Win8 vs Win7

Started Jun 10, 2013 | Discussions
Glen Barrington
Glen Barrington Forum Pro • Posts: 19,662
Come On! You knew I was including that as well. . .
1

You are splitting hairs.  The truth is, people AREN'T buying new machines in the numbers have have been.  People are holding out to see if Microsoft will cave.  That's what I'm doing.  I'm thinking Win 9 will be out in RECORD time!  no need to rush out and replace Win 7.

-- hide signature --

I still like soup. . .
Now that you've judged the quality of my typing, take a look at my photos. . .
http://www.jpgmag.com/people/glenbarrington/photos

 Glen Barrington's gear list:Glen Barrington's gear list
Canon PowerShot G3 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm 1:2.8-3.5 +12 more
dradam Senior Member • Posts: 2,818
Re: stick with Win 7 if possible...
1

1w12q312qw1 wrote:

dradam wrote:

1w12q312qw1 wrote:

Archer66 wrote:

Jim Cockfield wrote:

Win 7 = pretty good desktop OS

Win 8 = very bad desktop OS

Typical BS FUD from Jim Cockfield.

For desktop user Win 8 is the same as Win 7 with some improvements:

- Secure booting ( no more rootkits )

- Better file copying with enchanced dialog, you can even pause it

- Better multimonitor support

- Better taskmanager

- Better virtual machine ( Hyper V vs Virtual PC )

- Better printing ( no need to install printer drivers )

You W8 defenders sound exactly like the Microsoft sales team. Everything you list above has no bearing on my Windows7 experience speaking as an avid digital photographer. If I were shopping 8 versus staying 7 and I read your list, I'd yawn and laugh and stay with 7. Honestly, isn't that the crux of MS' problem? It just sounds like you and a few others are trying to sell the Edsel and the marketplace does NOT like the "look" of it, no matter what's under the hood.

And so many of you haters sound like there's some big man who comes to your house and makes you upgrade. The things listed above ARE improvements over 7. If you don't find them compelling enough to upgrade there is one very SIMPLE solution, just don't.

You are hilarious, dude. Always good for a laugh.

No problem bro.  You all seem quite stressed about this.

dradam Senior Member • Posts: 2,818
Re: Come On! You knew I was including that as well. . .
4

Glen Barrington wrote:

You are splitting hairs. The truth is, people AREN'T buying new machines in the numbers have have been. People are holding out to see if Microsoft will cave. That's what I'm doing. I'm thinking Win 9 will be out in RECORD time! no need to rush out and replace Win 7.

To ignore the fact that PC sales in general are down, at least partly because the previous generation of hardware was more than good enough and sturdy enough to not need upgrading yet, and laying all the blame for lower sales at the feet of Windows 8 is quite myopic of you.

1w12q312qw1 Contributing Member • Posts: 732
Re: Come On! You knew I was including that as well. . .
1

dradam wrote:

Glen Barrington wrote:

You are splitting hairs. The truth is, people AREN'T buying new machines in the numbers have have been. People are holding out to see if Microsoft will cave. That's what I'm doing. I'm thinking Win 9 will be out in RECORD time! no need to rush out and replace Win 7.

To ignore the fact that PC sales in general are down, at least partly because the previous generation of hardware was more than good enough and sturdy enough to not need upgrading yet, and laying all the blame for lower sales at the feet of Windows 8 is quite myopic of you.

NO ONE on any of these threads has made the claim that PC sales are down solely because of W8. One of the reasons W8 came to be was because of the migration to handheld devices and many of us believe MS got into a state of panic because of the graphs. and came up with W8.

I don't hate W8, but I hate cold weather. But I am with Glen in that Windows9 may right the MS-ship. I don't begrudge anyone for their preference, if you like the lay-of-the-land of W8, that's wonderful, I'm truly happy for you. Maybe you could do likewise.

Stan

kelpdiver Veteran Member • Posts: 3,481
Re: Come On! You knew I was including that as well. . .
1

Glen Barrington wrote:

You are splitting hairs. The truth is, people AREN'T buying new machines in the numbers have have been. People are holding out to see if Microsoft will cave. That's what I'm doing. I'm thinking Win 9 will be out in RECORD time! no need to rush out and replace Win 7.

