Goodbye windows 8 ?

[Geek007]

I can't help feeling smug.

Microsoft has become an arrogant bunch, so this is their comeuppance

Couldn't agree with you more. 10% well and truly ouch!!
Never underestimate the power of public opinion.

 

[HCHTech]

So...the crux of the article is that Microsoft is replacing Windows 8 with Windows 9. I don't see how this is news. They even try to play up the timing angle by saying:

============
It will go on sale in 2015, far earlier than many anticipated.
It is only 15 months since Microsoft launched Windows 8
============

so in 2015, it will have been 3 years since Windows 8 was released. I have seen April 2015 in other articles, so that would be 2.5 years. It is 15 months NOW since it was released. I don't see any mention of who the "many" were that anticipated a later release.

The previous versions of Windows targeted to home users were released

6 April 1992 Windows 3.1
24 August 1995 Windows 95 (3.38 yrs)
25 June 1998 Windows 98 (2.84 yrs)
14 Sept 2000 Windows ME (2.22 yrs)
25 October 2001 Windows XP (1.11 yrs)
30 January 2007 Windows Vista (5.26 yrs)
22 July 2009 Windows 7 (2.48 yrs)
26 October 2012 Windows 8 (3.26 yrs)
April 2015 ? Windows 9 (2.43 yrs)

So the average for every version of Windows before 9 is roughly 2.94 yrs. If there are no delays and Win9 comes out in April '15, that will be 2.43 years - hardly that much of a departure from the average, and more time than for XP and about the same as Win7.

I'm not a fanboy, but the article seems to be making much ado about nothing. Microsoft has a history of replacing less-than-favorably-received versions faster than those that were well-liked. How could they do otherwise?

 

[nlinecomputers]

Having read http://winsupersite.com/windows-8/threshold-be-called-windows-9-ship-april-2015

This seems more rumor and wishful thinking then truth. They are going to change things but what will be changed is speculation at this point.

 

[gunslinger]

I really don't understand what people are talking about when they say Win 8 is faster. I have run both side by side on the same machine and I have yet to see this speed. I'm running Windows 7 on my ancient custom machine with Core 2 duo and 4 gb and it runs as fast as any of the new Win 8 machines that are coming into the shop for basic tasks.


Oh well, maybe I'm too old and out of touch to notice this new speed increase.

 

[Martyn]

I really don't understand what people are talking about when they say Win 8 is faster. I have run both side by side on the same machine and I have yet to see this speed. I'm running Windows 7 on my ancient custom machine with Core 2 duo and 4 gb and it runs as fast as any of the new Win 8 machines that are coming into the shop for basic tasks.


Oh well, maybe I'm too old and out of touch to notice this new speed increase.

I'm one of the people who said 8 was faster than my 7 side by side. A few months on and the 8 is a dog and the 7 runs lovely The 7 machine is my bench machine as well.

 

[phaZed]

I find Windows 8 to be extremely fast during boot-up, somewhat faster on shutdown, and moderately to somewhat faster while operating (Compared to 7).. all in all, I see Windows 8's "Under The Hood" as a great improvement over prior OS's. I rather enjoy the desktop interface and Window styling, file copy status info, Task Man, etc.. but ya, Metro is a piece of dog crap.

When they released 8 for the customer preview and developers, asking for feedback, everyone screamed about the problems we speak of and MS released it anyway - pretty much as-is. Shame on them and now it's biting them in the ass.

I have had literally 5% of my Win8 customers say they like it, and the other 95% hate it UNTIL I put an alternate start menu on it and boot to desktop. Metro is the killer. The stupid, it burns. IMO, the sooner Balmer leaves, the better.

 

[NYJimbo]

I have had literally 5% of my Win8 customers say they like it, and the other 95% hate it UNTIL I put an alternate start menu on it and boot to desktop. Metro is the killer. The stupid, it burns. IMO, the sooner Balmer leaves, the better.

^^^^ - this right here.

99% of the end users don't even know that they can install a start menu.

Just yesterday I put "classic shell" on a customers PC and he said "Why hasn't Microsoft offered this already ?".

Good question......

 

[gunslinger]

Look for Windows 9 to boot directly to the desktop complete with start menu and offer the "metro" interface and an alternative. Exactly what they should have done to start with instead of beta testing it on an unsuspecting public just like they did with Vista/Win7. We are seeing it with Win8/Win9, and before in WinME/XP. The reason every other OS is good is because they basically beta test it on the public for a year or two first.

 

[coffee]

I really don't understand what people are talking about when they say Win 8 is faster. I have run both side by side on the same machine and I have yet to see this speed. I'm running Windows 7 on my ancient custom machine with Core 2 duo and 4 gb and it runs as fast as any of the new Win 8 machines that are coming into the shop for basic tasks.


Oh well, maybe I'm too old and out of touch to notice this new speed increase.

Girlfriend bought a new laptop and it came with windows8 on it. Boy was it fast!

FROM THE LAPTOP TO THE TRASH

-----
I have never thought of it as fast. Its about the same as any other windows version.

coffee

 

[gunslinger]

Girlfriend bought a new laptop and it came with windows8 on it. Boy was it fast!

