Don't forget the whole "closed OS" and being a ***** to code for, which were the main reasons why the company I work for isn't 'upgrading' to Windows 8.Bhaalspawn said:
Poll: So windows 8 then...
- Thread starter SnowBurst
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Windows 8 should have been Windows 7 SP2 since it is pretty much the same thing except the startup screen.
Windows 8 certification does not mean that games that are not certified by MS will not work, just that Windows 8 certified games are guaranteed to work.
Windows 8 certification does not mean that games that are not certified by MS will not work, just that Windows 8 certified games are guaranteed to work.
Well I'd love if they all ditched Windows but I don't think most of them have that privilege. They'll stick with it.
Nothing will happen. Dev will just ignore the certification thing - which I assume is optional. If MS's pushes it, you can expect a possible legal backlash and a second anti-trust lawsuit against them.
LOL. They have a monopoly, they aren't going to beg anyone. They can release a complete turd and still make millions. The only thing they have to fear is the DoJ breathing down their neck if they piss off too many people.L0dest0ne said:
Hence the quotation marks.Bhaalspawn said:
While not a completely closed OS Microsoft appears to be steering in that direction, a notion enforced by their past actions. (search for Microsoft anti-trust to see why)
Whether or not this is Microsoft's plan is up for debate.
As someone who has actually developed for Windows RT (which is what I assume you are referring to, when you say "closed OS"), I have only one thing to say: wat.Ed130 said:
Of all these sandbox operating systems (Android, iOS, etc.) WindowsRT far exceeds all of them in how easy (and how well defined) it is to program for. MS is catering to the developers like no other company by introducing the most AWESOMEST (yes, that's a word in my dictionary) features to what is already the most feature rich language (C#), which is what you should use when you program for WinRT (or the new .NET for that matter).
I mainly deal with hardware, it was one of the programmers who stated it was a *****.Mikael Guldborg Rask Andersen said:
He also dislikes C as well.
Don't have a Windows button, and I'm not going to go out and buy a keyboard that does so I can spend more money on an OS I don't want or need. It still doesn't avoid the fact that I just boot to desktop ATM by default anyway, no need for shortcuts.Megacherv said:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Windows-8-Metro-RTM-Server-2012-Release-Preview,16666.htmlAthinira said:
It would appear Microsoft is clamping down on that, and wants you to use Metro instead.
Vista wasn't that bad, you just had to get used to a few things.
Those few things, however, were annoying to get used to - same with 8. By the end of the week I tried using 8, I was ready to throw my laptop out the window thanks to how infuriating is was for me. It had a couple of nice features, but in general I was likely to just get rid of them anyway as they took up too much screen space.
Honestly though, I'm utterly confused in what way Windows 8 is a huge leap forward.
Booting faster is something I can get a longer lasting equivalent of by buying an SSD - which I've already done. Windows 7 boots in under 10 seconds most of the time, and being able to boot 2 or 3 seconds faster isn't going to be that much of an advantage. Whereas Windows 8 will no longer help my system boot faster once I move onto Windows 9, my SSD will continue to help no matter how many OSs I burn through. If Windows 9 or 10 is terribly optimized for boot speed, I'll still boot it quickly, whereas an investment in W8 instead of an SSD would not help me do such.
I've heard networking has finally seen an improvement, though for me that's not too big a deal.
What is a big deal is having to re-learn where everything is because Microsoft decided to re-arrange it. That and I have to deal with Metro, which is annoying from its layout right down to its icon design. That is something that will cause me trouble constantly, whilst I can simply use W7 instead, where I know where everything is, and where I can decide my screen layout to a greater extent.
Please define 'stupid good'?randomsix said:
Is it "Stop picking on those poor, defenseless hellspawn!" stupid good, or actually good?
Well, on one side, that's a bummer. But I'm confident it will be defeated. Bad decisions like those won't go unanswered, neither by intelligent hackers nor by software companies looking to sell us stuff.Joccaren said:
To paraphrase Russell Peters (in his indian accent): "Oh no, that is veeeryy incorrect"Joccaren said:
There is a difference between "Getting used to things" and things that are simply there to waste time. One of the biggest problems of Vista (before Service Pack 1, which remedied it somewhat) was the fact that it had the same problem as Yahtzee described in his Valkyria Chronicles review: ARE YOU SURE??? The UAC in Vista had a habit of requesting you clicking yes several times to perform one action. After service pack 1 (and in Win7), the request would only come once (although it was never fully solved in Vista). That is plain just wasting the users time.
Win8 is for the most part simply just "different". With that said, I'll admit to the fact that Microsofts attempt to block going directly into the desktop is a d*ck move of extraordinary proportions (and in general stupid as hell). I can't remember a single instance in which forcing things down the users throat has ever yielded something positive.
SSD's alone aren't enough. As mentioned, things need to happen on the software side too. I have an SSD as well, and i notice obvious speed differences between 7 and 8, especially in user-interface responsiveness. Similarly, the Vista performance problems aren't just problems you could solve with an SSD (it could help alleviate them, but at the end of the day it was still more resource-demanding and more than marginally slower than both Win7 and WinXP).Joccaren said:
...and so we are all different. Some people are more resistant to change than others. I don't mind re-learning stuff - What i do mind, however, is when the things i have to re-learn:Joccaren said:
1) Are unintuitive and therefore causes me frustration
2) Are trying to work directly AGAINST an optimal workflow that fits me
Microsofts attempt at blocking direct-to-desktop hacks are an example of point 2, but other than that i haven't found Win8 difficult to get used to. I'll admit that the Consumer Preview was an exercise in frustration, but for me, it has gotten a lot better.