The 'hold out' is driven by the fact that performance hasn't really changed since Sandy Bridge, and if you're the type to overclock, may have even regressed a little.  Despite switching to 22nm and having two generations (ivy bridge and haswell), the impact to a quad processor system (i5-2500k) is minimal, certainly not worth an upgrade.

If you want a longer lasting laptop, then the power savings are worthwhile.  And getting a newer MB with better SATA6 and USB3 support might be an allure, but the core system performance is moving very very slowly, since AMD can't see to put up much of a fight these days.

Frankly I'm tired of MS mucking with the UI with every new windows and office release, and that's enough of a reason to skip an upgrade when I have a choice.  They had the option of supporting "classic mode" but continue to choose not to.

1w12q312qw1 Contributing Member • Posts: 732
Re: Come On! You knew I was including that as well. . .
2

dradam wrote:

To ignore the fact that PC sales in general are down, at least partly because the previous generation of hardware was more than good enough and sturdy enough to not need upgrading yet, and laying all the blame for lower sales at the feet of Windows 8 is quite myopic of you.

I don't begrudge anyone for their preference, if you like the lay-of-the-land of W8, that's wonderful, I'm truly happy for you. Maybe you could do likewise.

Stan

dradam,

Kind of figured you wouldn't reciprocate in kind to my suggestion. You just don't have it in you to make even a token appearance of cordiality here.

With every post it seems like you're trying to convince yourself you made the right move with W8 and everyone else is blinded by their malaria-induced obsession with W7. Gotcha!

Stan

VirtualMirage
VirtualMirage Veteran Member • Posts: 3,956
Re: Come On! You knew I was including that as well. . .
2

kelpdiver wrote:

The 'hold out' is driven by the fact that performance hasn't really changed since Sandy Bridge, and if you're the type to overclock, may have even regressed a little. Despite switching to 22nm and having two generations (ivy bridge and haswell), the impact to a quad processor system (i5-2500k) is minimal, certainly not worth an upgrade.

Yep!

Over the past 4 generations of Core i7's, the clock speed hasn't increased much.  And despite the improvements and increases in parallelism, even core count hasn't increased much.  The only things that have improved is power consumption, efficiency, and new instruction sets.  I've got a 6-7 year old laptop that still gets the job done for internet, movies, music, light photo editing, and Office.  And it is a dual core Centrino with less than 3GB of RAM running Windows 7.

While memory is getting cheaper, the amount of RAM in machines from the past few years has been plenty for most.  And until Microsoft dumps 32-bit and goes 64-bit only, those with the 32-bit OS's will still be limited to 4GB.

The only real consistent big improvement that happens every year is graphics cards.  And well, the ones that need those huge improvements caters to a select crowd that are not likely to be buying a PC off the shelf, nor does that improvement require a new PC.

In the past, processor speed jumped so quickly at every release and every new OS strained the current hardware it pushed people to upgrade every 2-3 years.  But now OS's don't strain the hardware and machines are fast enough for the 'majority'.  So the need to upgrade isn't as great, extending the computer lifespan even longer.  People are more likely to buy a new PC as an addition to what they have than it is to replace, and that doesn't happen that often.  Unless, of course, the other PC kicked the bucket.

-- hide signature --

Paul

 VirtualMirage's gear list:VirtualMirage's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony a77 II Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD +18 more
dradam Senior Member • Posts: 2,818
Re: Come On! You knew I was including that as well. . .
1

1w12q312qw1 wrote:

dradam wrote:

To ignore the fact that PC sales in general are down, at least partly because the previous generation of hardware was more than good enough and sturdy enough to not need upgrading yet, and laying all the blame for lower sales at the feet of Windows 8 is quite myopic of you.

I don't begrudge anyone for their preference, if you like the lay-of-the-land of W8, that's wonderful, I'm truly happy for you. Maybe you could do likewise.

Stan

dradam,

Kind of figured you wouldn't reciprocate in kind to my suggestion. You just don't have it in you to make even a token appearance of cordiality here.

