and the SSD are connected which means they need to be loaded during install time), USB3 ports don't work, audio doesn't work and ethernet is recognized as a PowerPC cpu.Other things too need taking care of. like newer chipset drivers etc. In windows 8, simply by virtue of how new they still are, all I had to install was the BigFoot Network Manager program for the ethernet. Plus, the Windows installation itself took about a third of the time Windows 7 took to install. SiB took me a total of 1 minute to install and setup. Big whoop! As for the "Microsoft launch propaganda" I have absolutely no idea what you are referring to so no, that's not it.
  10. In the purpose of keeping this thread-hijacking to a minimum I'm gonna ignore all of the rest and focus only on this. Because like I told you in the post directly above yours, Windows 8 introduces a pretty big number of improvements "under the hood". To put it as simply as possible, Windows 8 is faster than 7, more stable than 7 and supports technologies that, in the last 3 years have become the new standards in computing, out of the box. To set up Windows 7 on my PC I needed an hour for the installation of Windows and drivers alone, then another hour or two for the necessary tweaking. For Windows 8 I LITERALLY went for a drink of water and when I got back my PC was already in the log-on screen waiting to create a new user account, after which everything *just worked*. It indeed is your prerogative to think that the only choices are between an older and slower OS versus an OS that looks like it was designed by a 3-year old, however the rest of us here actually do know better. So, as it is clear that we can only agree to disagree, I would respectfully ask you to stop spamming a thread that is supposed to be about a specific piece of software whose sole purpose is to restore functionality that you appear to have no use for. Thank you.
  11. Oh for crying out loud, what is it with all the negativity? YES, there IS a point in getting back what we consider to be "lost functionality" in an otherwise (mostly) pretty good upgrade to Windows 7. Windows 8 compared to 7 are faster, leaner and already support natively and out of the box technologies that in Windows 7 you need to patch the cr@p out of like USB3/SATA3 and most importantly of all, SSDs. Yes ladies and gentlemen, Windows 8 are not only SSD aware but also SSD optimized, no longer do you need to crawl through 10 different menus to hunt down 20 different options to tweak Windows behaviour to play nice with SSDs. Defrag only triggers a TRIM command for SSDs while still defrags as always on normal HDDs, prefetch/superfetch is automatically disabled if the install drive is detected to be an SSD etc. Really the only gray areas still present are pagefile and indexing services. So yes, Windows 8 is a valid upgrade to 7 from a technological stand-point, especially for the price (30euro? Come on!). That however does not mean we can or should ignore the fact that the design team must have been pretty high on non-prescription drugs with their dubious (to put it mildly) design decisions. And most recently, Aero, really? What the hell was wrong with the glass effect that they felt they had to wait up 'till the very last moment before ditching? To sum up, there are roughly that many design flaws as there are tech merits to Windows 8 and I for one don't see why we shouldn't help tip the scales more towards the right direction. BTW, the whole point of StartIBack is to NOT remove functionality, the Start Screen is still there should you need it for whatever obscure reason...
  12. I tend to agree with that, that's an incredible number of hoops one would have to jump through just to get a 1$ piece of software working illegitimately. To me just plucking down an extra 3$ (or 5$ to begin with) sounds simpler, to a cheapskate using a cracked version would sound far simpler still. However you know best. Concerning VMs, I am confused. If the program reads the REAL HDD/MoBo IDs then it should still register as the same machine so unless there is a number of installations limit it should work indefinitely on the same machine. If it reads data specific to the VM then again, just create a VM in the early stages before customization, back it up and then go on creating the required variations off of that. It should still count as the same machine. To take this further, if you create VMs THAT often then my guess is that no single VM will go on working for more than 30 days in which case the trial period should be enough for your purposes. Finally, if you are in the uncommon position of having 20+ VMs functioning simultaneously (either by being active concurrently or successively/discretely) then chances are you are not an end-user but either an IT/Administrator or a company in which case you will need to purchase a license for commercial use.
  13. Yes, I first found that and reported it back in Beta3 while using the RP (8400) version. However I found that if you click there, the start menu still turns up so it basically is an aesthetics rather than a functionality issue. If you drag the mouse pointer bottom down you want to press the start button and if you click there the start button will still be pressed so it's ok.
  14. I believe the price is fair, very fair actually with its' two price points. As for activation, most hardware-id bound activations usually use 3 points of verification, a HDD (that may or may NOT be the boot hdd as some -like myself- replace the previous boot hdd with a newer/faster one but still keep the old one in the pc as a data dump), the motherboard and a 3rd one, usually it's the graphics card although some machines don't have one (on-board graphics) in which case sth else is used (like a 2nd HDD or the Windows installation itself) or only the two are used. The activation hold so long as at least one of the three parts is still in use. The activation doesn't carry on to newer parts that replaced older ones while the rest were kept. When all three the motherboard, graphics card and hdd (or whatever) leave the system it's a new system and that is it.
  15. Greek translation ready and sent