Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account



Photo

Now they're chopping up the Start Button's bones


  • Please log in to reply
173 replies to this topic

#76
submix8c

submix8c

    Inconceivable!

  • Patrons
  • 4,310 posts
  • Joined 14-September 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Windows 8 is the future it is superior, faster (bla bla...) change nothing (bla blah) blunt is not trolling (bla bla) clinging delusion.

I note that you've been a member since 2007 and have jumped from Vista->7->8 and... what? Nobody's knocking your point, but maybe you should go to Linux and post there as a fanboy instead.

I consider the post a troll due to... please reread your post. ;)

If you're the "same ColdFlo" found via Google, yes, you are rather opinionated... Do yourself a favor... Free Your Mind!

Edited by submix8c, 11 June 2012 - 10:33 AM.

Someday the tyrants will be unthroned... Jason "Jay" Chasteen; RIP, bro!

Posted Image



How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#77
CharlotteTheHarlot

CharlotteTheHarlot

    MSFN Master

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,054 posts
  • Joined 24-September 07
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

... where Vista was a fine product running on less than capable hardware, not so with Metro, where the hardware is fine but the software is crippled


A most excellent point. :thumbup

There are many reasons to call Windows 8 the next Vista, but as you point out in one important way, they are completely opposite.

There is no way for Microsoft and sycophantic fanboys to spin that yarn again. Current hardware like i3, i5, i7 can tear up any software that Microsoft creates, and then some. Vista was at least 2 years ahead of the average hardware and should never have been used on anything less than dual-core but it often was. They really had always been doing that exact same thing forever really. Releasing Windows (and even DOS) designed and tested on bleeding edge hardware to a consumer market where the average system was lagging by at least a year.

So we are really at an unprecedented time here. This will be the first time in my memory where the Microsoft OS release is easily handled by current average hardware. For example we can even easily run Win8 in a VM on Win7 or WinXP, or run WinXP or Win7 in a VM on Win8. The way this whole thing pans out may be in a different direction than we ever guessed. Perhaps the hardware will simply make Microsoft and their idiotic decisions completely irrelevant. Then Microsoft can limp away and succumb to their self-inflicted wounds.

... Let him who hath understanding reckon the Number Of The Beast ...


#78
Fredledingue

Fredledingue

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,267 posts
  • Joined 10-February 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Adapt or perish; the time it takes you to learn a new interface is nothing compared with the reduced stress from using it

Sure I'll adapt... and find a solution to avoid w8.
Not because we don't like it, in fact there are good things in it, it's just very badly, horribly implemented.
No, I'll avoid losing time with W8 because it will be dead in a few months.

There is no point in learning to use something that won't exist save on small hand-held devices which work completely differently anyway.

As the market is concerned Windows 8 will be DoA (Dead on Arrival).

You can already see it whith Micrososft backpedalling fast as they try to improve the app screen to make it closer to a classic desktop and pretend to put a fake start menu at the same place of the real one.
But it won't be enough to avoid a total fiasco.

You know ColdFlo, the poeple are not stupid: They will see very quickely that the only goal of Metro is to put advertisements on your monitor screen.
Just like you have adds on TV and on the radio, media companies find normal to bring adds to computer screens and Metro just serves this function.
It will not work. Poeple will reject it massively.

It's OK to have sponsor adds on websites, it's less OK to have adds everytime you turn on your PC.
There is a red line here which MS is crossing dangerousely.

Anyone who had used a PC before and who will be confronted with Metro will return their machine to the store and ask the vendor to remove this garbage.
___________________

Windows 7 is a step back from this precisely because of what you described. Grouping taskbar items means that I need an additional click to see what's open.

That's definitely not what I'd personally call a step back.



This illustrates well why user choice is so important.

Personally, I find the wordless taskbar icons harder to use, as they don't immediately convey as much information to me as the wide verbose taskbar buttons.
.....

The bottom line, of course, is that Windows has been eminently customizable to suit the user's way of working/thinking, but with Windows 8 and Metro this aspect starts getting palpably curtailed.


Yes, With W8 the MS team has lost touch with the userbase and its need of customization.

Out of respect, we are not telling which taskbar configuration is the best.
We give our opinions based on pesonal experience.
JorgeA and me we prefer text labelled buttons, Coffee prefer large visaly, rich icons.

Important Note: when a non-grouped taskbar is too cluttered, quickely drag it up and the buttons align on two rows instead of one.
It makes them already much easier to read.
Drag it one floor up and on 3 rows and you have almost the full text caption on all of them.

Now drag it even higher, to 1/4 of screen height. Wow, it's like you have a cool new "task arranger" without installing any freeware! (You just had to know that you can do it)

Then go even further and drag it to half of the screen. Wooah! ... Metrofied! :dazed: The uLtiMATE C*00*L!

And that's why it was important to remind.

Maybe someone will like the W8 Metro interface, why not.
The point is to have the option.
The option to enable or disable Metro.

Edited by Fredledingue, 11 June 2012 - 02:38 PM.

HTASoft.com

superchargedwindows9xig1.png
Still Using W98SE+++ ...Daily.

#79
CoffeeFiend

CoffeeFiend

    Coffee Aficionado

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,399 posts
  • Joined 14-July 04
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Windows 8 is the future it is superior

That's your opinion. To reuse your own words, one could say it's a delusion too. I'd say it's vastly inferior, and if that's the future of Windows, then my future is bound to be mostly Windows-free.

Adapt or perish

With Metro, Microsoft picked the "perish" option :yes:

the time it takes you to learn a new interface is nothing compared with the reduced stress from using it

It's easy to learn the new stuff, just like it's always been. It's just too bad that Metro is just a gimmicky hindrance, merely getting in your way. Win8 feels like a crippled version of Windows -- and borderline not calling it Windows anymore (closer to a phone OS)

I wouldn't say it will be another Vista. It'll be far worse than that!
Coffee: \ˈkȯ-fē, ˈkä-\. noun. Heaven in a cup. Life's only treasure. The meaning of life. Kaffee ist wunderbar. C8H10N4O2 FTW.

#80
JorgeA

JorgeA

    FORMAT B: /V /S

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 3,206 posts
  • Joined 08-April 10
  • OS:Vista Home Premium x64
  • Country: Country Flag
While researching something else, I came across this discussion of a performance problem for Windows 8.

There are questions as to whether the DPC Latency Checker works properly in Win8, but even if we ignore that data, the first eight lines of the chart and the observations at the top of the OP don't exactly put MS's new operating system in a favorable light.

And now, for some dark humorous relief, a quip seen in another thread on the same topic:

Install Windows 8 and make your PC as awesome as your phone!

--JorgeA

#81
submix8c

submix8c

    Inconceivable!

  • Patrons
  • 4,310 posts
  • Joined 14-September 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
I like this one better -

windows 7 is going to hold on longer then xp did, in the business world. win8 is for us dumb consumers, simply put.


Someday the tyrants will be unthroned... Jason "Jay" Chasteen; RIP, bro!

Posted Image


#82
MagicAndre1981

MagicAndre1981

    after Windows 7 GA still Vista lover :)

  • Patrons
  • 6,088 posts
  • Joined 28-August 05
  • OS:Vista Ultimate x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

whether the DPC Latency Checker works properly in Win8


no, this tool is so old. User here often upload xperf traces and the DPC checker driver itself causes high DPC latencies. This tool is made for XP nearly 10 years ago.
Posted Image

#83
JorgeA

JorgeA

    FORMAT B: /V /S

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 3,206 posts
  • Joined 08-April 10
  • OS:Vista Home Premium x64
  • Country: Country Flag


whether the DPC Latency Checker works properly in Win8


no, this tool is so old. User here often upload xperf traces and the DPC checker driver itself causes high DPC latencies. This tool is made for XP nearly 10 years ago.

MagicAndre,

I have a question about this. They say on their website:

DPC Latency Checker for Windows 7, Windows 7 x64, Windows Vista, Windows Vista x64, Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2003 x64, Windows XP, Windows XP x64, Windows 2000

Is it really suitable for Vista/Win7?

And a follow-up question: How about this one -- will this tool give more reliable results for Vista/Win7? (These folks do specify that Win8 is not supported.)

--JorgeA

Edited by JorgeA, 12 June 2012 - 11:48 PM.