With every post it seems like you're trying to convince yourself you made the right move with W8 and everyone else is blinded by their malaria-induced obsession with W7. Gotcha!

Stan

Stan,

Feel free to do more than pay lip service to your suggestion.  I'm not sure which part of my post you have a problem with, or why you felt the need to quote yourself, perhaps you could put your feelings into words.

I don't care the least bit what computer hardware or software people use.  I'm quite happy with what I have, and if I weren't I would certainly find other options.  That said, this IS a forum for talk about PCs, so if it's all the same to you I will continue to voice my opinions (even when those opinions go against the prevailing hive mind around here) and correct factual mistakes where I see them.  I ALSO don't begrudge people their own opinions and would expect the same in return.

Archer66 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,948
Re: Come On! You knew I was including that as well. . .
1

dradam wrote:
this IS a forum for talk about PCs, so if it's all the same to you I will continue to voice my opinions (even when those opinions go against the prevailing hive mind around here) and correct factual mistakes where I see them.

+1

absentaneous Contributing Member • Posts: 532
Re: Win8 vs Win7
1

I did the switch so I can say that win7 is by no means worse than win8 unless of course you think you could benefit from those things that are different in win8. such as touch screen use or integration with social services or the use of apps. basically win8 is for those who'd like their desktop or laptop to work like a tablet or a phone. otherwise win7 is still a great OS. win8 is from the point of an average user basically just win7 with a few additional features and options. if you don't need those options and features then win7 is just as good. basically win8 is just win7 with a metro interface and apps. personally I like both the metro interface and the way apps work so for me the switch made sense. otherwise there isn't much difference.

OP raymb Regular Member • Posts: 494
Re: Win8 vs Win7
1

Thanks for your reply. I did not intend to start a war, But It seems to create strong feelings one way or the other.

I think I will work on the basis that "if its not broke don,t fix it" and stay with Win7.

thanks again for all the replies

Cheers Ray

 raymb's gear list:raymb's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 ASPH Mega OIS Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II Olympus 12-40mm F2.8
absentaneous Contributing Member • Posts: 532
Re: Win8 vs Win7
1

raymb wrote:

Thanks for your reply. I did not intend to start a war, But It seems to create strong feelings one way or the other.

I think I will work on the basis that "if its not broke don,t fix it" and stay with Win7.

thanks again for all the replies

Cheers Ray

I think that makes sense. also, I need to add that I switched to win8 using the discount microsoft was offering when win8 was released. that made the upgrade quite cheap so that was basically the main reason I got win8. if I had to pay the full price I'd probably stay with win7.

theswede
theswede Veteran Member • Posts: 4,006
Re: stick with Win 7 if possible...
4

Archer66 wrote:

Jim Cockfield wrote:

Win 7 = pretty good desktop OS

Win 8 = very bad desktop OS

Typical BS FUD from Jim Cockfield.

For desktop user Win 8 is the same as Win 7 with some improvements:

It's not even remotely the same. There is no hierarchical organization of programs accessed from the start system. There is no obvious way to get rid of a Metro app which takes over the screen. There isn't even any point to Metro on a desktop system.

The differences are very In Your Face and crippling for engineering and science users. I normally have at least dozens of programs to access industrial systems and subsystems installed, with confusing names. In the start menu they're grouped by manufacturer name and then by task to use them for - dead easy to find what I need.

In Windows 8 they're tiled up in the start screen with no organization and no way to tell what is for what, or even from what company.

Completely useless.

- Secure booting ( no more rootkits )

Except that is normally turned off. And even if it isn't a signed root kit will still bypass it.

- Better file copying with enchanced dialog, you can even pause it

That's an application, not an OS feature. It's been available as third party for a long time.

http://ultracopier.first-world.info/ for example.

- Better multimonitor support

This part is true, apart from that no monitor will have a start button or start menu, and it's confusing how to handle Metro apps due to the lack of visual cues.

- Better taskmanager

The task manager is better looking than before, but otherwise not that different. It does integrate other parts of the control panel. Whether that is better or worse is more a matter of taste. Seeing as I come from the "do one job and do it well" camp I'm still undecided.

