If there is something to complain about, people will complain.
It's also cool to bash new windows releases. I'm fairly certain it's a geek commandment at this point.
Migrating to a new OS is painful.
There are a few new features in windows 8 that seemed nice, so I will probably upgrade.
I will, however, be disabling everything metro related.
Metro seems obviously not designed for a workstation environment
Once you are able to distinguish between subjective and objective rationale then you will reach a state of awareness that will elucidate your question.
Migrating to a new OS is painful.
I have to admit that I don't personally plan to upgrade to 8 myself, but having a machine at work and using it extensively, I see little to no difference between 7 and 8 besides a couple new tricks to using it. (Ironically, one of the things i'm having a hard time getting used to is that the keying a new folder isn't Alt+F N F anymore, it's Alt+H N)
Talking about that search (which I almost never use in Win 7), it struck me that Windows apps install a lot of crap. Each folder in the start menu has at least 2, usually half a dozen or so, entries). It would be near impossible to provide that as one list.
Compare that to OS X, where there is an Applications icon on the Dock. Click it, and you get a single alphabetical list of application icons. Each application has one icon. There are a couple of folders, like Utilities, to group utility apps that people might not use every day.
So me that is just so much simpler and easier to use and to find apps. Plus I on the Mac I can click once to open Applications, and once again on the app's icon.
With Windows it is Start - All Programs, then the app's folder, then try to select the right app shortcut from there. Or take my hand off the mouse, lose focus, and type in the search field.
If Win 8 contianues that Microsoft trend, I will continue to prefer the alternatives.
Talking about that search (which I almost never use in Win 7), it struck me that Windows apps install a lot of crap. Each folder in the start menu has at least 2, usually half a dozen or so, entries). It would be near impossible to provide that as one list.
Compare that to OS X, where there is an Applications icon on the Dock. Click it, and you get a single alphabetical list of application icons. Each application has one icon. There are a couple of folders, like Utilities, to group utility apps that people might not use every day.
So me that is just so much simpler and easier to use and to find apps. Plus I on the Mac I can click once to open Applications, and once again on the app's icon.
With Windows it is Start - All Programs, then the app's folder, then try to select the right app shortcut from there. Or take my hand off the mouse, lose focus, and type in the search field.
If Win 8 contianues that Microsoft trend, I will continue to prefer the alternatives.
I personally think that the taskbar/start button makes windows so much more powerful and easier to navigate than anyother OS, but MS seem more interested in having everyone use touch screens, even, on a full desktop machine...
I personally think that the taskbar/start button makes windows so much more powerful and easier to navigate than anyother OS, but MS seem more interested in having everyone use touch screens, even, on a full desktop machine...
All-in-ones with touch seem to be at least moderately popular.
Additionally, cell phones and tablets kinda indicate a slight market for them.
I personally haven't try it yet. But a few people mentioned that every other windows sucks. And it's proven by history.That's a pile of excrement that's been repeated ad nauseum by mouthbreathers in response to Windows 8, basically. I don't know what columnist or forum poster started the bandwagon rolling, but no-one ever said this about Windows prior to like a year ago tops, and no-one with any credibility has ever said it, and it's blatant nonsense in general.
no that's pretty much observational history, of anyone that's used windows since 3.0 it's a proven track record.I personally haven't try it yet. But a few people mentioned that every other windows sucks. And it's proven by history.That's a pile of excrement that's been repeated ad nauseum by mouthbreathers in response to Windows 8, basically. I don't know what columnist or forum poster started the bandwagon rolling, but no-one ever said this about Windows prior to like a year ago tops, and no-one with any credibility has ever said it, and it's blatant nonsense in general.
touch is stupid on a desktop, i'm leaning back on my 24in monitor, i don't want to sit up to "touch" anything. Now if they incorporate a kinect into windows 8 and i can swipe that way, it might be useful.no that's pretty much observational history, of anyone that's used windows since 3.0 it's a proven track record.I personally haven't try it yet. But a few people mentioned that every other windows sucks. And it's proven by history.That's a pile of excrement that's been repeated ad nauseum by mouthbreathers in response to Windows 8, basically. I don't know what columnist or forum poster started the bandwagon rolling, but no-one ever said this about Windows prior to like a year ago tops, and no-one with any credibility has ever said it, and it's blatant nonsense in general.
