 BlitzenZeusBurnt Out CynicPremium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:2
 ·Frontier FiOS
| reply to La Luna
Re: What are the substantive reasons to reject Windows 8? Support for XP ends in 2014 when it should have ended in 2011, and the os was released in 2001. If the xp box isn't too antiquated you might put Win 7, otherwise you can put some nix distro on it if you're up for it.
Microsoft's next os is going in the same direction unfortunately.
--
I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires- Susan B. Anthony
Yesterday we obeyed kings, and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to the truth- Kahlil G. |
|
Mele20Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
kudos:4 | reply to La Luna
What it looks like (Desktop side) is XP IF your XP is set to use classic windows and buttons and using the advanced display Items list for further customization. The only real difference is that you cannot specify the Windows font you want but must use Microsoft's Segoe. It also looks a lot like Vista without Aero as Vista is very easy to use Advance Display/Items list and Classic windows and buttons. If you like XP classic look then you will prefer Win 8 over Win 7. But if you like Aero and rounded windows and buttons and fat rounded, way too padded tool tips, etc. then you will not appreciate the sleekness of Win 8 look.
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson |
|
 La LunaSurvived AshrafulPremium
join:2001-07-12
Warwick, NY
kudos:3 | reply to Woody79_00
said by Woody79_00:I actually like Aero. I liked it when it was first released, and was bummed when they removed it. Windows looks flat and ugly...even the colors look ugly without the transparency and such of Aero.....
^^^ This. Hate the look of Windows 8 (from what I've seen of it). Looks flat, dull and, well, ugly, almost like something from the 70's. I'll stick with Windows 7 on my laptop, which I love. Looks great and runs great. I also have a great XP Pro box, which I need a monitor for. As soon as I get that, I'll use that again too. Very happy with both, I see no need for Windows 8 right now.
--
The Alien in the White House
20,588 DEADLY TERROR ATTACKS SINCE 9/11 |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:7 | reply to psloss
said by psloss:But as others have posted, these two threads are presenting a narrow or false choice (upgrade or reject). You're interpreting the words more narrowly than I would. By "upgrade to Windows 8" I simply understood "replace use of previous versions by use of Windows 8".
I too never literally upgrade (as in, install one version on top of another), but that's mostly because version changes are so infrequent for me that I find it a useful time to do some much-needed spring cleaning. |
|
 dib22
join:2002-01-27
Kansas City, MO
kudos:2 | reply to Gershom 1624
The internet would be a safer place if every XP owner was as diligent as you  |
|
| reply to Gem
Microsoft is to Windows 8 what Charles Foster Kane was to Xanadu with Windows 8 awaiting the same ultimate fate of Kane's grand creation. |
|
 ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
 ·DSL EXTREME
| reply to Gem
For me, the question is: Why upgrade to 8?
I have one machine that shipped with 8. While there might be under-the-hood improvements, the end user result is just increased headaches. New setting locations, new "intuitive" features (that I have to minimize/remove), etc. I can't think of one thing new on Windows 8 that I can say saved me grief/time/effort/etc. over Windows 7.
So, I'll take a copy of Windows 8 if it ships on a new machine I happen to buy. I certainly wouldn't run out of my way to go pick it up on an existing Windows 7 machine. |
|
| reply to Gem
Based upon the posts in this thread and on other posts in other threads on the same subject this thread is in a sense comparable to an obituary for Windows 8. |
|
pslossPremium
join:2002-02-24
Alpharetta, GA | reply to dave
said by dave:That's not to say that the features are not good; they're simply not compelling enough reasons to upgrade.
Agree -- there are certainly advantages but they're outweighed by the disadvantages -- even though they may not be outnumbered in this context. The other problem after the upgrade license discount offer ended is the cost.
But as others have posted, these two threads are presenting a narrow or false choice (upgrade or reject). I can't remember seriously upgrading a Windows install after seeing the mess it made once. Installs starting with a fresh hard drive, but no upgrades.