- Better virtual machine ( Hyper V vs Virtual PC )

Which is pretty much immaterial to anyone actually relying on virtual machines (like I do a lot) as they need to have dedicated VM software anyway.

- Better printing ( no need to install printer drivers )

There is no difference in need for printer drivers between Windows 8 and earlier versions. There is an improved "call home" feature to get the latest drivers, but if your printer manufacturer hasn't paid its Microsoft tax that won't help you much. You still need to hunt down drivers.

Jesper

 theswede's gear list:theswede's gear list
Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D Sony SLT-A37 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha a7 Sony a5000 +7 more
Archer66 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,948
Re: stick with Win 7 if possible...
1

theswede wrote:

Archer66 wrote:

Jim Cockfield wrote:

Win 7 = pretty good desktop OS

Win 8 = very bad desktop OS

Typical BS FUD from Jim Cockfield.

For desktop user Win 8 is the same as Win 7 with some improvements:

It's not even remotely the same. There is no hierarchical organization of programs accessed from the start system. There is no obvious way to get rid of a Metro app which takes over the screen. There isn't even any point to Metro on a desktop system.

The differences are very In Your Face and crippling for engineering and science users. I normally have at least dozens of programs to access industrial systems and subsystems installed, with confusing names. In the start menu they're grouped by manufacturer name and then by task to use them for - dead easy to find what I need.

This was about desktop and not about Modern UI. Just pin your most used programs to taskbar or create a shortcut on your desktop just like in Win 7.

I bet most power users do not even use Win 7 start menu, there is no need for it.

In Windows 8 they're tiled up in the start screen with no organization and no way to tell what is for what, or even from what company.

Completely useless.

You do know that you can change it ?

- Secure booting ( no more rootkits )

Except that is normally turned off.

No it's not, most if not all new PCs have it on.

And even if it isn't a signed root kit will still bypass it.

Pardon ?

- Better file copying with enchanced dialog, you can even pause it

That's an application, not an OS feature.

WTF are you talking about ????

- Better multimonitor support

This part is true, apart from that no monitor will have a start button or start menu, and it's confusing how to handle Metro apps due to the lack of visual cues.

Again, this was about desktop.

- Better taskmanager

The task manager is better looking than before, but otherwise not that different. It does integrate other parts of the control panel. Whether that is better or worse is more a matter of taste. Seeing as I come from the "do one job and do it well" camp I'm still undecided.

- Better virtual machine ( Hyper V vs Virtual PC )

Which is pretty much immaterial to anyone actually relying on virtual machines (like I do a lot) as they need to have dedicated VM software anyway.

Hyper V isnt ?

- Better printing ( no need to install printer drivers )

There is no difference in need for printer drivers between Windows 8 and earlier versions.

Err, there is big difference. Use Google to find out more.

but if your printer manufacturer hasn't paid its Microsoft tax that won't help you much. You still need to hunt down drivers.

BS FUD

VirtualMirage
VirtualMirage Veteran Member • Posts: 3,956
Re: stick with Win 7 if possible...
1

theswede wrote:

Archer66 wrote:

Typical BS FUD from Jim Cockfield.

For desktop user Win 8 is the same as Win 7 with some improvements:

It's not even remotely the same. There is no hierarchical organization of programs accessed from the start system. There is no obvious way to get rid of a Metro app which takes over the screen. There isn't even any point to Metro on a desktop system.

The desktop is very similar in looks and functionality as 7.  As for the metro apps and the new Start screen, it's very easy to get rid of a Metro app (see below for how).

The differences are very In Your Face and crippling for engineering and science users. I normally have at least dozens of programs to access industrial systems and subsystems installed, with confusing names. In the start menu they're grouped by manufacturer name and then by task to use them for - dead easy to find what I need.

I'm in IT and I don't find it crippling at all. The desktop works just the same. Majority of my apps are not Metro based and work in the desktop. I imagine most of the engineering and science apps are still desktop applications as well and will work no differently than they have in the past. Multiple applications open? No big deal, works just as it did in 7.