Other than all of those same people forgetting how goofy XP was before SP1.
Win 3- terrible, just use DOS
Win 3.1- slightly better, but still inferior to DOS, another BAD
Windows 95- Good compared to everything up until this point, but BAD compared to future OS.
Windows 98- Fixed a lot of the issues with 95, but had some problems of it's own, better in Win98 Second Edition.
Windows 2000- Good, amazing, perfect OS. Flawless in every way.
Windows ME- Considered bad, but IMO pretty much equal to windows 98. Clearly inferior to Windows 2000 though.
Windows XP- At release, BAD- lots of driver issues, some infamous problems with sound blaster live cards and via drivers, but after the 3rd service pack it was mostly redeemed and considered good.
Windows Vista- At release, considered BAD by most, but IMO most of the blame is on bad drivers from nvidia or ATI. After SP1 I had no problems with Vista, although many still consider it bad. Still nothing wrong with it IMO, but 7 makes it obsolete.
Windows 7- Good, considered good by most users.
Precisely. As well as the other numerous other actual facts that contradict the distorted revisionism of the simpletons that subscribe to the "every other Windows is bad/good" myth. Like the fact Vista was actually fine, or that the 9x line was all just bad, or that the NT and 9x lineages were totally separate prior to XP, which is another thing the revisionists like to disregard in order to shoehorn their theory into sounding as if it's correct (e.g. going 2000 = good, Me = bad, XP = good).touch is stupid on a desktop, i'm leaning back on my 24in monitor, i don't want to sit up to "touch" anything. Now if they incorporate a kinect into windows 8 and i can swipe that way, it might be useful.no that's pretty much observational history, of anyone that's used windows since 3.0 it's a proven track record.I personally haven't try it yet. But a few people mentioned that every other windows sucks. And it's proven by history.That's a pile of excrement that's been repeated ad nauseum by mouthbreathers in response to Windows 8, basically. I don't know what columnist or forum poster started the bandwagon rolling, but no-one ever said this about Windows prior to like a year ago tops, and no-one with any credibility has ever said it, and it's blatant nonsense in general.
Other than all of those same people forgetting how goofy XP was before SP1.
http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-is-the-new-xp-7000006095/
IMO XP was pretty awful... Vista is a much better OS, always has been... Vista could have been amazing and people still would have complained about it
IMO XP was pretty awful... Vista is a much better OS, always has been... Vista could have been amazing and people still would have complained about it
I think that's part of it, perception.
If somebody tells you "you won't like this candy" and then you give them the candy, they're far more likely to say "I don't like this candy" than if you just hand it to them, because they're EXPECTING to dislike the candy.
stupid comparison, but you know what I mean.
There are a few new features in windows 8 that seemed nice, so I will probably upgrade.
I will, however, be disabling everything metro related.
Metro seems obviously not designed for a workstation environment
That's the thing, though. I spend all day on the computer and only time I even see metro is when I start up and shut down (providing I dont' just slap the power button)
Pin the few programs you use on your task bar, stick a link on your desktop to My Computer or just use winkey+e and you can ignore the-interface-formerly-known-as-Metro all day long.
I use the windows 7 start menu alot though. I like being able to press win and then type in whatever command I wish to run. I'd hate to lose that feature.
Fortunately, there is way to restore this start menu and not have to deal with the metro stuff at all.
For those complaining about games not compatible with Windows 8, try using a Mac. Or GNU/Linux. You Windows users are spoilt for choice.
For those complaining about games not compatible with Windows 8, try using a Mac. Or GNU/Linux. You Windows users are spoilt for choice.
