News HP switches to Windows 7 'by popular demand'

Depends on what device its running on and who's figures you believe.
http://blog.laptopmag.com/tested-windows-7-beats-windows-8-in-battery-life-file-copy-more

But I'm not really the one to answer that for other people, as my original question of "Seriously though when people roll out this innovation label what is it they are expecting ?" has so far only been thoroughly answer by your self, yet remains unanswered by other people like SexyHyde who originally stated ...

Yet they refuse to say what they see as the innovations that 8.x bring to the table, instead preferring to make unhelpful and snide remarks.

 

Greetings!

Again, another improvement that will not be perceived by the large majority of users as most users dont change OS in mobile devices.
Someone who bought a pre-W8 OS mobile device will stick with that OS for the rest of the lifetime of the mobile device. When user changes to another mobile device with W8+ OS he might perceive the improvement, but will perceive it coming from the new mobile device and not from the OS.

 

For me it has quicker boot up/shut down times, from what I've seen better slightly better performance overall, especially since my chip is an AMD one, has taskbars on both monitors (massive upgrade).

They're probably the main ones, I didn't do that much research before going for it though, and since it's a new build I can't directly compare my experience on W7 since the HW was different.

 

Sorry but did i say 7 is better than 8 in terms of battery life ? Because i believe i said "Depends on what device its running on and who's figures you believe."

Well if you insist, not that im the one trying to compare 7 and 8.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2057938/microsoft-apple-is-to-blame-for-reports-of-poor-windows-battery-life.html

But as i keep saying I'm not the one disputing what you or other people see as being innovative about Windows 8.x. You have already stated that no matter how small or how much a change benefits you, you see it as an innovation, and that fine. Did i launch into post after post disputing your opinion? Or did i accept that your opinion differs from mine and move on?

No you have listed what you see as an innovation, something that "make changes in something established" And as i have repeatedly said...
Seriously though when people roll out this innovation label what is it they are expecting ?
People role out this label all the time, claiming this and that isn't innovative and i would like people to explain what they expect when they use this term.

We have already established that you would be happy to call something innovative if a new product came out that was 1Mhz faster than the previous version, or if they change the name of a feature and added minimal technical improvements.

 

That argument seems a bit disingenious. Gareth has clearly argued that innovation is defined to mean a change made in something established by introducing something new, and that it is generally understood to bring an improvement. A 1Mhz hike does not constitute an innovation. What technical improvements are "minimal" is a subjective judgement.

I'm sorry, you are trying to compare battery life of different Microsoft OSs on a device that is not made for them? Might that be a factor to take into account?

What I would expect is a new and better way of doing things. Do I think that Windows 8 fits that bill? Faster boot: check. Less prone to crashes: check. Better integration with SkyDrive: check. Start Screen instead of Start Menu: check (yes, I know that others feel different, but this is my user experience). Better battery life: check. Allows for more versatile multi-function devices: check.

Now your mileage may vary, but I in Windows 8 I got what I expected by the word "innovation".

 

Sorry but how is it disingenious to state what i have stating all along in this thread, and that is asking "when people roll out this innovation label what is it they are expecting ?"

Yes Gareth has given the definition of innovation to mean change in something established by introducing something new, but frankly that seems a rather weak definition and hence why i drew attention to it by saying he would be happy with a 1Mhz hike.

TBH I didn't put much effort into it. As i have already stated "Depends on what device its running on and who's figures you believe." I.e I'm not trying to get into a competition on who can prove what OS is better than the other.
All I'm trying to do is find out what people like Phil Rhodes and SexyHyde mean when they use the term innovation, as this word seems to be bandied about all the time to either prove or disprove the newest thing is either great or useless.

So in general, and putting aside your professed like of 8.x for a moment, the good points outweigh the bad I'm guessing. As for myself it's the other way around.

As explained above I'm not the one trying to get into a competition on who can prove what OS is better than another, so didn't care much for taking your bait.
And far from descending into argumentum ad hominem like you seem intent on trying to do (with childish statements about my poor grasp on the English language), i have constantly stated that I'm merely trying to clarify what people mean when they use the term "innovate" to either dis or bigup the latest tech.

