Already using it (dreamspark already released the 8.1 release)
I hated it at the beginning, but gave it a chance for 2 weeks and now I'm loving it. It clearly does not deserve the bashing it gets. Most of the bashing is done by people who never used it anway...
Comment has been collapsed.
It's the same thing every time really. With the release of XP many people were bitching around how horrible it is. Then came 7 and even more people started bitching. Now 8 is here and yet even more (based on personal experience) people bitch about it. Funny thing is, those who bitch about 8 are the same ones who used to bitch about 7 but praise it now. I really wonder why some people have the attitude to complain about this and that without ever really having used it and/or just read about it in some forum.
Comment has been collapsed.
I loved Win 7 and Win 8 within 5 days after i installed them :D
Comment has been collapsed.
no, thats not totally correct. win7 was accepted pretty quickly, actually. even the industry uses it now. what industry and private customers avoided and avoid is vista and now 8. and the reasons are understandable in both cases. vista had performance problems on slower machines, 8 has metro, which no one wants on a desktop machine. i like 8, but only with tweaks that hide metro. metro just doesnt make sense as it is for desktop systems. ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
First: Death to tiles!
Seconed: Win XP, as beloved OS as it is now, wasn't good when it first got out and only really took off after the first SP.
In other words, I hate Win 8 (and 8.1) because I use Windows to work. You know, as in sit in front of the pc monitor and look at numbers and code all the day and Win 8 isn't good enough for that.
*** also got mine from DreamSpark so at least it was only a waste of my time and not my money.
Edit: Beside the not useful (for PCs) interface, Win 8 has some really great futures. Too bad, I guess... :(
Comment has been collapsed.
I hate it a little bit more than Win 7 because it crashed totally two times and recovery took 6+ hours because of its silly recovery screen couldn't appear -because of constant crashing- after the boot process for a long time. They shouldn't had to remove safe mode before boot.
But i'm using it since months and it's ok. But i still believe it's not so useful if you don't use it on a tablet (since i don't use Metro interface)
Comment has been collapsed.
I used it and didn't like it. Sure, you can bypass part of the horrendous UI by adding a start menu replacement, and bring back some level of usability to it. Sure, the underlying OS has got some improvement. But the retarded UI just throws me off and got me to get back on Win 7.
Some people will say I'm afraid of change, but honestly I adapted without any problem through DOS, Win2.1 Win 3.1x, 95, 98, 2000, XP, Vista and Win7. A phone/tablet UI has no place on a desktop PC, especially if you're doing actual work on there.
Comment has been collapsed.
What's in Win 8 update? I am using Windows 8 since it came out but I didn't really read about the updates :P
Comment has been collapsed.
With StartIsBack Win8 is actually usable. So yes, i like it (and i have 8.1 for some weeks now, MSDN subscription). It is still ugly, but the new task manager, the new copy dialog, buit-in virus scanner and other things are really nice.
Comment has been collapsed.
Apparently, I've been using an unusuable system. Why didn't anybody tell me? God, now I can't use it any more, because it's unusuable without a start button!
Comment has been collapsed.
So they released Windows 8, including tons of stuff everybody with half a brain agreed are absolutely horrible. So, in traditional Microsoft way of customer service, they listened to all the complaints about what people didn't like, and then went to great lengths to make those things even worse.
Comment has been collapsed.
Mainly how everybody hates the Metro, together with the removal of the usefulness of the start menu - people wanted the start menu back and never have to see Metro. So Microsoft decided to answer these people by putting a button to take you to where nobody wants to go where the thing everybody wants back used to be.
Sure, the underlying OS itself isn't bad - technically they were on the way of making a slightly improved version of Win7, but then they decided to shoot themselves in the foot in a futile attempt to use the desktop to give CPR to their dead mobile OS by forcing the same horrible and ugly GUI on it.
Comment has been collapsed.
You said "including tons of stuff", yet you only mention one thing. It always goes back to the same issue it seems. Too bad some people are resistant to improvement. Do an actual comparision and you will find out the new one is actually faster and easier to use. But this was discussed so many times everywhere I really don't feel like doing it here again.
It's just sad people bash and bash and reduce a whole OS to the start menu. If that's really all they can rate an OS on, then they are really better off with OSX.
Comment has been collapsed.
You asked for an elaboration, I gave you one. The whole UI-farce is what people seem to know best about this, which makes it a good example to pick.
Also, I have nothing against improvement, but I do have a whole lot against impairment. Change is not always for the better. The main visible function of an OS is ease of use, so curiously enough people actually judge them largely by how they handle that. Screw it up like Microsoft did with Metro, and no matter how much you managed to improve under the hood, you will not be applauded for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
So give other examples, because you were prompted and still focused on Metro. Metro doesn't bother me in the slightest. I'm actually kind of liking it. It doesn't interfere with me in any way, it doesn't slow me down at all. So give me another example. Because, personally, I think Microsoft's being a sarcastic troll with the 8.1 start button and I'm laughing my arse off about it. I'm perfectly happy without it. I'm actually going to look for a way to get it off if I upgrade.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm happy you said "with half a brain agreed". Cause we, with whole brain, like Win 8 <3
Comment has been collapsed.
About as excited as I was for iOS 7... I wasn't excited about iOS 7 at all, so if you want to use that as a reference point.
Comment has been collapsed.
Windows sucks. Linux all the way. Or BSD. Then you gotta get me excited.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah i am using an ubuntu right now just because it's out of the box, steam is on it and i have europa universalis 4.
I am hoping to win crusader kings 2 :-)
I prefer crunchbang and archlinux thought, but i need to save a lot of data before migrating.
I hope Dominions 4 will be ported to linux via steam as well, just as the 3 is.