For those complaining about games not compatible with Windows 8, try using a Mac. Or GNU/Linux. You Windows users are spoilt for choice.
What do you MEAN I have to run dosbox to run Commander Keen! It was only made 20 years ago! Why the HELL isn't that supported!?
Actually I kinda see Windows as a gaming operating system.
... hastaLaVista/Sieben ...
To be honest with yall, I don't really care about Windows 8. I'll still use Windows 3.1 no matter what Microsoft calls their new version.
Actually I don't want a start menu at all, nor this new metro thingy (I prefer to use a top bar with drop down menus (http://soulhunters-crappy-website.com/misc/Desktop.png), much faster...)Start8
Under Windows 7 you just have to run a app like "Startkiller" to remove the star menu, but how do I easily remove metro under Windows 8?
Actually I don't want a start menu at all, nor this new metro thingy (I prefer to use a top bar with drop down menus (http://soulhunters-crappy-website.com/misc/Desktop.png), much faster...)Start8
Under Windows 7 you just have to run a app like "Startkiller" to remove the star menu, but how do I easily remove metro under Windows 8?
I guess a little bit of both. i just Ignore Metro you dont see it if you stay on the desktop.Actually I don't want a start menu at all, nor this new metro thingy (I prefer to use a top bar with drop down menus (http://soulhunters-crappy-website.com/misc/Desktop.png), much faster...)Start8
Under Windows 7 you just have to run a app like "Startkiller" to remove the star menu, but how do I easily remove metro under Windows 8?
Not sure if trolling ;P
"Bring back the Windows® "Start" menu with Start8™!"
This too: http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=38096.0
Mac OS you can install any number of times on any number of computers, in theory (although you are only supposed to install it on one). No licence key. No activation bull****.
GNU/Linux the same, maybe unless you have a support contract with a large Linux vendor who limits the number of nodes they will support.
A lot of games have an installation limit too.
No idea why - someone will crack it eventually anyway.
Except Windows Vista, 7 and 8 are all superior to 2000 and XP with regard to performance on modern hardware, compatibility with modern applications/hardware, reliability, security, etc.What a pity some new programmable point-of-sale keyboards (and other industrial hardware) aren't modern. It's a shame I have to throw away my otherwise perfectly working scanner only because it's not "modern"... oh wait, it's still supported in SANE.
It is very hard to use if your monitor is not touch screenYou ever used it because thats not the case at all.
Now that 8 is out, and XP is soon to lose its extended extended extended support status, I wonder how long manufacturers will continue to support it with new drivers.
2014 isn't that soon for manufactors to drop support..After paying for a copy of Windows 3.1 or Windows 98, if manufacturers don't continue making drivers for all their peripherals for them, one is forced to actually replace the perfectly good operating system you've bought, and buy another one, in order to stay up-to-date!
Can't tell if this is deadpan sarcasm or tragically serious.2014 isn't that soon for manufactors to drop support..After paying for a copy of Windows 3.1 or Windows 98, if manufacturers don't continue making drivers for all their peripherals for them, one is forced to actually replace the perfectly good operating system you've bought, and buy another one, in order to stay up-to-date!
I mean, it seems like switching to Linux is the only way to escape this rip-off!
Windows Vista y u no run on my Babbage Engine!?Show Image(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/45/Difference_engine.JPG/320px-Difference_engine.JPG)
Writing Software is hard. Really hard. Writing an OS is even harder. Why SHOULDN'T you pay for a newer version, with newer features, that took time to develop by real people, with real families to feed.
Writing Software is hard. Really hard. Writing an OS is even harder. Why SHOULDN'T you pay for a newer version, with newer features, that took time to develop by real people, with real families to feed.
2014 isn't that soon for manufactors to drop support..
Full-screen apps are pretty but only make sense when your resolution is, maybe, 1024x768 or less. I want to resize and move my programs around to get good value out of my screen space.
