Thread: Windows 8: Good or Bad?

Here you go; here they are:

http://www.microsoft.com/global/surf...especsheet.pdf

Cheers,
Drew

Yeah we really kind of got those already (thanks for the link). I was meaning more like processor size, cost etc

I haven't found much more (yet) except, "One Windows RT tablet runs an NVIDIA Tegra 3 ARM processor, and the other Windows 8 Pro tablet runs Intel's Ivy Bridge Core i5 chips."

cost, nothing very precise yet but, somewhere around $500-800. Figure, bout the same as any existing tablet

Originally Posted by Drew

I haven't found much more (yet) except, "One Windows RT tablet runs an NVIDIA Tegra 3 ARM processor, and the other Windows 8 Pro tablet runs Intel's Ivy Bridge Core i5 chips."

cost, nothing very precise yet but, somewhere around $500-800. Figure, bout the same as any existing tablet

That would be great considering Apple has put their Ipad around $800. With Microsoft setting the price in that range it seems for sure they are competing with Apple's Ipad.

I realize that the author of the article in question is expressing a biased opinion and some of the points he makes are arguably valid and some arguably invalid. For sure, I am on his side in a general perspective. I have copies of Windows 8 betas on DVDs, but have seen Windows 8 on a couple of friend's computers and based on that experience, I have not yet installed it on any of mine. I probably will download and save a copy of Windows 8 RTM through my TechNet subscription when it becomes available, but I also probably will never install it. I have just recently backed a Windows 7 computer back to XP because XP is SO MUCH more stable. (I never moved my important work to Windows 7 due to this stability issue. Windows 2000 blows them all out of the water from a stability standpoint, but 2000 is losing so much developer support that it is becoming very frustrating.) With all those issues aside, I continue to be convinced that no one operating system will likely be developed to be optimized for everything from a cell phone to a corporate desktop client computer. Certainly will not be developed by Microsoft until some competitor shows them how. When Windows 8 hits the streets on new big box store computers, I believe the "new" factor will be the only plus feature that it will show. When "average user" tries to wade through stuff that is foreign to his prior computer experience, he is going to be very vocal about his dissatisfaction with it. Very possibly, Windows 8 will, as some predict, become the new Vista. In my personal opinion, and without spending months learning how to use a new tool to perform the same work I have been doing with my old tools for years (more than 25 years now), I would enjoy seeing Windows 8 become the new Vista.

[QUOTE=john3347;13486] I have just recently backed a Windows 7 computer back to XP because XP is SO MUCH more stable. (I never moved my important work to Windows 7 due to this stability issue. Windows 2000 blows them all out of the water from a stability standpoint, but 2000 is losing so much developer support that it is becoming very frustrating.)

This is a good point, 2000 and XP are rock solid. But if your a gamer and need the lastest Directx 10 or 11 your out of luck. The performance of the two is great, but for a media user like myself, I must go with Win 7 for games and HD content. If your pc has a DX10 card, XP will never use it nor Win2000. It is a shame though, those are both great systems that I used to swear by untill I moved to Win 7. I am getting tired of Win 8, I can't stay with the Release Preview forever and the RTM cut features I liked from Win 8 release preview, so I just moved back to Win 7 and am using Win 8 RP aero theme which is very nice looking. I can play all my DX10 games without fear of any of them running slow or freezing because of apps using memory or the system running a useless program I'll never know about.

"Well, let's see... 1 st all, Win7 ain't broken... if it ain't broke, don't fix it."


"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is excellent advice - BUT: Windows 7 IS BROKEN!! I have many more operational problems on each of my computers with Windows 7 than with two XP and one 2000 computer combined. On one Windows 7 computer, for instance, when I attempt to open a file on the harddrive from a desktop shortcut, I get an error message that says "Server Execution Failed". (This is just one of several examples of a broken system) No file (or application) that is on the harddrive will open from the desktop shortcut. This just started all at once several weeks ago. The same thing happened on another Windows 7 computer and I was able to do an upgrade install of the same OS and was therefore able to save most of my saved material. Windows 7 gives me times over more screen freezes, operational failures, and general "flaky" operation and than either my Windows XP or Windows 2000 computers. Windows 7 is definitely broken and needs some attention paid to fixing what's wrong with it and less attention to a new system that will then have to have the bugs worked out of it.

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it!

Originally Posted by john3347

"Well, let's see... 1 st all, Win7 ain't broken... if it ain't broke, don't fix it."


"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is excellent advice - BUT: Windows 7 IS BROKEN!!

Win 7 is not only unstable but it is broken. Its "search" is a joke to say the least! As for Win 8? Sorry but I don't want to degrade my PC!