FROM THE LAPTOP TO THE TRASH

-----
I have never thought of it as fast. Its about the same as any other windows version.

coffee

People who think Win 8 is fast apparently have never used a fast Windows 7 machine or Elementary OS.

 

[coffee]

People who think Win 8 is fast apparently have never used a fast Windows 7 machine or Elementary OS.

I think its all windows fan boy hype when they say "gee, this version is alot faster". Or the windows supported sites launch a article campaign telling everyone how great it is.

coffee

 

[gunslinger]

I think its all windows fan boy hype when they say "gee, this version is alot faster". Or the windows supported sites launch a article campaign telling everyone how great it is.

coffee

Exactly. If I remember correctly at least 6 experienced "techies" on here argued me for months that Windows Vista was a lot faster than XP....lol If its new and shiny it just has to be better right?

 

[coffee]

Exactly. If I remember correctly at least 6 experienced "techies" on here argued me for months that Windows Vista was a lot faster than XP....lol If its new and shiny it just has to be better right?

Of course, Everyone knows linux is faster

Unfortunately, They dont make quickbooks for linux yet

coffee

 

[phaZed]

Gee, this thread is devolving fast...

Of course, the techs that argue that Windows 8 is faster than 7 (or other previous Win versions) may be right because they have some hands-on time with it, or at least recognize that the technical method in which Windows 8 operates during boot and shutdown is fundamentally different, but I digress.

That method, that I shall mention, would be that Windows 8 employs a "hybrid" of cold booting and hibernation in which ONLY the drivers and user session are reloaded on a cold boot. The services and kernel session are hiberfile'ed and recalled upon boot - which explains why boot times are faster. Of course you guys could have looked that up (or should have already known) prior to posting your mild-mannered slams.

Makes some TN members look kind of "ignant" - Just sayin'!

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/09/08/delivering-fast-boot-times-in-windows-8.aspx

 

[gunslinger]

For the record Aaron I said "I'm running Windows 7 on my ancient custom machine with Core 2 duo and 4 gb and it runs as fast as any of the new Win 8 machines that are coming into the shop for basic tasks." I said nothing about boot times and I see boot time as a non-issue anyway because I rarely restart my machines unless its to install updates. For basic everyday tasks I have seen no speed difference.

 

[phaZed]

People who think Win 8 is fast apparently have never used a fast Windows 7 machine or Elementary OS.

Ok, gunslinger, have it both ways.. I could really care less bud. Good day.

 

[BrentfromZulu]

I feel as though it is a wash. Looking at the benchmarks when W8 first came out it was typically a slight lead, although practically everything fell in the margin of error.

Windows 8 does have faster USB 3 Transfer speeds (unless you have select motherboards that have special stuff for USB 3 like ASUS).

Benchmarks aside, I, like most people, just work better in Windows 7. I had Windows 8 for a while and was okay with it. Then, I reformatted to Windows 7, and I realized how much better off I was with Windows 7.

 

[nlinecomputers]

I feel as though it is a wash. Looking at the benchmarks when W8 first came out it was typically a slight lead, although practically everything fell in the margin of error.

Windows 8 does have faster USB 3 Transfer speeds (unless you have select motherboards that have special stuff for USB 3 like ASUS).

Benchmarks aside, I, like most people, just work better in Windows 7. I had Windows 8 for a while and was okay with it. Then, I reformatted to Windows 7, and I realized how much better off I was with Windows 7.

Ok wasn't you the one that said you "couldn't take the article seriously" and that "Metro was the future of Windows"? That seems contradictory to this statement here.

 

[gunslinger]

Ok, gunslinger, have it both ways.. I could really care less bud. Good day.

Not trying to be a hard ass or anything. I'm just saying the boot speed does not mean anything to me. Real world, in use, common every day tasks do. I think most people would agree with that but to each their own. I have never personally been able to see a difference in speed. Maybe the benchmarks disagree but if there is no real perceptible increase in the speed of everyday tasks, what good is it? Other than to be able to say "Win8 scores 3-5 points higher in such in such benchmark"


Even if it was significantly faster (say 20-30% or more) to the point there was an obvious difference, It wouldn't matter much to me if I had to put up with metro and the new menu structure.

 

[Krynn72]

Personally I've had no issues with windows 8 or 8.1 at all using it as my primary OS on my desktop machine. I've been using it since a few months before it came out and had very little issue getting down a quick and easy workflow for it. Frankly, I hardly notice a difference between it and windows 7. I see the metro UI for maybe a whole 2 minutes per week with 3-6 hours daily use. I won't upgrade my laptop from windows 7 though, simply because there really is so little difference as far as I am concerned. I like the new start menu better, and I do see a significant boost to boot up speed, but I won't pay any more money to get those changes for my laptop.

Most complaints about it from my customers and from people online seem based on initial aversion to the metro UI, and that was enough to put them in the mood to over-criticize everything about it. You need to use that UI for very, very, very few things. Sure there's stuff to gripe about, but being a Linux user as well, I have just as many gripes about windows 7 as I do 8 (and frankly, a lot less for either of those than I do with linux).

Its no surprise though. People hating change isn't anything new. That said, I am curious where they will go with Windows 9. I can't see them giving up on the idea of a new interface and going back to the 7 year old design that everyone is begging for.