You're not using a PC from 2002, so why are you so insistant on people using an OS from 2002?I call BS on this.
Writing Software is hard. Really hard. Writing an OS is even harder. Why SHOULDN'T you pay for a newer version, with newer features, that took time to develop by real people, with real families to feed.ROFL. What do I have to smoke to come up with ideas like this? O.o
Writing Software is hard. Really hard. Writing an OS is even harder. Why SHOULDN'T you pay for a newer version, with newer features, that took time to develop by real people, with real families to feed.
I don't pay for new software just because somebody may've worked hard to make it. Much of those peoples' "hard work" amounts to more crap on my hard disk, more obnoxious activation and anti-piracy measures, more dumb updaters, and less cash, that I worked hard for, in my pocket!
Just compare Microsoft Office '97 to Office 2010. Just about all Microsoft did was add cumbersome and irritating anti-piracy and activation, change some fonts, shuffle around all the menus, make the graphics shiny, and make it hog up nearly a gigabyte of extra disk space.
But Office '97 runs perfectly fine on anything from a 486 with 12MB of RAM to an Intel I5 with 8GB of RAM. And I can just take my one disk and install it on as many PC's as I feel like using the same number. And it still works perfectly fine for typing up my documents and creating charts, graphics, and presentations. I use it all the time for work and have absolutely no trouble. And if somebody throws a .docx file at me? Wordpad'll take care of that.
Or what about Adobe Acrobat Reader? What was once a simple, fast, and easy-to-use PDF reader has now morphed into a monstrous, bloated mess that takes up over 100MB of disk space and constantly asks me for updates. And then "A-Dope" wonders why I don't buy their full version. Maybe it's because I've got better things to do than spend hundreds of dollars on a piece of crap?
I don't give a damn how hard those programmers and software engineers work, or how their life situation is. That's their business, not mine. If I find their product to a be slow and irritating heap of ****, then I just won't buy it. I'm a capitalist, and I put my money where my mouth's at.
ROFL. What do I have to smoke to come up with ideas like this? O.o
- There are tons of perfectly working legacy hardware, I don't think new release of some OS is a good reason to throw it away.
- Some hardware/software simply *doesn't work* on new releases of the OS.
- Performance of most netbooks is still on par with old hardware (even Pentium Ms were more powerful than early Atoms, AMD E-350 is comparable to three years old C2D)
You're not using a PC from 2002, so why are you so insistant on people using an OS from 2002?
Your argumentation is based on a completely invalid assumption, hence there's no point in discussing it further.You're not using a PC from 2002, so why are you so insistant on people using an OS from 2002?
Sane people don't run the latest OS for the sake of running the latest OS. We use software (and hardware) that helps us get stuff done. MS Win8 don't (yet).
I'm slowly getting used to Windows 8 on a 13" touchscreen Ultrabook that work paid for, but without a touchscreen, I honestly don't see the point.
I'm slowly getting used to Windows 8 on a 13" touchscreen Ultrabook that work paid for, but without a touchscreen, I honestly don't see the point.
I would tend to agree with you there, assuming you mean "over Windows 7"
For the most part it's Windows 7 with touch functionality. People love windows 7 but they hate Windows 7: Touch Edition?
Thats all some great BS there are great improvement under the hood that you guys seem to not care about at all.
well just dont use the GUI i dont touch it i just stay on the desktop as i would have done with Win7.Thats all some great BS there are great improvement under the hood that you guys seem to not care about at all.
Oh I care, but I'd rather see those under-the-hood improvements with a Windows7 GUI. Anyway like I said, it's definitely useful for touchscreen, but I doubt I would even have tried it yet if work didn't pay my new laptop.
well just dont use the GUI i dont touch it i just stay on the desktop as i would have done with Win7.Thats all some great BS there are great improvement under the hood that you guys seem to not care about at all.
Oh I care, but I'd rather see those under-the-hood improvements with a Windows7 GUI. Anyway like I said, it's definitely useful for touchscreen, but I doubt I would even have tried it yet if work didn't pay my new laptop.
