Jump to content
witcher01

Windows 8 Information ?

Recommended Posts

Has there been much information on this new operating system ??? ive heard rumours around the place but nothing really concrete... any u guys got some information on it??? maybe a estimated release date ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an even release, so it'll be shit. Stay with 7 until 9 is ready. ;P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an even release, so it'll be shit. Stay with 7 until 9 is ready. ;P

Call me hopeful, but they may have learnt their lesson with 7. Will be an interesting release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's going to have to be a massive fucking improvement to get me off Win 7 ATM.

Personally I can't see that happening unless they get WinFS or it's equivalent sorted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still a bit early to get excited about it.

 

I wonder whether they will call it Windows 8 or something else. Windows 2012 End of the World Edition?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will windows 8 include the new filesystem to replace NTFS which they've been banging on about for years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will windows 8 include the new filesystem to replace NTFS which they've been banging on about for years?

I'm fairly sure they scrapped it long ago. It isn't as good as people think it is, and it certainly isn't a benefit if developers aren't interested in utilising it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i wonder if this will be the cover

minus the xp bit

 

Posted Image

Ouch, that the new banner for "Windows Hate"? (Which strangely enough, rhymes with "Windows 8")

 

One thing you can be certain on, is that out of the 100 things they might promise, you may get a dozen actually implemented. A lot of people around me are still sticking by Windows XP for better or worse. Heck, I've got a VM here running Windows 2000.

 

And with the Vista fiasco fresh in their minds? Who can blame them?

 

As for me, I consider myself a power user, and I've never lived without a command line of some sorts (I'm almost totally lost on a OS9 Mac). The newer user interface presented by these later editions of Windows don't particularly grab me. Heck, I'm quite content with the interface of Windows 3.1.

 

In fact, it took me a good month or two to figure out how to add icons to the desktop in Windows 95, and a little longer to add entries into the Start menu … I was used to bringing up Program Manager, going File… → New… → Program Group/Program Item, and entering the details there. For a long while, I was relying on clicking Start → Run to run my DOS games and QBasic.

 

Every new release moves things around to where they were before. And as I say, I consider myself a power user, so you can imagine how it is for a novice.

 

It's worth pointing out that I emigrated from the Microsoft world over to the Free Software world many years ago. Today, I now consider this my home and only return for short stints on business. Nothing I do for pleasure is done on Windows.

 

Whenever I do, the first thing that usually bites me is my key bindings. I'm used to being able to drive most aspects of the desktop from a keyboard alone. This is particularly handy on the netbook and laptop. I can almost ignore the pointing device and drive the machine from the keyboard entirely. Move windows around, maximise and minimise windows, move them between virtual desktops, shade windows, you name it, I can probably do it.

 

Nowhere can I see a means to do the same in Windows. Nope, Microsoft decided the key bindings you may use, and what Microsoft says, goes. Now some would argue this is standardisation. Fine… if it were a computer that I shared with others. My computer is my personal computer, and so it should work the way I want it to.

 

Microsoft with each release, seem hell-bent on making my computer present the same user interface as everyone elses, and increasingly, dumbing down the interface for the lowest common denominator. At the moment, I have one laptop which dual boots Windows XP and Linux (spends most of its time in the latter). I have a couple of VMs that run Windows. Almost everything else is Linux.

 

Some day I'll have to replace my laptop, and at that time, it may be a choice between Windows 7 and Windows 8. Mind you, I'll happily buy a Windows Vista laptop if they'll waive the operating system cost (and I give it an exorcism with a Gentoo LiveCD on-the-spot), but I doubt there'll be any left. My leaning will probably be towards the newer, as any code I develop will probably have to work on it, but likely, it'll be set up for dual-boot like this one, and will spend most of its time running Linux.

 

Microsoft won't want to rush Windows 8. Look what happened with Vista… Microsoft have managed to churn out a semi-decent OS when they've actually spent the time on it to make it a worthwhile product, fixing bugs rather than introducing features. Vista was more a case of piling on feature after feature, with the end result being an un-debugged mess that went to market. They then spent the next few years bug fixing it, which is how we got Windows 7. If they keep polishing it, it may turn out half decent, but if they just decide to do a feature-rush, it'll backfire.

 

Operating systems should not take centre stage with regards to a user's interactions. Microsoft seem hell-bent on Windows on being the reason you'd want a computer. It should just get its business done quietly in the background whilst allowing uninterrupted dialogue between application and user. After all, you don't use the OS so much, but rather the applications you install on it. This favours the more iterative approach that they took with Windows 7 and Windows XP, versus the rush that was Windows Millennium and Windows Vista.

 

I suppose my point is, if we hear that they're going to introduce feature after feature after feature, then we should run for the hills. If nothing much is said about it until release, then that may be a good sign that they've got their minds focussed where it truly matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the question is will it be worth my time to upgrade from Windows XP Pro?

If you want to play games or use new hardware that does not have XP drivers then yes I suppose it would be worth it.

BF3 at least looks like being Vista/Win 7/+ only as it is a directx 11 only game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard it's more 'cloudy' so....meh. Not real interested in cloud stuff for what I do though I can see the benefit for enterprise situations (and global megalomaniacs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i wonder if this will be the cover

minus the xp bit

 

Posted Image

Ouch, that the new banner for "Windows Hate"? (Which strangely enough, rhymes with "Windows 8")

 

One thing you can be certain on, is that out of the 100 things they might promise, you may get a dozen actually implemented. A lot of people around me are still sticking by Windows XP for better or worse. Heck, I've got a VM here running Windows 2000.

 

And with the Vista fiasco fresh in their minds? Who can blame them?

 

As for me, I consider myself a power user, and I've never lived without a command line of some sorts (I'm almost totally lost on a OS9 Mac). The newer user interface presented by these later editions of Windows don't particularly grab me. Heck, I'm quite content with the interface of Windows 3.1.

 

In fact, it took me a good month or two to figure out how to add icons to the desktop in Windows 95, and a little longer to add entries into the Start menu … I was used to bringing up Program Manager, going File… → New… → Program Group/Program Item, and entering the details there. For a long while, I was relying on clicking Start → Run to run my DOS games and QBasic.

 

Every new release moves things around to where they were before. And as I say, I consider myself a power user, so you can imagine how it is for a novice.

 

It's worth pointing out that I emigrated from the Microsoft world over to the Free Software world many years ago. Today, I now consider this my home and only return for short stints on business. Nothing I do for pleasure is done on Windows.

 

Whenever I do, the first thing that usually bites me is my key bindings. I'm used to being able to drive most aspects of the desktop from a keyboard alone. This is particularly handy on the netbook and laptop. I can almost ignore the pointing device and drive the machine from the keyboard entirely. Move windows around, maximise and minimise windows, move them between virtual desktops, shade windows, you name it, I can probably do it.

 

Nowhere can I see a means to do the same in Windows. Nope, Microsoft decided the key bindings you may use, and what Microsoft says, goes. Now some would argue this is standardisation. Fine… if it were a computer that I shared with others. My computer is my personal computer, and so it should work the way I want it to.

 

Microsoft with each release, seem hell-bent on making my computer present the same user interface as everyone elses, and increasingly, dumbing down the interface for the lowest common denominator. At the moment, I have one laptop which dual boots Windows XP and Linux (spends most of its time in the latter). I have a couple of VMs that run Windows. Almost everything else is Linux.

 

Some day I'll have to replace my laptop, and at that time, it may be a choice between Windows 7 and Windows 8. Mind you, I'll happily buy a Windows Vista laptop if they'll waive the operating system cost (and I give it an exorcism with a Gentoo LiveCD on-the-spot), but I doubt there'll be any left. My leaning will probably be towards the newer, as any code I develop will probably have to work on it, but likely, it'll be set up for dual-boot like this one, and will spend most of its time running Linux.

 

Microsoft won't want to rush Windows 8. Look what happened with Vista… Microsoft have managed to churn out a semi-decent OS when they've actually spent the time on it to make it a worthwhile product, fixing bugs rather than introducing features. Vista was more a case of piling on feature after feature, with the end result being an un-debugged mess that went to market. They then spent the next few years bug fixing it, which is how we got Windows 7. If they keep polishing it, it may turn out half decent, but if they just decide to do a feature-rush, it'll backfire.

 

Operating systems should not take centre stage with regards to a user's interactions. Microsoft seem hell-bent on Windows on being the reason you'd want a computer. It should just get its business done quietly in the background whilst allowing uninterrupted dialogue between application and user. After all, you don't use the OS so much, but rather the applications you install on it. This favours the more iterative approach that they took with Windows 7 and Windows XP, versus the rush that was Windows Millennium and Windows Vista.

 

I suppose my point is, if we hear that they're going to introduce feature after feature after feature, then we should run for the hills. If nothing much is said about it until release, then that may be a good sign that they've got their minds focussed where it truly matters.

 

MS make corporate products.

Most of your complaints are not compatible with that goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been some malware & adware around recently advertising itself as Windows 8.

 

I'm guessing that's what prompted the OPs question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Windows 8?!?

 

I'm only just about to get onto Windows 7 for fuck sake!

Innovation waits for nobody. :P

 

They do wait for me hey? :P

 

I'm one of those late comers, only upgrading from XP last year. I don't think I'll jump on the Windows 8 bandwagon until I have a valid reason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MS make corporate products.

Most of your complaints are not compatible with that goal.

Windows Home and Windows Media Centre are corporate products?

 

Even then, an office worker is going to be much more productive if they can adapt the desktop to suit their work flow, rather than having to conform to some uniform standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be getting Windows 8 as soon as it's available to MSDN subscribers (ie early beta's). Why would I do that? I'd like to know what challenges I'm going to face making my apps "For" Windows 8. I would have thought a similar logic would be reasoned by IT Pro's, as they want to test out the apps they have with this environment, or even, to keep ahead of the crowd and be able to support the system. My wife's an MCT for Windows OS's so she gets all the good stuff up front too :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only info I know is that windows 8 will not have a 32 bit version its planned to be 64 and 128 bit versions which is what Windows 7 was meant to be but they decided to change to 32 and 64 for one last time. Seems they wanna force all places to make all programs 64 bit versions and get 128 bit stuff started which I think is good cause with noone forcing this on us we'd be here in 100 years still having everything made in 32 bit to cater to the majority of PC's which seriously holds back progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only info I know is that windows 8 will not have a 32 bit version its planned to be 64 and 128 bit versions which is what Windows 7 was meant to be but they decided to change to 32 and 64 for one last time. Seems they wanna force all places to make all programs 64 bit versions and get 128 bit stuff started which I think is good cause with noone forcing this on us we'd be here in 100 years still having everything made in 32 bit to cater to the majority of PC's which seriously holds back progress.

lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only info I know is that windows 8 will not have a 32 bit version its planned to be 64 and 128 bit versions which is what Windows 7 was meant to be but they decided to change to 32 and 64 for one last time. Seems they wanna force all places to make all programs 64 bit versions and get 128 bit stuff started which I think is good cause with noone forcing this on us we'd be here in 100 years still having everything made in 32 bit to cater to the majority of PC's which seriously holds back progress.

Got a source for that? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only info I know is that windows 8 will not have a 32 bit version its planned to be 64 and 128 bit versions which is what Windows 7 was meant to be but they decided to change to 32 and 64 for one last time. Seems they wanna force all places to make all programs 64 bit versions and get 128 bit stuff started which I think is good cause with noone forcing this on us we'd be here in 100 years still having everything made in 32 bit to cater to the majority of PC's which seriously holds back progress.

O_o

 

Where's the sauce?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×