

  (Source: Microsoft)



Comments Microsoft:



It seems a bit counterintuitive, to say the least.



Source: Windows Team Blog

Comments     Threshold


Doesn't offer enough over Windows 7
By gigahertz20 on 7/2/2012 5:00:38 PM , Rating: 1
I don't think Win8 will be that big of a hit. Most people that have Win7 installed will not see an important enough feature that Win8 has that is worth upgrading for. I haven't read about any new features yet that just blow me away.

MS is putting out a new OS way too soon, if you are going to launch a new OS just a few years after your last one, you better have some great features that will make your average ma and pa computer user want to upgrade. If you don't have those, people will just be content with what they have. XP to Win7 was a nice jump for many people, Win7 to Win8 will just make people wonder, what's the difference?

RE: Doesn't offer enough over Windows 7
By Manch on 7/2/2012 5:11:20 PM , Rating: 2
Its already kown that the corporate world will skip this. Plus look at the price. Its a minor upgrade at best. think Windows ME. You paid for it, youre not sure why, and then you realize the tragic mistake you made and cry when you realize you cant go back bc you cant find your discs.

Its really not ME bad. Its meant for tablets and laptops. For those applications, it works. Not serious desktop work. Who wants to spend the day finger banging there screen when a mouse and keyboard is much better and easier?

RE: Doesn't offer enough over Windows 7
By gigahertz20 on 7/2/2012 5:16:45 PM , Rating: 2
They should have called it Windows Touch and just marketed it towards touch screen users. Win8 makes it sound like it's suppose to be the new MS desktop OS, which I guess it's also suppose to be, but it's just gonna be seen as another ME or Vista now.

RE: Doesn't offer enough over Windows 7
By Manch on 7/2/2012 5:29:06 PM , Rating: 3
That would have made more sense.

Everybody dogs on Vista, but Win 7 is merely an upgrade of it. Vista is/was a decent OS. How MS implemented it was just plain idiotic, and the hw/sw manufacturers didnt help things. Im running vista on one of my boxes, and i cant justify upgrading it to Win 7.

RE: Doesn't offer enough over Windows 7
By sviola on 7/2/2012 6:32:21 PM , Rating: 2
Well, Vista was a decent OS, but 7 has a lot of improvements under the hood, specially on the graphics stack. In Vista, you have a single entry point for graphics data, while in 7 they fixed it allowing for multiple resources to use the graphics stack at the same time.

By noirsoft on 7/2/2012 11:04:43 PM , Rating: 2
I'm pretty sure the feature you are talking about was introduced in Vista. Unless you mean something other than GPU virtualization.

RE: Doesn't offer enough over Windows 7
By ET on 7/3/2012 3:43:04 AM , Rating: 2
Which is exactly the case for 8. People find it hard to look past the UI change, but underneath it's a similar upgrade to 7 to what 7 was to Vista.

Personally I'm put off by Metro, but that doesn't mean I can't see the advantages. I don't know if I'll buy it, since I'm just now planning to upgrade my desktop from Vista to 7, but I still think it's decent value for people who care about performance. Still, I can understand people who stick to what they know and are comfortable with. A lot of people stuck to XP for gaming even when Vista became faster.

RE: Doesn't offer enough over Windows 7
By Manch on 7/3/2012 4:40:54 AM , Rating: 2
The forcing of the UI/removing of the start button is what most people are taking issue with. Forcing you to switch to a UI you do not want in order to get the other upgrades is stupid. They pulled this with Vista and DX10. Rememebr the backlash because of that?

RE: Doesn't offer enough over Windows 7
By Spuke on 7/3/2012 12:36:22 PM , Rating: 2
You don't have to use the Metro UI. I don't understand why this is soooooo difficult to understand.

By Manch on 7/3/2012 1:01:17 PM , Rating: 2
you may not have to use the tiles and can go to the start screen but its more cumbersome than the start button. As I said in my first post, its a great interface for a mobile platforms, media PCs but, to me its a step backwards for a desktop. Why not let people keep the start button in addition to the metro UI. To me its like a playstation controller. It works great as it is. Tweak it, fine, add features, fine, but do not scrap it for something else. Youre throwing the baby out with the bathwater here

RE: Doesn't offer enough over Windows 7
By Florinator on 7/2/2012 5:19:07 PM , Rating: 2
Windows 8 is a slightly optimized Windows 7 + Metro UI. Everything that worked on Windows 7 will work on Windows 8. You don't like the Metro UI? No problem, don't use it.

Nobody claimed Windows 8 was a major update, not even Windows 7 was a major update from Windows Vista.

In fact, let me share a little secret with you. If you check the build number of Windows Vista you get something like this: 6.0.x.
Windows 7 build numbers are: 6.1.x.
Windows 8 build numbers are: 6.2.x.

There you go, they are all minor updates from Windows Vista.

RE: Doesn't offer enough over Windows 7
By Belard on 7/2/2012 10:48:20 PM , Rating: 1
You CANNOT use Windows8 without using metro.

The Start button is hidden and the whole metro interface *IS* the start "menu", its just a big ugly screen that runs metro APPS that look like metro apps on the WindowsPhone, but on a 24" screen... its like... PUKE!

By steven975 on 7/3/2012 9:36:00 AM , Rating: 2
I think Win8 makes a good case for 2 desktop monitors.

With the preview, I run a 17" 5:4 and a 24" 16:10. Metro on the smaller one. I like it.