You do know that the Start Screen can be organized and grouped to your liking, right? Or if you know the name of them, you can quickly find it by typing a few letters on your keyboard and select it via the quick search function. You don't even have to launch a program to search, just start typing.

You can also pin them to the task bar or create shortcuts on your desktop just like you probably were in Windows 7. That works exactly the same.

It seems like your biggest beef resorts around finding and launching the application and not when it comes to actually using it. How much time do you spend launching an application? A few seconds, maybe? A little organization will make it easier for you to find things or pin the ones you frequently used, problem solved.

It takes me less time to find an app I want to launch in 8 than it does in 7's antiquated Start menu. In fact, in Windows 7 I stopped using the Start menu for most of my needs. I mainly used the search bar to find what I was looking for. I kept my frequently used programs pinned on the task bar, or in the menu. Having to click Start, All Programs, then scroll through all my programs to find what I was looking for was much slower, especially if the application was buried in multiple sub folders.

While your preference to group applications by software manufacturer may work for you, for me it didn't always pan out (especially for those applications you knew more by name than by who made it). That is where the search and/or pin capabilities came in handy. I'd also much rather group my applications by category than by manufacturer (Photo Editing, Games, Office apps, Music and Videos, etc.). Windows 8 makes it easier to organize this way.

In Windows 8 they're tiled up in the start screen with no organization and no way to tell what is for what, or even from what company.

Completely useless.

As mentioned above, easy enough to find. The Start screen can be grouped and organized to your liking, and don't forget your search options too. There are some further improvements coming down the pipe in Windows 8.1, which is in public beta soon and probably will be released sometime this summer (I'm hearing August).

- Secure booting ( no more rootkits )

Except that is normally turned off. And even if it isn't a signed root kit will still bypass it.

Turned off by who? You? The user who doesn't know what they are doing? Or those wishing to run Linux distros that doesn't have a KEK?

By default, many OEM PCs have it turned On. But Microsoft made it a requirement for them to offer the option to disable it. Remember, secure boot wasn't created by Microsoft. They were just one of the first to widely implement it. Secure boot came about through the development of the UEFI and is part of the UEFI specification.

The majority of people will not be dual booting, so this isn't an issue to them. It's for people, probably like you, that also wish to run a Linux distro that may need to disable it if they don't have a supported KEK.

- Better file copying with enchanced dialog, you can even pause it

That's an application, not an OS feature. It's been available as third party for a long time.

http://ultracopier.first-world.info/ for example.

Ummm.....it is an OS feature, it is built in to the OS and cannot be removed. You don't open a separate program to access or use, it is integrated into the functionality of the OS.

- Better multimonitor support

This part is true, apart from that no monitor will have a start button or start menu, and it's confusing how to handle Metro apps due to the lack of visual cues.

The Metro interface is your Start screen and only occupies one of the monitors, leaving the others in desktop mode.

As for visual cues, how much hand holding does one need to figure out how to use it? The Apple iOS and even Android don't have much in the way of visual cues, yet I don't hear people complaining about them for the lack of.

How is handling the Metro apps confusing? They take up a full screen. To leave them you hit the Windows Key. Meanwhile they stay resident in the background (much like how Apple OS X does). If you wish to close the app, move you mouse to the top left corner of the screen to bring up your active apps and close them. Easy.

I will say that Microsoft could have done more to show these new methods to the end user. Remember the welcome tutorial that would pop up in the notification area on every fresh install of Windows XP? I remember finding that so annoying, but it was useful to the first timers out there.

- Better taskmanager

The task manager is better looking than before, but otherwise not that different. It does integrate other parts of the control panel. Whether that is better or worse is more a matter of taste. Seeing as I come from the "do one job and do it well" camp I'm still undecided.

Task Manager received more than just a cosmetic change. If you look closer, you will see it provides loads more of useful information compared to the Task Manager in 7. It's not just another pretty face.

- Better virtual machine ( Hyper V vs Virtual PC )

Which is pretty much immaterial to anyone actually relying on virtual machines (like I do a lot) as they need to have dedicated VM software anyway.

How so?