From a consumer or mainstream point of view, it's much more a choice of phablet vs. PC than Windows vs. Windows. (Which I think is why in part Win8 is like a variation of that line from an old House episode -- it's Windows, but not Windows.)
So yeah, I won't upgrade Windows 8 because the Metro interface is counterproductive for me and because of the cost premium. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't buy it. Next time I buy a PC, Eight could be hundreds of $US cheaper than the alternatives and that would be compelling. (Although next time I buy a PC, it might have whatever they decide to call Windows Blue on it instead of Eight.) |
|
|
|
 CylonRedPremium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County | reply to pnjunction
I am finding with Win 7 I am using the desktop icons less, now that I can pin programs/files on the Start button and the Start button acts like I would expect it to. It was the reason I hated the XP Start button and would only use the classic Start button - the XP start button had very frustrating tendencies.
--
Brian
"It drops into your stomach like a Abrams's tank.... driven by Rosanne Barr..." A. Bourdain |
|
BlitzenZeusBurnt Out CynicPremium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:2 | reply to pnjunction
I was making toolbars due to programs covering up desktop icons since 9x. |
|
 pnjunctionTeksavvy ExtremePremium
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
kudos:1 | reply to koitsu
said by koitsu: I do not dare try Windows 8. The more I see , the less I'm inclined to try it. Hah yeah in my limited experience the only part that was truly offensive were the terrible native Metro apps. For me it was the garbage picture viewer. Ugly, confusing, and in the end less capable than the windows 7 or XP versions. Now as an 'advanced' user I would just install 3rd-party apps that I like better, but it's a shame the average user gets stuck with that touchscreen-pushing crap.
I think I could actually grow to like the start screen thing. On Windows 7 as I increasingly multi-task I'm finding the desktop icons increasingly annoying to use since it requires me to minimize everything I'm doing to use them. (Here's a question: can anyone tell me the purpose of the desktop peek on the side of the taskbar when all you can do is see all the icons you want to use, but not actually use them?) In theory once I got that start screen set up with all my common shortcuts, it would be easier and faster to use than desktop icons.
As far as windows 7 vs XP, there are only a few reasons why I like 7 more these days. The task bar is a bit better with the big icons, the live previews and right-click actions (like recent documents in word, tasks in outlook, most visited pages in browsers, etc.). In general windows 7 is prettier with the themes and transparencies. It's better than XP at finding what you want if you just hit start button and start typing. I think some of the Explorer features like being able to click on any level of the path to go there are new? (Took me a while to get used to this instead of the Up button which disappeared, but it is better as you get exactly where you want with one click.)
Still these are pretty minor I could go back to XP and not miss them too much. |
|
 sclementSClementPremium
join:2002-06-23
Spanish Fort, AL | reply to Gem
On the positive side, IMHO Win8 can give a few more years of usability for Vista users, particularly laptops. On the negative side, power management, which worked superbly in Win7, seems to be indiscriminately ineffective, i.e., it powers down the system one day and fails to do so the next.
--
Loc: Gulf Coast of AL
|
|
 Woody79_00I run Linux am I still a PC?Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state | reply to Mele20
I actually like Aero. I liked it when it was first released, and was bummed when they removed it. Windows looks flat and ugly...even the colors look ugly without the transparency and such of Aero.
I can understand though why some people may prefer that, especially if they don't have the dedicated GPU to really handle Aero (one with a 7.1 GPU rating for Aero or higher) or not using it on battery to conserve power.
on the Desktop, i love Aero....i actually use Flip 3d, Peek, etc to manage multiple windows...its a bummer they removed Flip3d from Win 8. |
|
Woody79_00I run Linux am I still a PC?Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state | reply to Gem
Per Request, Here is how you "Disable" Windows Smartscreen on Windows 8 so every 3rd party exe program you run on your PC is not sent back to Microsoft. » www.howtogeek.com/75356/how-to-t···ndows-8/Smartscreen Filter "Will still be turned on" in Internet Explorer 10. This just diaables it when you double click an installer file, and Smartscreen wants to send info about the file you are running back to MS in other words, it returns the handling of files back to Windows 7/XP which just gives a dialog with the name of the file and thats all. |
|
| reply to dib22
said by dib22:I have no idea why people stick with XP... was amazing for it's time, it's just a security sitting duck these days.
