Windows 8

[Madmax]

Anyone apart from me having a play with this yet.
Bloody thing has a few bugs, but not as many as i would expect

[jrandom]

Hell no. I'm a very late adopter.

I'll only use someone else's beta software if I'm getting paid to do so.

[Madmax]

I had a spare HDA and nothing to do

[jrandom]

I had a spare HDA and nothing to do

You have the internet, surely you could've managed one more wank for the day?

[nathanwhite]

Microsoft has an interesting trend of releasing alternately bad then good OS's. The last three went
XP=good, Vista=bad, 7=good.

I'm reserving judgement for Windows 8

[Gremlin]

Microsoft has an interesting trend of releasing alternately bad then good OS's. The last three went
XP=good, Vista=bad, 7=good.

I'm reserving judgement for Windows 8

Well, if you extrapolate that (if memory serves me correctly) there was 98 2nd Edition, Windows Me (shite), Windows 2000 (bit of a staple product), Win XP, Win Vista (shite), Win 7, Win 8.

Each time there's a hopeless one (Me and Vista are prime examples) there is a good one after it. That said, I'm still learning the annoyances in 7, like it deciding to re-classify it's domain adapter to a public one, which sends my rules out the door and the firewall clamps down. Fucks you off real good when an OS is able to change it's mind.

No, haven't used 8 at all. I played with 7 RC a few months before release, then took the jump into dual booting my work laptop with 7 a couple of days before public release. I'd never bother with beta because it's going to change anyway. I still have a few 2000 boxes floating around, plenty of XP and 2K3 to maintain, 8 can wait.

It's a bit off topic, but Microsoft has committed itself to such regular releases because of trying to change to yearly fees for software rather than buying upfront. It only makes sense to a customer if they get the new stuff every 3 years or less, beyond that and you're better to buy outright. Suppose that's the business side anyway. With the recession, also more common to drag the machines out an extra year... (or more in small ones).

[Brian d marge]

Well, if you extrapolate that (if memory serves me correctly) there was 98 2nd Edition, Windows Me (shite), Windows 2000 (bit of a staple product), Win XP, Win Vista (shite), Win 7, Win 8.

Each time there's a hopeless one (Me and Vista are prime examples) there is a good one after it. That said, I'm still learning the annoyances in 7, like it deciding to re-classify it's domain adapter to a public one, which sends my rules out the door and the firewall clamps down. Fucks you off real good when an OS is able to change it's mind.

No, haven't used 8 at all. I played with 7 RC a few months before release, then took the jump into dual booting my work laptop with 7 a couple of days before public release. I'd never bother with beta because it's going to change anyway. I still have a few 2000 boxes floating around, plenty of XP and 2K3 to maintain, 8 can wait.

It's a bit off topic, but Microsoft has committed itself to such regular releases because of trying to change to yearly fees for software rather than buying upfront. It only makes sense to a customer if they get the new stuff every 3 years or less, beyond that and you're better to buy outright. Suppose that's the business side anyway. With the recession, also more common to drag the machines out an extra year... (or more in small ones).

Im trying ,,,trying ,,,,nope cant hold back

HOW much does windows cost? and you PAY for a bad os?

Still some people actually like CZ motorcycles ........

Stephen

[nathanwhite]

It's a bit off topic, but Microsoft has committed itself to such regular releases because of trying to change to yearly fees for software rather than buying upfront. It only makes sense to a customer if they get the new stuff every 3 years or less, beyond that and you're better to buy outright. Suppose that's the business side anyway. With the recession, also more common to drag the machines out an extra year... (or more in small ones).

I usually run ubuntu. New release every 6months. :S

However I usually only bother with it every 18 months or so and you can update from within the system by about 5 click. Pretty easy really

[Scuba_Steve]

Anyone apart from me having a play with this yet.
Bloody thing has a few bugs, but not as many as i would expect

most probably cause it's not a major change, to oversimplify it Win8 biggest change (Metro) is just an overlay to Win7. But even so, like others have mentioned this is MS's "down" cycle so don't expect Win8 to work right, you'll have to wait for the "fix" which they'll charge another 400$ for titled Win9 or something.
And I'd expect the ARM version to be even worse, MS doesn't have the experience or to an extent the interest in ARM architecture this is somewhat a financially forced move rather than a chosen one, so again don't expect anything spectacular from this side of the Win8 coin

[SMOKEU]

HOW much does windows cost? and you PAY for a bad os?