Ultimately i won't move on from Win7 instantly. I will once the hackers have finished teaching Microsoft not to stop standing in our f*cking way when we want to configure the system they way WE want it to work. I'm not a child that needs handholding - If i was, i would have bought a Mac.
Oh god, please add that to the list of alignments for D&D in an upcoming version, please.Ed130 said:
Actually, screw it, I'll convince the next DM I play with to add in it just for a laugh. Anyone who went with that alignment would probably be killed pretty quickly by their own party, but eh. Hrrm. A stupid good bard, who's songs affect both ally and enemy in a beneficial way. That would be entertaining.
My problem comes largely from having to wait for a lot of this stuff, then install it afterwords.Athinira said:
Some companies, such as Stardock, have even decided that they won't develop Windows enhancement tools for W8 because they see it being a waste of time, and that they're better off waiting until MS releases an OS better received by its audience.
Whilst I'm sure others will continue to develop for W8, its hardly encouraging having to search through more companies that will provide a feature you want.
Definitely agreed. Vista, and IMO 8, actively tried to stop me using them. I used XP when Vista was out, and I'm using 7 whilst 8 is.
UAC could be turned off. It solved a lot of the problem doing that. Sure, it was annoying until you turned it off, but IMO so is Metro, and MS is actively working to prevent you turning that off.
Yeah, this I'll agree with.
W8 isn't a step backwards, its a step to the side. Its changing things around for the sake of changing them around in a lot of cases IMO, and not allowing you to change them back is one of the stupidest moves MS has made. Hopefully they'll learn from it soon enough.
Agreed, the main point was that a simple boost in speed isn't that great a leap forward when it can be achieved via other methods that were more permanent, and that seems to be W8's main improvement overall.
I also don't get unresponsiveness in general, unless I've got a lot going on or I've screwed something up with my drivers or MSconfig/Regedit. Granted I'm running a reasonably powerful rig, so even on poorly optimized programs my system can generally just brute force its way through, though on my Laptop there is a significant difference between the original Vista install the store gave me, and the W7 install I put on a week later.
TBH 1 and 2 are my points for change as well. Things like the snap to side of screen introduced with 7 for windows were nice features that enhanced things. Re-arranging where everything was got on my nerves as it was, IMO, completely arbitrary.
With W8, Metro fits 1 easily, and you say the 2 yourself here:
My main problem along these lines is that there really is, for me, no reason to buy 8, reinstall everything and then tweak it to fix it. Most of what 8 does is a re-arrangement for no reason. If I installed it it would be upgrading for the sake of upgrading and having to learn where MS has put everything this time because I upgraded, as opposed to upgrading to take advantage of some useful features.
Were it to come with a large array of improved features, I'd be happy to pay for it. More control over my system would come primary, and then optimization and minor features like the snap to side of screen. However, for as long as most of its 'appeal' comes in the form of its tablet UI and slightly faster booting times [For me anyway], I have no reason to get it and relearn everything.
Everyone's different, but the main reason I see 8 as a waste of time is because it isn't a step forward, but just a better presented and less intuitive version of Windows - like Vista was. Granted Vista had its other issues, but for the most part you could work your way around them - like one would have to do with 8's annoyances. 8 isn't as bad as Vista, but that doesn't make it a worthwhile investment either.
Indeed. Though, once that happens I'm thinking W9 will be around the corner, so I'm waiting to see if that has any benefits, and if not whether W7 compatibility will be kept for a lot of games and programs that I run.
If its got some nice new features, I'll probably upgrade to take advantage of them. I was originally tempted to put one basic load of 8 on my laptop for its X360 game compatibility, until I found out more on the specifics of that and how I could get an emulator to do a better job if I really wanted to.
If compatibility isn't being kept for W7, I'll move on so that I can continue to use programs. I'm personally hoping MS learns from what people don't like about 8 though, and makes 9 something worth getting.
Microsoft is deliberately not including a "boot straight to desktop, bypass Metro" feature AND they will be blocking the ability to schedule a task to automatically run the executable that takes you from Metro to the desktop.Blood Brain Barrier said:
As well as that, desktop is very, very different too.
I personally will be sticking with Windows 7 until the gaming future of Windows 8 becomes a little clearer to see.
It's a trope.Joccaren said:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StupidGood
I didn't know that Stardock is also anti Windows 8 as well, is there any companies (gaming or otherwise) that ARE excited by 8?
I still want it officially in some troll D&D version, or an April Fools release or something, just to see how badly it would turn out in game.Ed130 said:
And yeah, they put it out in their customer report:
http://www.stardock.com/press/CustomerReports/Stardock2011.pdf
Starts on page 8, and continues a little on page 9. Basically they're of the opinion that unless Windows 8 changed from how it was in that preview version [Which I know at least the Metro and Desktop issue hasn't been fixed], that Windows 8 would be considered a "General Failure", and it will end up that there "Is not a viable commercial market for software that exists to fix features of Windows 8", mostly due to the reasons that "Many, if not most, users will simply not migrate to it".
That said, it also links to a beta of Start8, which adds the start button to W8, so there might be some development by them, and saying that they won't develop for 8 outright was a hyperbole, however it does not bode well that they do not consider it commercially viable to do so.
I mean besides Microsoft?DoPo said:
(And don't say something like Apple or Linux, because Linux is an open source project and Apple is going to be happy anyway.)