I have an XP machine and a newer Windows7 machine.
-----
I stay with XP because:
1) It works fine and does what I need it to do.
2) I don't want to waste money on hardware upgrades that otherwise I would not need.
3) Using router with firewall, software firewall with additional defense monitoring, AV and various system hardening methods, I don't feel that my WinXP is a sitting duck.
3a) Seconfig XP is a very useful freeware to tighten a WinXP system. I have used it for years.
»seconfig.sytes.net/
4) If Microsoft wanted me to upgrade from WinXP to Win7, they should have provided me with a direct upgrade path. As it stands, I would have to spend days re-installing programs and data. |
|
 JohnInSJPremium
join:2003-09-22
San Jose, CA
 ·PHONE POWER
 ·Comcast
| reply to oldmike
said by oldmike:Here I sit with a 2005 build XP desktop, a 2011 W7 laptop, and a 2012 W8 laptop.
I see very little difference at all between the three.
Your boot time on XP and 7 should be substantially slower. Your battery life on your win8 laptop (as measured in time per mAh of battery) should be substantially higher.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us |
|
Mele20Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
kudos:4 | reply to Xioden
I couldn't find any way to fix the so called "3D" look of rounded edges and fat raised looking windows. XP and Windows 8 are flat with square edges. I like sleek and flat not rounded and bloated. When I installed the Wiin 7 public beta on a virtual machine that rounded and raised looked was the first thing I noticed. The first thing I noticed on Win 8 was the square, flat look was back. So, it matters a lot to me. The very thing that many criticize about Win 8 is the very thing that appeals to me as it looks like XP NOT Win 7.
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson |
|
CylonRedPremium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
1 edit | reply to Mele20
said by Mele20:said by NotTheMama:Windows 7 is essentially Vista 3.0; there was the initial release of Vista, followed by the much updated & corrected versions of Vista--until M$ eventually "got it right", and finally Windows 7.
No, Vista is far superior to Win 7 because Vista is far more customizable to be just like XP GUI wise. XP Pro is the finest OS from Microsoft NOT Win 7 where even when using third party programs to correct the mess of the GUI in Win 7 it still is not nearly as good a GUI as XP and Vista. Uhhhh - right. At my last job I lost track how many times one of my bosses had to have Vista re-loaded. I knew the guy who had to reload the laptops and he got VERY tired of reloading Vista months after we started getting laptops with Vista.
Sorry - but Vista was crap (and well known crap) - my former boss found Win 7 to be light years better than Vista. In reality - all of the folks who had Vista in our office had large issues every year many times multiple times per year.
I had Win 7 running for 3 years without reloading with zero issues. Not sure why the GUI is not as good - I find the GUI and especially the Start button to be far superior in Win 7 than XP.
--
Brian
"It drops into your stomach like a Abrams's tank.... driven by Rosanne Barr..." A. Bourdain |
|
| reply to koitsu
said by koitsu:I'm probably that "knowledgable member who runs XP" that you refer to. Whee. :P
My list of reasons for staying with XP, at this point, is somewhere in the low hundreds (in the 1xx range), and I'm not exaggerating in the least.
It would take me weeks to create the full list of all the reasons (you are not the first person who would be inclined to ask me for such (I've had several)). Many of them are bugs in Windows 7 itself and have been fixed (even with SP1), and a good number are GUI or UI-related (read: not involving third-party software). These are outright bugs/flaws and not matters of opinion -- what is a matter of opinion, however, is how severe I consider them. They're major enough that they're deal-breakers for me when it comes to my own home workstatation, where I have no tolerance for fooling about.
Could you at least list a few of them, maybe a top 5 technical reasons you dislike Windows 7? Or is it really just the Windows 7 UI that you dislike?
--
less talk, more music |
|