 

So this coming patch Tuesday i can go around proclaiming Microsoft have innovated yet again.

So you didn't say the following then ?

...

Sorry, but do please point me to the post i made that is an ad hominem attack upon your person. Because i can point you to plenty of post where you claim i said things that i didn't, and outright attacked me.

As i previously said if the %500 speed up effect very few people i wouldn't exactly call it impressive or an innovation, especially as no one ever said "Gosh rendering text sure is slow"

Again putting words into my mouth. Do point me to the post that "roundly refused to accept any of the changes that came in Windows 8 as innovative"

You would assume incorrectly then, because IIRC i actually said "OK i guess they would count as technical innovations, yes ?"

No. You stated...

Or are you going to say you didn't mean to emphasis Make changes in something established

 

If this coming Patch Tuesday Microsoft releases a patch that brings a significant improvement by doing things different from how they were done before, then yes, they can be said to have innovated.

A 1Mhz hike in CPU performance in itself is not an innovation. It is just a marginal improvement in existing affairs. But if that 1Mhz hike was, say, accompanied by a 20% reduction in TDP by using a new chip substrate or transistor technology, then it is an innovation. See the difference?

But according to the definition of the word, it is. And as Gareth explained, people will say: "Gosh, that battery lasts longer". As it does when CPUs can get tasks done more efficiently and drop back to idle quicker.

But OK, say we have this new enzyme therapy for patients with a rare gentic metabolic disorder that only 60 people in the UK suffer from, which reduces their symptoms and extends their life. It only affects very few people... Most of us won't notice it even exists. Innovative?

 

You don't have to go back to the stone age to know that new tech is generally a bit poop. It improves and can then become established and further refined. Just look at the XP to vista to 7. XP was the pinnacle of the technology it was based on. Vista was a rewrite and a bit pants. Windows 7 was a refinement and has become well established. The desktop on 8 is a further refinement. It introduced metro which is pants (outside of surface devices) 8.1 was a refinement and so the cycle continues

4k monitors had 30Hz refresh rates. The occulus had low res monitors etc etc.

Tech refreshes so quickly being old doesn't give such an advantage.

Lol!

 

Damn it got juicy in here while I was gone.

Already done by Gareth, to a very fine degree too, I may add.

See my very first post when I defended innovation in Win 8, then stated I use Win 7, Ubuntu and Android.
For me Win 8 is not suitable, all the things I know and admit it does better are negated by the longer time I spend in system navigation. They still innovated where they innovated, some people can navigate Win 8 quicker than Win 7, just because I can't doesn't mean they didn't innovate.

You may think my comments were snide and unhelpful, but I posted them with the intention of letting you know you were digging a hole for yourself. I was trying to be funny and HELPFUL. I'm sorry if my comments got you butthurt. I'd like to think maybe I was your true friend in this discussion, in that I was telling you to stop digging, everyone else gave you energy drinks and bigger spades.

You need them chopsticks yet?

 

You're absolutely right, and yet many people seem to forget this obvious pattern!

 

So when i said...

And you replied yes but without the great part, who is it that decides that its just new or a great new thing, you ?
Because the word great would indicate a notable degree or newness, yet you say that isn't the case. So thusly i assume you would be happy with anything new, no matter how small.

Nothing to do with making an argument easier, more to do with that's what you said (see above) you stated an innovation just has to be new, a 1Mhz bump is new is it not ?

You mean when you claimed i said the following...

...

Again who's setting this bar, you ? if the increase in 2D rendering was only %250 would you still call it an innovation, how about if it was only %100, %50 or %5 ?

Well i apologise if that how it came across, as i wasn't intending to say they were not innovative. But that kinda highlights the point i have been trying to make, you see all the things you listed as innovations, while i maybe rather cack handedly called into question how truly innovative some of those thing are.

I understand the meaning perfectly, but as explained above you seem to want to set this bar for how new or how much something has changed before we can claim its innovative at the exact definition of the word, I.e just something new.
Because when i questioned if you meant some great new way of doing things, you said without the great, so it just needs to be a new way of doing things, a few tweak hear and there, a new name and its an innovation.

You know you already covered this further up in your post, so i will just say see above.

 

I present to you, The Chork!



Proper innovation, right there.