Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by brumgrunt, 24 Jul 2012.
ability to remove metro permanantly and giving at least a start pearl - job done
until then though , most home users will look at it and go ` yeah wheres my touch screen monitor 2 feet away`
I rather want them to beef up their browser, make it faster, better and FULL support for HTML5 and Hardware accelerate ALL CSS3 functions. Since the browser is the MOST used application on the windows platform anyway.
If you actually use Windows 8, you'll see that the Start Screen is better than the Start menu. Granted the default layout sucks, but once you add folders, make your groups, and pick a better color like dark gray as background instead of flashy green (PS: you do that at first run of the OS), then the Start screen is very enjoyable to use. Imagine seeing new bit-tech.net news right in front of you, without clicking or doing anything. Interested in the headline? Open it up, and read all about it. Same for other news, imagine Steam implementation as well, and perhaps even games.
I am using Windows 8 as we speak on my desktop with my 24inch screen, and I have no trouble using it. Is it all around better than the Start menu? No, it has it's weaknesses, but it's clearly adjustable over time. And so far, the strength surpass the weaknesses.
IE10 currently gets 319 on the HTML5 test so it'll be a pretty good browser. I'd be very surprised if it didn't support full GPU acceleration for all CSS3 effects.
Windows 8 just needs a coretemp tile & a HWMonitor tile and all will be well with the world.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
I remember circa windows 95 when people where hating the start menu as to how people are hating metro now signalling the death of windows back then.
I have to admit I still find metro awkward, its not really that bad but I feel that its missing something, maybe more lives tiles from third party apps, maybe an ability to somehow add more customization to its background (though I understand why the need for the static backgrounds).
but overall its not really that bad, I find the workflow almost the same when using the good ol start menu if not faster ( win + typing what you need select enter)
(sigh.. just realized how old i am now)
Every app should be 3d enabled!
Word could show fonts that look like they are raised from the paper, when you type words like bOObs, the Os could imitate what they are describing.
Excel could have sound effects when your budget is not balanced, or when you have an excess of cash it could automatically launch your browser and direct you to the closest high-end escort service.
For Internet Explorer if could have quiet sobbing since no one use that browser anymore.
What a joke, maybe they can add features like not having to reboot to install something, Linux has the ability to CHANGE the core OS code on the fly and has since... well forever!
Or maybe we could have an OS that does not have to be reinstall every 9 to 12 months because it corrupts itself over time.
Microsoft has done more to HARM the PC platform and hold back its development than any other entity or factor.
Yours in anti-Microsloth Plasma,
You're entitled to your opinion and to pick what you use. I'm glad you like it and I'm happy you'll be able to upgrade to Windows 8 and use Metro.
... I'm with this guy.
I've used the consumer preview and I've been helping one of our techies get his laptop running with the latest preview version with a view to rolling it out company wide. Our VPN doesn't work with it, so its a no-go, and there's a couple other problems.
I actively dislike the Metro interface to the point that I'll fight to the last to use Linux as my desktop OS instead, despite the horrendous problems I know it'll give me.
Or hold off the upgrade until Stardock create a way to get rid of it.
I don't care about enjoyable, I care about effectiveness. When I go to Start and launch a program, I want to be able to do it within a split second and not have to scroll through this long mess of blocks. Last time I tried Metro, I spent a good 5 minutes trying to figure out how to add something to it directly from the interface, and it aggravated me how there's so much wasted vertical space.
Or, I could just open a web brower (which could be opened from quicklaunch as 1 click, if desired) that automatically opens to those pages so I get the full thing in front of me from the very beginning. This of course is assuming I'm using Windows, which I rarely touch. In Linux there's methods that are best of both worlds such as a resizable browser that is attached to your desktop.
Anyways back to the article, its nice Windows is finally getting these improvements, however, I personally feel things like graphics performance should be left up to userspace, not kernelspace.
wouldn't a new scedualler work better . sted of constantly switching cores t should load one core whit 1 task or thread and keep it at that core. when a new thread gets activated it should set it on another core. this would stop L2 and L1 cashe crushing , increases the clockgating and power gating. it would also trigger turbo more often.
People who are complaining about the metro start screen, you do know that you can type whatever you're looking for and it will immediately show the program/app/whatever? No need for scrolling or looking for your app. Try it out, it's awesome.
I'm definitely looking forward to using the full finished version.
Or, I could still do that with the original start menu, so that point is somewhat invalid. Half the point of a GUI is to avoid using the keyboard. If I really wanted to type out the program, I'd crack open a command line, which I often do anyway.
Every little helps I guess, though I don't feel general app rendering is much of a problem in 7... maybe free up CPU cycles for something else and be handy for hardware with a weedy GPU and relatively powerful GPU.
Nothing wrong with improvements in general rendering, I admit it isn't really a killer feature but doesn't deserve the tirade of mocking.
Is it really such a huge inconvenience to reboot every once in a while? It isn't like every single package you install requires it.
Also, I'm not 100% sure but I'm pretty sure the kernel can't be altered on the fly. It can be upgraded and modules can be loaded, however.
I think you're maybe confusing "Changing the core OS code" with installing software, however.