Hyper-V allows virtualization and management of those VMs created. No other dedicated VM software is needed. The only requirements are that you are using Windows 8 Pro 64-bit and have a SLAT enabled processor (which all Intel Core i3, i5, and i7 have as well as many AMD processors).

-- hide signature --

Paul

 VirtualMirage's gear list:VirtualMirage's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony a77 II Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD +18 more
Midwest Forum Pro • Posts: 17,974
Re: Win8 vs Win7
1

gs85739az wrote:

Windows 8 will benefit those that use touch screens, mainly tablets/laptops, reaching across ALL DAY to a touch screen on a desktop will prove tiresome!

Absolutely agree. The idea that someone wants to use a keyboard, a mouse, AND touch their screen all the time is complete idiocy. Maybe a couple of foot pedals to replace the shift key and space bar will be next.

Personally, I hate having a screen full of fingerprints. On my iPad? Sure, that's the way it works, that's the nature of it. ADDING that situation on purpose where it doesn't exist already and is not needed - just to make a desktop PC act like a tablet - is just dumb.

-- hide signature --

It's nice to say that nice pictures are nice. (sarcasm)

Midwest Forum Pro • Posts: 17,974
Re: stick with Win 7 if possible...
2

Jim Cockfield wrote:

raymb wrote:

Not withstanding the much maligned metro interface on Win8, which can be replaced with third

party software. Are there any benefits in Win8 as an operating system that would make the switch worthwhile?

Not really.

Most performance tests show that the difference in speed between Windows 7 and Window is negligible (and IMO, is more likely to be due to newer drivers in Win 8 , versus OS improvements).

Windows 8 does have faster shutdown and startup speed. So, if you're using a laptop or happen to be shutting down and starting up your desktop frequently, that could be perceived as a benefit.

But,the faster shutdown and startup speed is mostly "smoke and mirrors", as Windows 8 is using something similar to the hibernate feature in Windows 7 to get the fast shutdown/startup speeds.

Personally, I'd make sure to disable that feature if using Windows 8 anyway, as if you're using any kind of dual boot config with another operating system, using "fast startup" with Windows 8 could potentially cause file system corruption. Here's a post on the subject:

http://www.addictivetips.com/windows-tips/what-is-fast-startup-windows-8-disable-it/

Here's another article on the subject;

http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Linux-and-Windows-8-Fast-Startup-puts-data-at-risk-1780640.html?page=2

Now, I wouldn't go out of my way to use Windows 7 versus Windows 8 if buying a new machine and you don't have much choice, as there are some "work arounds" that let Windows 8 look and feel more like Windows 7. For example, here's one of the free solutions you can use:

Classic Shell for Windows:

http://www.classicshell.net/

Article about it:

http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/windows-8-classic-shell.html

But, I would make sure to disable "fast boot" if you're using any kind of dual boot config to reduce the potential for file corruption, since by default, Windows 8 doesn't"really" perform a full shutdown and reload.

Again, the performance increase you get using Windows 8 is mostly "smoke and mirrors". So, unless you're using a laptop, or using another system system that's rebooted often, I would *not* consider Windows 8 to replace Windows 7.

Now, if you happen to find a good deal on a new machine with Windows 8 installed, I wouldn't avoid it if you can't find the same system with Win 7 installed.

But, if buying a machine with Win 8, I'd personally make sure to disable fast boot and use utilities like the free Classic Shell to make it work more like Windows 7, as IMO, Windows 8 is very bad in comparison for Desktop use without the use of third party utilities like Classic Shell.

Win 7 = pretty good desktop OS

Win 8 = very bad desktop OS, especially from a User Interface perspective (but, with third party utilities, you can make it work more like Windows 7)

I read that Win 8 is built on the Win 7 kernel so it should be roughly as fast, other than outside influences like new drivers or the 'smoke and mirrors' quick startup / shutdown aspects.

Windows 7 PC's still ARE available and if your vendor or store of normal choice says they don't have any, BUY ELSEWHERE and get Win 7. Leave the easily amused to play with their hybrid OS nightmare.