#84
MagicAndre1981

MagicAndre1981

    after Windows 7 GA still Vista lover :)

  • Patrons
  • 6,088 posts
  • Joined 28-August 05
  • OS:Vista Ultimate x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

yes, this tool is better. I've linked it in my DPC tutorial.
Posted Image

#85
andreaborman

andreaborman

    Junior

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 50 posts
  • Joined 31-May 12
  • OS:XP Home
  • Country: Country Flag
Attached File  Classic Shell on Windows 8RP.JPG   98.45KB   13 downloads

I have finally done it. I have installed Windows 8 RP 32bit.

And as you can see there is more choice of colors for the start screen,like these cool pastel pink and pastel blue colors. Which I like better than the dark and drab colors in Windows 8 CP. And also I have the Windows XP start menu and look on my Windows 8 RP thanks to Classic Shell. The Aero theme is still on Windows 8 RP, but I am not using it.

And all of the Windows XP and Windows Vista software works on Windows 8 RP. And so do the Windows NT and 95 games,Microsoft Entertainment Pack, which are 16 bit software. Andrea Borman.
Andrea Borman.

#86
submix8c

submix8c

    Inconceivable!

  • Patrons
  • 4,310 posts
  • Joined 14-September 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

And as you can see there is more choice of colors for the start screen,like these cool pastel pink and pastel blue colors

ARRGGG! Shades of Win9x!!! That is something I NEVER did! Worse, working on someone else' PC it was GAWD-AWFUL to see anything! Give me DRAB so I can be HAPPY when I get something to "work"!

To each their own... Doubting the majority of Techies ever fiddled with it either (eye-candy)...

And all of the Windows XP and Windows Vista and Windows7 software works on Windows 8 RP.

More than likely (32-bit).

And so do the Windows NT and 95 games,Microsoft Entertainment Pack, which are 16 bit software.

Doubt that. You must NOT be referring to the DOS-based games. I.E. later Entertainment Packs were 32-bit as opposed to EARLIER ones. Indeed you needed the Windows 3.x 32-bit add-in to achieve it with many. Better read up on 16-bit... They will NOT run on XP and up hence my doubt (you NEED a dual-boot). Go ahead and try OLD Duke Nukem (could be wrong about that one)! ;)

edit - My bad - there is a "switch" for 16-bit...
http://www.winbeta.o...-says-microsoft
http://www.askvg.com...cation-support/
XP 16-bit problems -
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/324767
...and more than likely Vista and Win7...
SO... they must have FIXED the nasty "bugs"... Kind of like "Compatibility Mode"...

Edited by submix8c, 14 June 2012 - 11:21 AM.

Someday the tyrants will be unthroned... Jason "Jay" Chasteen; RIP, bro!

Posted Image


#87
andreaborman

andreaborman

    Junior

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 50 posts
  • Joined 31-May 12
  • OS:XP Home
  • Country: Country Flag

And as you can see there is more choice of colors for the start screen,like these cool pastel pink and pastel blue colors

ARRGGG! Shades of Win9x!!! That is something I NEVER did! Worse, working on someone else' PC it was GAWD-AWFUL to see anything! Give me DRAB so I can be HAPPY when I get something to "work"!

To each their own... Doubting the majority of Techies ever fiddled with it either (eye-candy)...

And all of the Windows XP and Windows Vista and Windows7 software works on Windows 8 RP.

More than likely (32-bit).

And so do the Windows NT and 95 games,Microsoft Entertainment Pack, which are 16 bit software.

Doubt that. You must NOT be referring to the DOS-based games. I.E. later Entertainment Packs were 32-bit as opposed to EARLIER ones. Indeed you needed the Windows 3.x 32-bit add-in to achieve it with many. Better read up on 16-bit... They will NOT run on XP and up hence my doubt (you NEED a dual-boot). Go ahead and try OLD Duke Nukem (could be wrong about that one)! ;)

edit - My bad - there is a "switch" for 16-bit...
http://www.winbeta.o...-says-microsoft
http://www.askvg.com...cation-support/
XP 16-bit problems -
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/324767
...and more than likely Vista and Win7...
SO... they must have FIXED the nasty "bugs"... Kind of like "Compatibility Mode"...


I have got the games from Microsoft Entertainment Pack.Which was made for Windows 95 and Windows NT but works on all other versions of Windows and on Windows 8. But no,they are not the Doss games. I downloaded MEP from this website here-My link

Andrea Borman.

Edited by andreaborman, 14 June 2012 - 12:13 PM.

Andrea Borman.

#88
Fredledingue

Fredledingue

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,267 posts
  • Joined 10-February 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
With some effort and third party apps one can turn W8 into an almost pallatable system.

Still W7 is more advanced IMO.

HTASoft.com

superchargedwindows9xig1.png
Still Using W98SE+++ ...Daily.

#89
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,520 posts
  • Joined 27-November 10
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
I'm not sure if it's a security flaw in Windows 8 but I managed to edit a protected file using the 16-bit "edit.com" command. Could anyone else check it? I haven't got access to Windows 8 at the moment.
Posted Image
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#90
MagicAndre1981

MagicAndre1981

    after Windows 7 GA still Vista lover :)

  • Patrons
  • 6,088 posts
  • Joined 28-August 05
  • OS:Vista Ultimate x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

what have you done? Use psr.exe to show all steps.
Posted Image

#91
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,520 posts
  • Joined 27-November 10
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
As I said I can't check it myself now but you can just try to create a text file, deny access to it for everyone and then run edit.com from commandline and try to edit the file.
Posted Image
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#92
Tripredacus

Tripredacus

    K-Mart-ian Legend

  • Super Moderator
  • 9,893 posts
  • Joined 28-April 06
  • OS:Server 2012
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

32bit Windows 8 is likely going to be a legacy OS for people to use on older hardware. Of all the new hardware I am testing this month:
2 AMD boards
10 Intel boards
4 notebooks

All of them except 1 have UEFI 2.3.1. So in this case, 32bit Windows (7 or even 8) is not supported on those devices.

So because many manufacturers are using the new spec, I forsee that most Windows 8 in the market will be 64bit, or tablets which will have RT for ARM. And even the tablets will be from few manufacturers, since there is some limiter in the channel for who can sell ARM based products for some reason.
MSFN RULES | GimageX HTA for PE 3-5 | lol probloms
msfn2_zpsc37c7153.jpg

#93
JorgeA

JorgeA

    FORMAT B: /V /S

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 3,206 posts
  • Joined 08-April 10
  • OS:Vista Home Premium x64
  • Country: Country Flag

All of them except 1 have UEFI 2.3.1. So in this case, 32bit Windows (7 or even 8) is not supported on those devices.

So because many manufacturers are using the new spec, I forsee that most Windows 8 in the market will be 64bit, or tablets which will have RT for ARM. And even the tablets will be from few manufacturers, since there is some limiter in the channel for who can sell ARM based products for some reason.

Tripredacus,

So I gather that motherboards with UEFI can't run 32-bit OS's? I didn't know that.

--JorgeA

#94
Tripredacus

Tripredacus

    K-Mart-ian Legend

  • Super Moderator
  • 9,893 posts
  • Joined 28-April 06
  • OS:Server 2012
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator


All of them except 1 have UEFI 2.3.1. So in this case, 32bit Windows (7 or even 8) is not supported on those devices.

So because many manufacturers are using the new spec, I forsee that most Windows 8 in the market will be 64bit, or tablets which will have RT for ARM. And even the tablets will be from few manufacturers, since there is some limiter in the channel for who can sell ARM based products for some reason.

Tripredacus,

So I gather that motherboards with UEFI can't run 32-bit OS's? I didn't know that.

--JorgeA


Its not so much "can't" its more like "probably won't". As I struggled with getting things figured out about it... I was not able to explain the 95% failure rate of being able to deploy Win7 32bit on them, and the 95% success rate while using 64bit. I've done probably over 50 (or maybe 100) deployments on this new spec and was never able to explain why I wasn't getting a 100% replication of either kind.

Intel and the other ODMs I was in contact with didn't really have any idea of what the trouble was. It took me about 2 months to get the "32bit not supported on UEFI" email from Microsoft. While the official line of why Win 8 32bit isn't supported because it can't take advantage of UEFI 2.3.1's features, I'm certain this slight incompatibility also weighs heavily into their decision.