Comment has been collapsed.
of course it's a good idea. they just didnt do it right.
Comment has been collapsed.
That is originally a tablet or phone first. Then it adds functionality when docked.
It's not the first time I have seen a dock functionality(read up on Asus Padfone) thus I'm actually pretty ok with it.
However, Windows has always been for desktops(read big screens, cause we love them), and this move by M$ is just plain shitty for them.
I would have rather they made Windows 8 a desktop OS strictly and made a Windows "Tablet" 8 for tablets. That would have been a good idea, but M$ just had to fuck both up.
Comment has been collapsed.
It doesn't make sense to have separate versions, precisely because you want a full OS when docked. The stupid thing Microsoft did was trying to force a new UI on desktop users. Windows 8.1 solves that to an extent (allowing to boot into the desktop), but it would have been better to add a Windows 7 UI mode in the first place for desktop users.
Comment has been collapsed.
It makes total sense to have different versions for them, cause they have Windows 8(for desktops and such), Windows RT(for the Surface and tablets) and WP8(for phones).
Now how much sense does it actually make to have one fit all for both Windows 8 and Windows RT when the usage is fundamentally different?
Comment has been collapsed.
How much sense does it make for Android to be based on the Linux kernel? A lot. Usage isn't as different as you think, which is why it's likely that full Windows 8.1 tablets will do better than Windows RT ones. Many people want to run desktop software on their tablets, they want the flexibility that comes from that.
Using a tablet/phone for all computing needs is a good model, docking it to work as a full PC or hooking to a TV and controller for game play. The hardware isn't there yet, but that doesn't mean the model is bad. Laptop hardware eventually became good enough for most people for most uses, and I imagine that the same will be true for tablets and phones.
Comment has been collapsed.
Can you explain this sentence? I mean, the Linux Kernel is used for both desktop, tablets and phones. It's the same implementation. It has a different UI system and some other different peripheral software, but it's still the same kernel. So I'm baffled by your post.
Comment has been collapsed.
The kernel is just a text-based OS part which is able to work by itself. However, each implementation of it with different OSes is different, so as to accommodate the different uses of each. Even if they have the same kernel, they work differently, unlike what M$ is doing.
Comment has been collapsed.
Your avatar looks more like a backtrack/kali than a mint :-)
Comment has been collapsed.
Still not liking it. Reasons below.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
Damnit steamgifts stop merging 2 and 3 into the same line and changing 4 and 5 to 3 and 4
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
how does it look anything like windows 98? do you mean the name, since if you take out the 9 from windows 98 it's windows 8?
i'm with you on metro/modern. it makes almost no sense on a 1080p screen but after a couple easy changes to get images displaying in windows photo viewer (what windows 7 used) instead of that useless metro photos app (seriously, it doesn't even have an option to let you go to the next photo in the directory) and the like, you only need to see metro until you click desktop after starting up and when launching a program. somehow my computers often end up showing the desktop pretty soon after startup without me having to do anything -- i'm guessing there's something the desktop thinks i need to see there, which is correct because EVERYTHING i need is in desktop. technically you can pin all the programs you want to launch directly (not from opening a document) to the taskbar and see even less metro.
activation is also super annoying. microsoft actually doesn't offer a reasonable licensing option for people who build and upgrade their own computers. i believe that problem actually came with windows 7 though, where my normal process of replacing my motherboard, cpu, and ram every couple years actually requires buying a new copy of windows even though my old motherboard, cpu, and ram go on to run linux so that first copy of windows isn't being used. i'm not aware of any changes in windows 8 activation and licensing since 7.
uac doesn't bother me all that much so i've just left it on, but there are still options to turn it off in windows 8.
Comment has been collapsed.
It looks like Windows 98 when it comes to the desktop windows. They look pretty similar. I find your joke funny btw.
While it is just barely decent on a small screen, it indeed has issues with bigger ones. Also, I do find that the Modern apps are not so modern after all. It's like at least 2-3 steps back in Windows generations.
As for the activation, Windows 7 only requires you to activate once right? However in Windows 8, you activate once, you are given some time until you need to reactivate again. And it's pretty obvious replacing the mobo requires a new license.
While UAC doesn't bother you that much, I can't stand actually being asked if I want to run every single installer and/or program I want to run. And if you do turn it off, the Modern apps won't run officially.
Comment has been collapsed.
I recently changed my CPU + motherboard and sure enough my Windows 8 got deactivated and asked me to activate again. At the bottom there was an option to contact Microsoft for activation problems and I clicked on it. The next screen showed me a toll-free number. I called that number and they asked me to do a few steps and my windows was activated within 2 minutes or so. And I never had any instances where my windows got deactivated on its own. If you use KMS methods to activate, your windows will get deactivated every 30 days or so.
Comment has been collapsed.
57 Comments - Last post 13 minutes ago by entitygeorge
17 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by tevemadar
2 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by spodamayn
60 Comments - Last post 42 minutes ago by UlverHausu
1,449 Comments - Last post 53 minutes ago by XJ777
11 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Lugum
18 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Fitz10024
6 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by DemonsRift
149 Comments - Last post 6 minutes ago by Althalus
15 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by Lexbya
68 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by Calibr3
878 Comments - Last post 21 minutes ago by hbguru
116 Comments - Last post 32 minutes ago by bashscrazy
19 Comments - Last post 35 minutes ago by Vaart
Yeah...in 15min it comes to the Win8 market and everyone can update...did go back from 8.1 recently because of BF4 beta...you should really try it! Win8.1 is great!
That thread is more to spread something...so stop hating before you even start :) keep calm and enjoy what i easily hidden ;)
...
Comment has been collapsed.