Thats all some great BS there are great improvement under the hood that you guys seem to not care about at all.
Thats all some great BS there are great improvement under the hood that you guys seem to not care about at all.
i was thinking the same thing
What's UEFI BIOS? O.ousually referring to the new clicky BIOS's but UEFI is only standard to allow booting off 3TB drives (and possibly mice) and replaces the BIOS and a bunch of other things that let the OS talk to the hardware easier and better. Lots of motherboard manufacturers just decided to add the mouse features with it which i find rather stupid because when the average joe sees and overclock button they can click theyll do it (or that is at least my experience).
OK, I am an idiot, but what does UEFI stand for, anyway?yes if you building a new PC
Is it something I should know about?
OK, I am an idiot, but what does UEFI stand for, anyway?yes if you building a new PC
Is it something I should know about?
Who builds a pc and doesnt tweak BIOS settings?OK, I am an idiot, but what does UEFI stand for, anyway?yes if you building a new PC
Is it something I should know about?
Especially if you plan to tweak BIOS settings. If you plan to use stock settings, it probably doesn't matter?
Who builds a pc and doesnt tweak BIOS settings?OK, I am an idiot, but what does UEFI stand for, anyway?yes if you building a new PC
Is it something I should know about?
Especially if you plan to tweak BIOS settings. If you plan to use stock settings, it probably doesn't matter?
Also im so happy most of the Intel MB's ive worked on lately have a legacy mode FTW!
Go Win8 its snappy!Who builds a pc and doesnt tweak BIOS settings?OK, I am an idiot, but what does UEFI stand for, anyway?yes if you building a new PC
Is it something I should know about?
Especially if you plan to tweak BIOS settings. If you plan to use stock settings, it probably doesn't matter?
Also im so happy most of the Intel MB's ive worked on lately have a legacy mode FTW!
True enough. I've had the pleasure of playing around with Asus' latest iterations of UEFI and I really like the funtionality. But I've only used Windows 8 so far on my Ultrabook. If I ever get a large enough touchscreen to justify installing Windows 8 on a desktop, it'll be fun to test how UEFI integrates...from what I've read on that front, it's all good. Call me old fashioned but I still love my Win7 on the desktops I build.
OK, I am an idiot, but what does UEFI stand for, anyway?
Is it something I should know about?
basically, as I understand it, it's the bridge between your motherboard's firmware and your OS/software.FTFY
some motherboards do allow you to run both or one or the other.basically, as I understand it, it's the bridge between your motherboard's firmware and your OS/software.FTFY
If you use UEFI, there's probably no BIOS. BIOS is *replaced* by UEFI.
Whoo got Start8 and well i didnt realise how much i missed the start menu... o and metro still works!
well microsoft may be thinking of doing that they fired the guy who made metro.... and their enterprise customers say they wont buy without a start menu so they dont have to retrain amoung other thingsWhoo got Start8 and well i didnt realise how much i missed the start menu... o and metro still works!
See this is my biggest issue with Win8...If I have to mod it to make it function like the OLD windows to maximize the experience, something is wrong. Don't get me wrong, I see the benefits of the OS for a touchscreen device (as I posted previously), but I hate that I have to mod it so that it works as well as the last version...and I'm talking about functionality, not just appearances.
If a start-menu option was included in Win8, and I didn't have to get a third-party mod, it wouldn't bother me so much.
well microsoft may be thinking of doing that they fired the guy who made metro.... and their enterprise customers say they wont buy without a start menu so they dont have to retrain amoung other thingsWhoo got Start8 and well i didnt realise how much i missed the start menu... o and metro still works!
See this is my biggest issue with Win8...If I have to mod it to make it function like the OLD windows to maximize the experience, something is wrong. Don't get me wrong, I see the benefits of the OS for a touchscreen device (as I posted previously), but I hate that I have to mod it so that it works as well as the last version...and I'm talking about functionality, not just appearances.
If a start-menu option was included in Win8, and I didn't have to get a third-party mod, it wouldn't bother me so much.
and start 8 is tiny its a very small mod no impact on the system really.
my guess is the option is going to be in the first service pack.well microsoft may be thinking of doing that they fired the guy who made metro.... and their enterprise customers say they wont buy without a start menu so they dont have to retrain amoung other thingsWhoo got Start8 and well i didnt realise how much i missed the start menu... o and metro still works!
See this is my biggest issue with Win8...If I have to mod it to make it function like the OLD windows to maximize the experience, something is wrong. Don't get me wrong, I see the benefits of the OS for a touchscreen device (as I posted previously), but I hate that I have to mod it so that it works as well as the last version...and I'm talking about functionality, not just appearances.
If a start-menu option was included in Win8, and I didn't have to get a third-party mod, it wouldn't bother me so much.
and start 8 is tiny its a very small mod no impact on the system really.
I saw that they fired that guy. Interesting. I know Start8 is tiny and unobtrusive, it's just frustrating that MS basically told us to pound sand and left the functionality to the hackers instead of just including the option to begin with. I will be thrilled if they add that option through a small windowsupdate, or even in a service pack. But the sooner, the better. Like I said previously, I like Metro for touchscreen devices and live tiles, but most of us live in the Desktop side of things when doing anything related to "productivity," and it's just silly to reinvent the wheel this many versions in. Shows a lack of forethought and judgment, in my opinion of course.
I heard (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/118882-Valves-Source-Engine-Runs-Better-on-Linux-Than-Windows) you get better FPS on GNU/Linux than Windows ... not sure if it's worth it to switch though.Just because of better FPS? No, it's not Windows for free.
it's much more.I heard (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/118882-Valves-Source-Engine-Runs-Better-on-Linux-Than-Windows) you get better FPS on GNU/Linux than Windows ... not sure if it's worth it to switch though.Just because of better FPS? No, it's not Windows for free.
DO NOT BUY A WIN8 PHONE.
rant;
Win 8 is a terrible mouse and keyboard experience.
You have to click like 4 to 6 times to do something very trivial that would have taken 2 mouse clicks in Win7. (what I mean is the navigation.
User Account Control in Win8 is OMG bad. User account can NOT have UAC turned off which is Annoying. This means you have to literally enter in the admin account credentials every single time you launch an app... I've resorted to copy / paste from a text file, but still it's freaking annoying..
The decision to put Windows 8 on every single PC going forward is frankly retarded. What if you don't use touch? What if you don't have a tablet?
Lastly, I hate win8 because it's so damn buggy. At my job we have to work with it daily and I must say it's driven me more and more insane as the days go by. I have to develop test plans around it... and it's not as simple as Win7.
That being said, this will be nice in tablet form, and it will be useful to have the new RTE for application integration with Windows phones / tablets..... But that just tells you what Microsoft's vision for the world is. Screw that. Power to Linux!! Power to open source!!!
same experiencd 100% on multiple pcsrant;
Win 8 is a terrible mouse and keyboard experience.
Subjective opinion. My experience has shown precisely the opposite. So I could easily say "Win 8 is a phenomenal mouse and keyboard experience". Which it is. For me at least.QuoteYou have to click like 4 to 6 times to do something very trivial that would have taken 2 mouse clicks in Win7. (what I mean is the navigation.
Examples? I find stuff in Win8 much faster than in Win7, with less keystrokes and less mouse clicks.QuoteUser Account Control in Win8 is OMG bad. User account can NOT have UAC turned off which is Annoying. This means you have to literally enter in the admin account credentials every single time you launch an app... I've resorted to copy / paste from a text file, but still it's freaking annoying..
I'm pretty sure this isn't true. This was the first thing I turned off after upgrading. Start+W -> "uac" -> Enter.
And if a normal user needs to do that many things with Admin credentials, that user should probably just be an Admin.QuoteThe decision to put Windows 8 on every single PC going forward is frankly retarded. What if you don't use touch? What if you don't have a tablet?
I use Windows 8 on my desktop. No touch. No tablet. It's glorious.QuoteLastly, I hate win8 because it's so damn buggy. At my job we have to work with it daily and I must say it's driven me more and more insane as the days go by. I have to develop test plans around it... and it's not as simple as Win7.
I have had it installed for 5 months straight, working on it 8+ hours a day, and it hasn't crashed once. Not a single time. And I do software development for a living.QuoteThat being said, this will be nice in tablet form, and it will be useful to have the new RTE for application integration with Windows phones / tablets..... But that just tells you what Microsoft's vision for the world is. Screw that. Power to Linux!! Power to open source!!!
:rolleyes:
People are just stuck in their ways. The start button / menu is an almost 20 year old paradigm. Windows is due for a change. If you don't like it, stay on Windows 7. Otherwise... adapt, because getting mad about it ain't gonna change ol' Ballmer's mind.
that has nothing to do with the start menu as its not needed for life itself, muchless computing.People are just stuck in their ways. The start button / menu is an almost 20 year old paradigm. Windows is due for a change. If you don't like it, stay on Windows 7. Otherwise... adapt, because getting mad about it ain't gonna change ol' Ballmer's mind.
Eating is a millions of year old paradigm. It's time for a new way to acquire energy and nutrients.
Breathing is a millions of year old paradigm. It's time for a new way to transport oxygen into the bloodstream.
Communicating using a language is a thousands of year old paradigm. It's time for telepathy.
Typing is a decades old paradigm. It's time for telekinetic data entry.
Need I continue?
that has nothing to do with the start menu as its not needed for life itself, muchless computing.People are just stuck in their ways. The start button / menu is an almost 20 year old paradigm. Windows is due for a change. If you don't like it, stay on Windows 7. Otherwise... adapt, because getting mad about it ain't gonna change ol' Ballmer's mind.
Eating is a millions of year old paradigm. It's time for a new way to acquire energy and nutrients.
Breathing is a millions of year old paradigm. It's time for a new way to transport oxygen into the bloodstream.
Communicating using a language is a thousands of year old paradigm. It's time for telepathy.
Typing is a decades old paradigm. It's time for telekinetic data entry.
Need I continue?
People are just stuck in their ways. The start button / menu is an almost 20 year old paradigm. Windows is due for a change. If you don't like it, stay on Windows 7. Otherwise... adapt, because getting mad about it ain't gonna change ol' Ballmer's mind.
Eating is a millions of year old paradigm. It's time for a new way to acquire energy and nutrients.
Breathing is a millions of year old paradigm. It's time for a new way to transport oxygen into the bloodstream.
Communicating using a language is a thousands of year old paradigm. It's time for telepathy.
Typing is a decades old paradigm. It's time for telekinetic data entry.
Need I continue?
People are just stuck in their ways. The start button / menu is an almost 20 year old paradigm. Windows is due for a change. If you don't like it, stay on Windows 7. Otherwise... adapt, because getting mad about it ain't gonna change ol' Ballmer's mind.
Eating is a millions of year old paradigm. It's time for a new way to acquire energy and nutrients.
Breathing is a millions of year old paradigm. It's time for a new way to transport oxygen into the bloodstream.
Communicating using a language is a thousands of year old paradigm. It's time for telepathy.
Typing is a decades old paradigm. It's time for telekinetic data entry.
Need I continue?
So, you're saying you DON'T want to live in a world where we get nutrients from patches, can live in a zero-oxygen enviroment, and can use telepathy?
Bonus points if this world includes not having to sleep, or only having to sleep a couple hours a day.
While the Start menu could be reasonably subject to a number of improvements, there is really no rationally defensible basis for its complete eradication in favor of an inferior "tile" format.
Computing is not needed for life. What are you saying? What is your point? Did you even spend any time thinking about what I said, or respond to it viscerally without any degree of cognition whatsoever?