Now for the technical reasoning behind this, it has to do with the bootloader. You should be able to deploy 32bit Win8 (or Win7 for that matter) onto a UEFI 2.3.1 spec board as long as you use unattend to only have 1 partition. Its when there is a System Reserved (or similar) partition involved that Windows does a kabooom on this hardware spec. It was really annoying when I didn't have the answer, but now that I do we just adapt to it. What else can you do?
MSFN RULES | GimageX HTA for PE 3-5 | lol probloms
msfn2_zpsc37c7153.jpg

#95
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,520 posts
  • Joined 27-November 10
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag
@Tripredacus
Are you sure about that? I've got an UEFI motherboard (ASRock A55 Pro3) and had no problems with installing Windows 2000 on it. Is it only related to UEFI 2.3.1?

Edited by tomasz86, 15 June 2012 - 04:02 PM.

Posted Image
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#96
Tripredacus

Tripredacus

    K-Mart-ian Legend

  • Super Moderator
  • 9,893 posts
  • Joined 28-April 06
  • OS:Server 2012
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

I can't speak about XP and older OSes. The problem seems to be with the newer Bootmgr introduced with Vista/2008. Here is some reading.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/930061
MSFN RULES | GimageX HTA for PE 3-5 | lol probloms
msfn2_zpsc37c7153.jpg

#97
JorgeA

JorgeA

    FORMAT B: /V /S

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 3,206 posts
  • Joined 08-April 10
  • OS:Vista Home Premium x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Now for the technical reasoning behind this, it has to do with the bootloader. You should be able to deploy 32bit Win8 (or Win7 for that matter) onto a UEFI 2.3.1 spec board as long as you use unattend to only have 1 partition. Its when there is a System Reserved (or similar) partition involved that Windows does a kabooom on this hardware spec. It was really annoying when I didn't have the answer, but now that I do we just adapt to it. What else can you do?

Thanks, Tripredacus. I was wondering if it was a sneaky way to leave 32-bit OS's off the plane.

--JorgeA

#98
Tripredacus

Tripredacus

    K-Mart-ian Legend

  • Super Moderator
  • 9,893 posts
  • Joined 28-April 06
  • OS:Server 2012
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

Well it seems that the UEFI thing was decided back in 2006 as you can read in that KB article. Remember this was even before it was expected that Windows 8 would only have a 64bit and 128bit version. :rolleyes:

So what ended up happening was that after initial development, the UEFI spec was only to support 64bit. And it turns out the market didn't exactly trend along with the projections, so we now have a situation where hardware supports UEFI 2.3.1 (due to manufacturers getting product out to support Windows 8) and still quite a demand for 32bit OS. And most of that demand is from the Enterprise and ISVs, not so much the consumer market.
MSFN RULES | GimageX HTA for PE 3-5 | lol probloms
msfn2_zpsc37c7153.jpg

#99
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 14,562 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
OT :ph34r:, but not much ;), and about shooting one's feet, seemingly MS decided to shoot it's parrtner's feet:
http://www.telegraph...-fragments.html

Guess WHICH part of Windows 8 will be anyway available to users of the "old" (on average less than one year old) Lumia's? :rolleyes: :
http://www.phonesrev...-800-next-week/


jaclaz

#100
CoffeeFiend

CoffeeFiend

    Coffee Aficionado

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,399 posts
  • Joined 14-July 04
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
That's funny. Windows phones already don't sell (they're like 1% of the market), Nokia is just about the only company that still bothers making them, and Nokia's sales are quickly dropping: 24.4M smart phones sold in Q1/2011, to 19.6 in Q4/2011 to a mere 11.9 in Q1/2012. And only a small part of that are Windows phones too (2M -- yep, their old Symbian phones outsell them 5 to 1). Their sales dropped more than 50% in a year, in a market that's very healthy and with HUGE growth (50% in a single year). Nokia's doing so poorly (a €929 million net loss in Q1/2012) that they're currently cutting 10000 jobs and shutting plants down. And with this announcement, analysts (Nomura Holdings Inc) just slashed their sales predictions of Nokia devices by 41% which is understandable, because who wants to buy an obsolete phone that already wasn't selling? I don't see those Surface tablets selling much better either.

Meanwhile, iDevices are selling like crazy (enough to have made Apple the most valuable company i.e. the one with the biggest market value worldwide), and Google's activating more than 900,000 Android devices per day. MS already lost the game and they're turning Windows into garbage in order to win a war that's already lost.
Coffee: \ˈkȯ-fē, ˈkä-\. noun. Heaven in a cup. Life's only treasure. The meaning of life. Kaffee ist wunderbar. C8H10N4O2 FTW.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users