8 beta is free from the MS website. I've given it a go. The start menu is very strange. Looks like it would work well on a tablet, but on a desktop, not so much.

[avgas]

I'm laughing my arse off at this thread.

Change 8 to 7 and its like stepping back to good ol 2008 on the forums.

I am running 8. Its ok, but too pretty for me. But then again I am considered ancient for still using a keyboard and mouse where as this is really designed to be used in a tablet or some kind of supercomputer like this


I have beta'd for 8, 7, Vista and XP. Best disappointment (beta-wise) was 7 - it was basically Vista SP2.
For those of you who don't remember XP was rubbish until it got its SP2. SP1 was closely followed by SP2 because Msoft thought it was a good idea to remove half the API's to make it run faster in SP1 - dumb move.

Vista, while slow, had a lot of features that have come in handy - especially for no tech people (like my dad). Somehow he managed to delete critical XP files off his laptop.........he couldn't do that with Vista. As mentioned earlier 7 was Vista with new pants, but I guess Msoft had make some money - but they would have saved a bit of face by simply releasing it as Vista SP2 instead.

The only major bug I have found with 8 so far has been the 64bit install was rubbish. Ended up giving up and doing a 32bit. But then again the 64 was PRC so I shouldn't expect much - they probably have fixed it now (this was 4 months ago).

I am chucking Mint12 64bit on the box tonight - so that should be fun.

[SMOKEU]

I am chucking Mint12 64bit on the box tonight - so that should be fun.

Mint 12 is awesome, I use that on my desktop. I don't like the GUI of the recent Ubuntu versions.

[avgas]

Mint 12 is awesome, I use that on my desktop. I don't like the GUI of the recent Ubuntu versions.

Yeah to be honest I preferred the Mint GUI as its more 'windowsish'. So have been using it on and off since about version 7.

Ubuntu failed the whole 'universal' thing for me as I found it did not deliver on half the promises it made. But then again this was nearly 10 years ago.

[Mental Trousers]

Hell no. I'm a very late adopter.

I'll only use someone else's beta software if I'm getting paid to do so.

I eventually moved my desktop to WinXP because I got new hardware (previous machine couldn't be turned off or it wouldn't turn back on again and eventually it totally gave up) and Win2k didn't have drivers etc. Software had also moved well past Win2k so it was just easier to update.

Chances are I'll skip Win7 (it's on the wife's lap top and it pisses me off) and go straight Win8SP2. In the meantime there's drivers for all the new hardware for WinXP and all the software I want/need runs on it so that's me for a while.

I'm laughing my arse off at this thread.

....

I am chucking Mint12 64bit on the box tonight - so that should be fun.

Mint is good. Ubuntu always annoyed me although I do use the LTS versions for some things, but on a desktop it's Mint all the way.

[Gremlin]

However I usually only bother with it every 18 months or so and you can update from within the system by about 5 click. Pretty easy really

Tested Ubuntu for a client, just plain didn't work when you start throwing various hardware and everyday functionality at it. Performance to Terminal server was horrible. All the applications for business purposes require Windows anyway.

I have beta'd for 8, 7, Vista and XP. Best disappointment (beta-wise) was 7 - it was basically Vista SP2.
For those of you who don't remember XP was rubbish until it got its SP2. SP1 was closely followed by SP2 because Msoft thought it was a good idea to remove half the API's to make it run faster in SP1 - dumb move.

Well to be blunt, once you start digging into menus here and there, plenty in 7 looks like 2000, possibly even older. It seems like they just add more crap on top of the core, despite telling us they are ground up new builds. Simple things like finding out the ipconfigs via GUI in XP were 2 clicks... with 7 you have to go into a centre, then the adapters, then properties, then details... WHY?!

In the meantime there's drivers for all the new hardware for WinXP and all the software I want/need runs on it so that's me for a while.

In XP I still used classic themes, but I'll admit to really enjoying 7. It scared me when I first realised it... and the hardware detection is pretty good as well.