The problem with the statement is the suggestion that it is advisable to change a fundamental means of interacting with a given system, defended only by the patently false supposition that "all change is good." So, if all change is good, how about this: you're alive. I think you should be dead.
Now do you still agree that all change is good?
Arguments exist in abstract and a given premise can be extrapolated appropriately to other contexts.
While the Start menu could be reasonably subject to a number of improvements, there is really no rationally defensible basis for its complete eradication in favor of an inferior "tile" format.
Except that stating that the "tile" format is inferior is subjective opinion. I can easily and just as validly state that the start menu is the inferior format, and there's no rationally defensible basis for holding on to it in light of an available superior format.Indeed. Personally, I find both approaches aggressively user-hostile, at least when the user's me. But then I spend most of my time in front of a mac, and have done since '87. I've tried to like windows, but it invariably has me tearing my hair out and screaming obscenities.
Computing is not needed for life. What are you saying? What is your point? Did you even spend any time thinking about what I said, or respond to it viscerally without any degree of cognition whatsoever?
The problem with the statement is the suggestion that it is advisable to change a fundamental means of interacting with a given system, defended only by the patently false supposition that "all change is good." So, if all change is good, how about this: you're alive. I think you should be dead.
Now do you still agree that all change is good?
Arguments exist in abstract and a given premise can be extrapolated appropriately to other contexts.
Yes, but only up to a point. After that, it's been abstracted out to such a degree that it doesn't even make any sense anymore.
I never once said "all change is good", and that wasn't my argument. I said that Windows is due for a change. My point is that computing is in it's infancy, and it's shortsighted to think that any particular paradigm that we have come up with is the "best" in such a short time.
That means we need to try out many different ways of doing things. It may end up that a start button/menu is indeed the best paradigm. But I wouldn't feel comfortable coming to that conclusion until a larger set of alternatives had been attempted.
launching programs can be done more quickly using the Start Button, typing the first few letters of the application you want to use and hitting Enter
I believe that an Earth free from all human life could be a worthwhile pursuit. Let's go ahead and test this one out, too!
Saying that something is due for a change without qualification is the same as suggesting that all change is good.
I have no idea why you cannot see this, especially since you are referring to a "rationally defensible basis."
I think you have conflated rationality with your own irrational emotional attachment to something you can't necessarily explain. It's okay, you're just an organism existing in relation to your environment; it's difficult to come to terms with this.
The reason a Start Menu is superior, or the concept thereof, is because it represents a hierarchy.
A hierarchy can be sorted by function, or whatever.
If you wanted to do that with an unsightly slathering of tiles, it would necessarily require more space to accomplish, and is thus inferior.
as far as missing the start menu, I don't. You can reach most any program you want with the search by tapping the winkey and typing the first 3 letters of the program which will bring it up (or if not it because the name is similar, then in the list)Yeah I don't get that either. On previous versions of Windows I hit the Windows key or clicked bottom left of my screen and got a small start menu.
Move the mouse to the bottom right or press Windows-C to get the standard system charms.
Hit settings, power, shutdown.
[)amien
Somebody here should know this. How the **** do you turn of a computer running win 8?
(hell, even Ubuntu is a viable desktop OS these days).
I think to an average user the only difference would be that the traditional start menu is missing. But...is it really that bad? Do you really use it THAT often to find a program you installed or something?YES. Yes I do.
I realize this is from pages ago, but I just had to respond...I think to an average user the only difference would be that the traditional start menu is missing. But...is it really that bad? Do you really use it THAT often to find a program you installed or something?YES. Yes I do.
I haven't got 8 purely because my upgrade cycle isn't due for a new OS. However, having tinkered with it on my brother's laptop, I can pretty safely say that the lack of win7 style start menu would drive me bats... At least until I learn all the exe names for programs to use with winkey+r like I used to do in XP... you know, before win 7 gave me a better solution. *sigh*