PEBCAK, IMHO. I only do a reinstall after a major hardware change (board replacement, for example) and even that isn't always strictly necessary. This install has been going since the Sandy bridge launch, my Dad's XP machine has been running fine from the same install for ~9 years.
Everything post 9x has been pretty stable if you're diligent.
DOS and Windows in the 80s/early 90s made the IBM PC ubiquitous in the office and at home. I'd argue they've done more in the PC platforms favour than probably any other factor, bar maybe the clean room BIOS engineering that made clones possible.
I'm not a Microsoft fanboy by any stretch of the imagination and celebrate the strengths and flexibility of *nix; but your frankly emotive inaccuracies give those of us who champion open source a bad name.
I tried win 8, I looked at it for about 10 seconds then powered off my vm and bleached my eyes.
I couldn't find control panel instantly, it scared me. I will try again.
I think you've taken Microsoft's vague descriptions of their increases and added in some explanatory text... but resulted in accurate reporting.
At least that's how I read the figures...
A 100 per cent frame rate boost would mean your FPS was doubled, right? You've got your original 100% plus the 100% boost. A 50% bost is x1.5 the original, and a 150% boost is x2.5 the original? Still with me?
But even though MS say "Framerate increase over windows 7" I think what they mean is "Framerates compared to windows 7"
I think MS mean that a 150% 'increase' is 50% higher than before and not the original 100% and another 150%.
Statistical information is inaccurately presented like this all the time. An 'after' comparison to the original 'before' is presented as an increase. Why? Either through a misunderstanding of the differences or because presenting comparisons as increases is a good way of making things seem better than before.
100% faster means it's twice as fast. A 10% boost means you're 10% better than before not at 10% of the original level.
The reason I'm pretty convinced when MS says 150% they really mean new speed = 'old 100%' + 'new 50%' and not 'old 100%' + 'new 150%' is that if they had really made things x2.5 as fast they'd use these sorts of figures and not 150%.
How about a clarification in the article either detailing the actual increases? Or by not calling the before / after comparisons boosts and jumps.
1) because my Ubuntu server doesn't right now shows me "Restart to complete Updates...".
2) if your Windows 7 installation corrupts itself in 9-12 months, then there is something wrong with your computer or your usage scenario. I had to reinstall at motherboard change only..
@Windows8: I don't mind the Start screen, my only issue is that many times i push the Windows key by mistake, and there is a huge visual difference between Start menu showing up in Windows 7 versus whole desktop going away in Windows 8 .
I haven't used Windows 8. From videos and user reports it tends to look somewhat obnoxious and generally full of features I'd never use. However, how many of us tech people actually leave things at default? I'm sure within a couple months use I'd have the system bent to my will and fully customized just the way I like it, similar to what you've done.
Maybe some still won't like it, but props to you for actually using it and working with it rather than saying "it's different, change is bad" and never looking back.
I'm a little worried about this... with hitting the Windows key becoming more and more common I can see it being accidentally pressed more in games. Who knows, though. Maybe you can bind it to a different key (or key combo). I can forsee much rage playing an online game and popping up the start screen at a bad comment!
Exactly. And some people wonder if I work for Microsoft. I don't.. I just give it a genuine try, and push myself to see what Microsoft (or whoever) was thinking, adapt, see what I can do improve my usage, THEN judge.
While I didn't say it at first, as I keep everything until I am comfortable and THEN comment, I didn't like the Start Screen on my laptop nor desktop. Despite using the dark gray color layout, to make it smoother to the eye (and nicer.. my opinion), I still got the shock of switch. Exactly like User Account Control dialog box. But like everyone here.. I got use to it, rather quickly actually.. Took me a week of actual using Windows 8 as if it was my main OS, and I got used to it. And now enjoy it more than the Start Screen. I have more items than on my start menu, I find things much faster as I don't have to go to sup-directory for 1x executable, or pass through a long list in that folder of "help", "readme", website link, and so on. So I find that I am more productive.
Games block it, and those who don't, just shows the desktop, like in Windows 7... just without the start menu. Now I haven't tried ALL games, but the ones I have, those are the behavior it does.
You should care about my enjoyability, it shouldn't be a mystery what I do with my computer to you guys, and my high standards. If something makes me loose productivity, or hard to use, then I don't enjoy it.
-> Open > All Programs > Find and open folder of the program I want. Find in a long list of useless items that contains the following items or more: "uninstall", "readme", some web link, "help", and more. Find the program, click to run.
Results: 3 mouse clicks, lot more second to find... harder to see to high res screen resolution due to smaller text.
-> Open > Have A LOT more programs... even on a 1440x900 screen resolution on my laptop > Click on program to run.
Results: 2 mouse clicks, few seconds to find.
Also, with the wonderful touch pads we have on our laptop. Large icons are god send. That is one of the big reasons why I LOVE Windows 7 task bar. Even if I use my mouse, larger icons are easier to click on than tiny items.
Also, I don't get what you are talking about "vertical space". It uses the vertical space just fine. Your complaining without real reason.. just to bash on something.
Anyway, You know what will be cool, and I can see... Desktop apps, with Metro icons. Click on them it runs the desktop app. All fine. But the title can inform you about an update for the program. Like puts a star or something on the live tile. Just an idea.
It's just to show how many possibility developer can take advantage off, and goes far further than news and e-mail notification.
Separate names with a comma.