-- hide signature --

It's nice to say that nice pictures are nice. (sarcasm)

Glen Barrington
Glen Barrington Forum Pro • Posts: 19,662
Re: Win8 vs Win7
1

Midwest wrote:

Absolutely agree. The idea that someone wants to use a keyboard, a mouse, AND touch their screen all the time is complete idiocy. Maybe a couple of foot pedals to replace the shift key and space bar will be next.

Personally, I hate having a screen full of fingerprints. On my iPad? Sure, that's the way it works, that's the nature of it. ADDING that situation on purpose where it doesn't exist already and is not needed - just to make a desktop PC act like a tablet - is just dumb.

Yeah, I'm always cleaning my phone and tablet screen with a little spray bottle of 'stuff' but my PC?  I'm more likely to dust it than clean it!

-- hide signature --

I still like soup. . .
Now that you've judged the quality of my typing, take a look at my photos. . .
http://www.jpgmag.com/people/glenbarrington/photos

 Glen Barrington's gear list:Glen Barrington's gear list
Canon PowerShot G3 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm 1:2.8-3.5 +12 more
dradam Senior Member • Posts: 2,818
Re: Win8 vs Win7
1

Midwest wrote:

gs85739az wrote:

Windows 8 will benefit those that use touch screens, mainly tablets/laptops, reaching across ALL DAY to a touch screen on a desktop will prove tiresome!

Absolutely agree. The idea that someone wants to use a keyboard, a mouse, AND touch their screen all the time is complete idiocy. Maybe a couple of foot pedals to replace the shift key and space bar will be next.

Personally, I hate having a screen full of fingerprints. On my iPad? Sure, that's the way it works, that's the nature of it. ADDING that situation on purpose where it doesn't exist already and is not needed - just to make a desktop PC act like a tablet - is just dumb.

I've been running Windows 8 for months, and have yet to feel the need to reach across my desk and touch my screen.  It is completely, and totally usable with just keyboard and mouse.

theswede
theswede Veteran Member • Posts: 4,006
Re: stick with Win 7 if possible...
1

The differences are very In Your Face and crippling for engineering and science users. I normally have at least dozens of programs to access industrial systems and subsystems installed, with confusing names. In the start menu they're grouped by manufacturer name and then by task to use them for - dead easy to find what I need.

This was about desktop and not about Modern UI. Just pin your most used programs to taskbar or create a shortcut on your desktop just like in Win 7.

You're seriously suggesting that pinning programs to a task bar will solve the issue of not knowing what program does what from what manufacturer?

Seriously?

I bet most power users do not even use Win 7 start menu, there is no need for it.

Either you don't read what I write or you don't understand the problem. Either way, your opinion on this subject is worthless.

You do know that you can change it ?

Into a hierarchy organized as the Windows 7 start menu? Even if I can, why do I have to spend the time and effort doing this when in Windows 7 is starts out exactly like I want it with zero effort?

You have no idea what the problem is here.

No it's not, most if not all new PCs have it on.

On the Dells we purchased in the last few months it has been about 50/50.

And even if it isn't a signed root kit will still bypass it.

Pardon ?

Microsoft leaks keys like a sieve. There are plenty of Microsoft signed viruses and root kits in the wild today. Why will that change now?

- Better file copying with enchanced dialog, you can even pause it

That's an application, not an OS feature.

WTF are you talking about ????

That it's an application. Sure, it's included, but if you move using another method there is no better copying. It's not implemented at an OS layer, it's just the Explorer copy dialog which is beefed up. There were plenty of such applications around going back to the NT4 days.

That said, good thing Microsoft included it. But it's hardly a change for a power user.

Again, this was about desktop.

You can never get away from Metro. If nothing else, the start screen remains Metro.

Hyper V isnt ?

It's a bare bones one. Hardly enough for power users. Or for me either, for that matter.

Err, there is big difference. Use Google to find out more.

Uhm. No. The printer still needs the driver. It's just that the dial home and get it method is smoother.

BS FUD

You've really shown you understand and can address all issues I raised. This level of response all along would have saved you a lot of typing, and is pretty much the level of comprehension of the issues you display.

Jesper

 theswede's gear list:theswede's gear list
Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D Sony SLT-A37 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha a7 Sony a5000 +7 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads