Thread: Windows 8

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,687
    Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaRepub View Post
    Thanks Luke, I think SLW and I will stay with 7.
    I agree, this sounds like a train wreck.
    The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
    http://i.imgur.com/FHvkMSE.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Senior Member LukeEDay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Happy Valley
    Posts
    2,056
    Let me also add that you should never do a windows update. Always do a clean install. There is so many things that could go wrong with an update; ie, drivers break, programs don't work, renaming folder structures, etc.

    Windows 8 as far as I am concerned is not worth the hassle or time. Stick with Windows 7. It will be another decade or so before they stop supporting it. By then they might have something better out.

    I love my God, my country, my flag, and my troops ....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,687
    I guess the software engineers they have now are the same kids that were walking into open manholes and running into walls while they were texting 5 years ago. God help us.
    The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
    http://i.imgur.com/FHvkMSE.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Senior Member Janice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern USA
    Posts
    2,809
    I beta tested too. Luke layed it out well. It will be too weird for most people unless they make some changes. I tell folks to stick with XP or 7. When we beta tested the various increments of Win 7 they actually seemed to listen to and act upon our (the beta testers) input. Not so much with this version. I like fast intuitive and hands-on. I'd pass on this one.
    http://i1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd445/JansGraphix/ConsUndergrd-Sig2.jpg
    Liberalism is just communism sold by the drink.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    617
    Do NOT get windows 8, all they did was take the xbox 360 dashboard and the windows phone OS and made it into the desktop OS. Seriously, every program is ran in an app form even the "desktop" view with the start menu etc. is an app. You have to ask yourself why is it only 70 bucks, when all the other OS's have been 150ish, except for windows 7 for me I totally had a student discount and got it for 32:P
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member LukeEDay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Happy Valley
    Posts
    2,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Janice View Post
    I beta tested too. Luke layed it out well. It will be too weird for most people unless they make some changes. I tell folks to stick with XP or 7. When we beta tested the various increments of Win 7 they actually seemed to listen to and act upon our (the beta testers) input. Not so much with this version. I like fast intuitive and hands-on. I'd pass on this one.
    I agree. I don't think they listened to the beta testers on this one at all. All that came out of it was that I got a free copy of it. Of course, I won't be using it ..

    I love my God, my country, my flag, and my troops ....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Member TVDOC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    280
    Quote Originally Posted by LukeEDay View Post
    Let me also add that you should never do a windows update. Always do a clean install. There is so many things that could go wrong with an update; ie, drivers break, programs don't work, renaming folder structures, etc.

    Windows 8 as far as I am concerned is not worth the hassle or time. Stick with Windows 7. It will be another decade or so before they stop supporting it. By then they might have something better out.
    My experience with Windows (and Microsoft in general) in the commercial arena (for use on computers in a technical, server, and office environments) is NEVER use a new version.......EVER.....at least until it has been in retail use for at least 12 months. Our practice was to always use the "next generation back" from that which is currently available for a couple of reasons:

    1. So far every new version of Windows is full of code errors, security problems, driver problems, and bugs, that require a good number of months to fix, and Microsoft falls waaaaay down the list of software companies that are really responsive to customer problems and providing the methodology and one-on-one support capability. They seem to think that their customers have nothing else to do than wade through hundreds of website pages to devine the solution to a problem (if one exists).

    2. Microsoft has the annoying history of writing and selling one very good version of Windows, followed by one that is a total disaster.....ME is a good example. There are some exceptions........Win2000 (which was the last version built on the NT kernel) and followed by XP (which was also good about 9 months after its release) Hence, the desire to always run the version that is one edition back from the current version if you need the systems to run relatively dependably and stable. In an environment where your systems absolutely have to run right every day, day-in-and-day-out, stick with the proven OS. I would add that I'm not totally impressed with Windows 7, even now mine still has some annoying bugs that Microsoft hasn't fixed yet........

    As a matter of information, before I retired, I was still running Win2000Pro on (32 bit) technical devices and servers long after Microsoft stopped supporting it because it was probably the most stable, and trouble free OS that they have come up with.......only when drivers became difficult to obtain and update did I finally transition to XP, and then only reluctantly. I've always been a believer in the old sage that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"........

    YMMV.......for what it's worth.....

    doc
    Last edited by TVDOC; 10-26-2012 at 12:21 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Senior Member LukeEDay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Happy Valley
    Posts
    2,056
    Quote Originally Posted by TVDOC View Post
    My experience with Windows (and Microsoft in general) in the commercial arena (for use on computers in a technical, server, and office environments) is NEVER use a new version.......EVER.....at least until it has been in retail use for at least 12 months. Our practice was to always use the "next generation back" from that which is currently available for a couple of reasons:

    1. So far every new version of Windows is full of code errors, security problems, driver problems, and bugs, that require a good number of months to fix, and Microsoft falls waaaaay down the list of software companies that are really responsive to customer problems and providing the methodology and one-on-one support capability. They seem to think that their customers have nothing else to do than wade through hundreds of website pages to devine the solution to a problem (if one exists).

    2. Microsoft has the annoying history of writing and selling one very good version of Windows, followed by one that is a total disaster.....ME is a good example. There are some exceptions........Win2000 (which was the last version built on the NT kernel) and followed by XP (which was also good about 9 months after its release) Hence, the desire to always run the version that is one edition back from the current version if you need the systems to run relatively dependably and stable. In an environment where your systems absolutely have to run right every day, day-in-and-day-out, stick with the proven OS.

    As a matter of information, before I retired, I was still running Win2000Pro on (32 bit) technical devices and servers long after Microsoft stopped supporting it because it was probably the most stable, and trouble free OS that they have come up with.......only when drivers became difficult to obtain and update did I finally transition to XP, and then only reluctantly.

    YMMV.......for what it's worth.....

    doc
    True, and right. There are A LOT of businesses still running XP and server 2003 because they work, and work well...And they don't want to fix something that is not broken. In all reality, when it comes to the business environment, XP was awesome.

    I did like Windows 2000 Pro and Windows 2000 Server also. There were a nice, and stable. That is where I learned most of my server set up from.

    It is the same principle with Mac Os X Server. They discontinued X Serv, and now have it minimalized to Mountain Lion Server. They went from have a full fledged server environment to having a little setting box with things taken out or condensed.

    I love my God, my country, my flag, and my troops ....
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •