tincup wrote:

I still miss the XP explorer thing: Up Button, explorer pane, triangles etc.

There are several interface enhancements that 7 has that by now I find it a bit of a pain going back to XP. I love the previews of open items on the Taskbar, thumbnails for icons on the desktop, Aero Shake and jumbo high res icons. A Windows Explorer folder now makes a pretty good photo management program. Windows Key+Tab does a more graphical Alt+Tab.

The changes to the folder navigation I feel are a step forward. The Win7 folders have both a back and forward buttons. The up button is not needed as the addressbar uses bread crumbs to be able to instantly navigate to any higher folder in the path with a single click. If by explorer pane you mean the navigation pane or fodler treeview, it is still there, you just have to turn it on (Organize > Layout) You can also turn the Menubar back on.

Mind you, that I still like a couple of things in the XP interface better, but with a few tweaks the only thing that I miss is the original XP search and the ability to arrange items in the start menu and folder icons. The ability pin items in the Start Menu lessens my desire about the Start Menu.

BTW, in case you are not aware, you can even make the Taskbar more like XP's. The Quick Launch is still there for backwards compatibility. but is not in the list of built-in toolbars. You have to create a new toolbar and navigate to the folder.

I keep meaning to ask: does Winkey+R still work (to bring up the Run dialog) ?

I could probably do without a Start menu, but not Winkey+R.

I think if you're giving a new OS a try, and your approach is to find the settings that change things back to the way they used to be, you're completely missing the point. Instead of trying to get the "Quick Launch" back, try pinning programs. Try to get familiar with the new Start Menu before you clutter your desktop with shortcuts.

That said: Win8 is a confused schizophrenic mess.

tincup wrote:

If you're happy with W7 as-is you probably wouldn't notice any of these changes, but to a fair number of people these are little things that make a difference [as evidenced by the popularity of ClassicShell].

It would be an interesting analysis. How many of these people genuinely find the old interface better, versus how many of them simply don't want to adapt to the new features (even if the new features, once conquered, are far more efficient) because "Different = sucks".

bucket wrote:

I think if you're giving a new OS a try, and your approach is to find the settings that change things back to the way they used to be, you're completely missing the point. Instead of trying to get the "Quick Launch" back, try pinning programs. Try to get familiar with the new Start Menu before you clutter your desktop with shortcuts.

This *1000

bucket wrote:

That said: Win8 is a confused schizophrenic mess.

Using it daily on my home PC. It's not as bad as the hype suggests. I had some resistance to it initially, but I decided to stick it out for a few weeks, and I found that with the apps I use, and the way I interact with the system, it has had zero impact versus Win7. The boot times are vastly improved, that's the biggest difference for me, and that's a good thing.

I would make a bet that 90% of anti-Win8 comments on the web are from me-tooers who have never used it, and are simply echoing what their friend echoed from a friend who read a rant on a tech blog. A further 5 percent installed it, used it for 5 minutes, and got rid of it because "different = sucks". The final 5% are from people who have legitimate complaints, or have applications that don't work.

(Not necessarily talking about anybody in this thread, or on this forum, just a general observation.)

Jorpho wrote:

I keep meaning to ask: does Winkey+R still work (to bring up the Run dialog) ?

I could probably do without a Start menu, but not Winkey+R.

All of the Winkey combinations work.

There's a new one too, Winkey+X, which brings up a menu with a handful of useful things.

For those who are contemplating whether to upgrade to Windows 8 or not, here are some considerations :

1. If currently running Windows XP, the official extended support ends in 8th April 2014, and if XP is the main OS being used, it might be wise to upgrade to Windows 8, and that too, can wait unitl next year.

2. If currently running Windows 7, and there are no problems or issues (big ones anyway), the official support ends in 14th January 2020. That's nearly 7 years of free updates from now. If everything is working fine, it's highly economical and practical to keep Windows 7.

3. If Vista is the current OS, the support ends in 2017. It's like a midway. Vista was less "polished" than 7, and many would have upgraded to 7 anyway.

4. If dual booting or tripple booting versions of Windows OSs, the thing to keep in mind, is the cost of getting two or more anti-virus or internet security suites - one for each OS.

5. If one wants to run "Windows 8-Only" apps, then the choice is easy, regardless of Windows 7 support.

6. If one is not happy with Windows 7 and/or Windows XP, then Windows 8 might provide something new.

7. If one would get Windows 8 no matter what, then, the path is also clear.

8. If money is no problem, ditto.

I hope Microsoft won't release Windows 9 very soon - like how Vista was superceded by Windows 7. Some Vista owners would have felt they invested in a half-baked product. But then, Windows 9 may be better Windows 8, and hopefully Windows 8 users won't feel bad.

Unfortunately, Operating Systems are not games - where once you purchased a game, you can always replay it in the designated OS. But the practicality of using an OS after the official support, especially in a connected world, wanes, due to security issues. Furthermore, applications are developed for newer OS and older ones will become less useful.

Of course, vintage computing with older operating systems in older machines is another matter entirely. For eg. - MS-DOS or Windows 3.1 in a 486.

Windows Lifecycle Fact Sheet

FYI vista,7,8 are literally same OS just with some tweaks. Also news has it a new addon code named "windows blue" will be free to all windows 8 users when it is unveiled.

cdoublejj wrote:

FYI vista,7,8 are literally same OS just with some tweaks.

Yeah, like Windows 2000 and XP are literally the same OS.

...except they're not.

cmd /version

Although out of all 3, 8 has the most changes. no they are not the EXACT same but, but, at the heart of each os there lie MANY similarities.

bucket wrote:

I think if you're giving a new OS a try, and your approach is to find the settings that change things back to the way they used to be, you're completely missing the point. Instead of trying to get the "Quick Launch" back, try pinning programs. Try to get familiar with the new Start Menu before you clutter your desktop with shortcuts.

Except that I do not like how there is no clear distinction between what is just a shortcut (pinned) and what is an open application without clicking on it. The only other changes that I have made to my Win7 is the ShellFolderFix to remember folder locations and sizes. I have made no changes to my Start Menu. Mostly, I much prefer Win7's interface over XP's.

cdoublejj wrote:

cmd /version

Although out of all 3, 8 has the most changes. no they are not the EXACT same but, but, at the heart of each os there lie MANY similarities.

They are similar, for sure.

But similar isn't "literally the same OS".

Literally doesn't mean "sort of"! 😜

SquallStrife wrote:

... I would make a bet that 90% of anti-Win8 comments on the web are from me-tooers who have never used it, and are simply echoing what their friend echoed from a friend who read a rant on a tech blog. A further 5 percent installed it, used it for 5 minutes, and got rid of it because "different = sucks". The final 5% are from people who have legitimate complaints, or have applications that don't work ...

Problem with that game is we all can play it.

My bet is 95% of pro-Win8 comments on the web come from a very active (the task is herculean and hopeless) group of minions on Microsoft payroll. On the remaining 5% I will not comment.

But stubborn facts are way more interesting than any bet:

Five reasons why Windows 8 has failed

That's the epitaph of Windows Tiles: 'It made Vista look good'.

TELVM wrote:

SquallStrife wrote:

... I would make a bet that 90% of anti-Win8 comments on the web are from me-tooers who have never used it, and are simply echoing what their friend echoed from a friend who read a rant on a tech blog. A further 5 percent installed it, used it for 5 minutes, and got rid of it because "different = sucks". The final 5% are from people who have legitimate complaints, or have applications that don't work ...

Problem with that game is we all can play it.

My bet is 95% of pro-Win8 comments on the web come from a very active (the task is herculean and hopeless) group of minions on Microsoft payroll. On the remaining 5% I will not comment.

Heh.

Trouble is, I'm not really "playing" any "game" there.

Remember the "Mojave" experiment? Admittedly it wasn't the most unbiased test, but the fact emerged that people were bashing Vista online having never even seen or used it.

I have no trouble believing that to be the case once again, this time around, 6 years later, with a significantly larger/louder pool of voices.

That's not to say that there are zero legitimate complaints, but I understandably have little faith in the broader nerd-o-sphere to be objective, especially when the new thing is so different to the old thing. For better or for worse, the "creature of habit" mentality is quite pervasive in our hobby.

TELVM wrote:

But stubborn facts are way more interesting than any bet:

Five reasons why Windows 8 has failed

There are some good points in there, once you filter out all the typical narcissistic ZDnet-writer opinion and conjecture.

The graph also paints a somewhat incomplete picture:

Consider that 5 years passed between XP's release and Vista's release, but only 3 passed between W7 and W8. This would factor in to the uptake rate.

Consider that PC sales overall are considerably down over 2009.

Consider that despite the difference in absolute number, the growth curve actually favours Windows 8.

And so on.

SquallStrife wrote:

... the growth curve actually favours Windows 8 ...

Certain postings in this topic remind me of trolls that propagate how the annual youtube relaunches are a gift from heaven, that having to click on "My subscriptions" instead of well, simply getting them instantly is way more convenient, and how people that think differently should gtfo 😁

TELVM wrote:

http://www.picturepush.com/photo/a/12402611/img/12402611.jpg […]
Show full quote

SquallStrife wrote:

... the growth curve actually favours Windows 8 ...

Um..... Kay?

How about you try that again without the (poor) attitude.

d1stortion wrote:

Certain postings in this topic remind me of trolls that propagate how the annual youtube relaunches are a gift from heaven, that having to click on "My subscriptions" instead of well, simply getting them instantly is way more convenient, and how people that think differently should gtfo 😁

"Certain postings in this topic" Pish-posh.

I'm not saying anybody should GTFO. I'm saying that there is a pattern of behaviour out there in the wilds of the Internet, to bash something because it's popular to do so, not because you've given it a proper go and found it wasn't for you. It was demonstrated back when Vista came out that this was the case.

TELVM's attitude seems to be that since the bashing is popular, it must be objectively correct, and since I disagree I must be some kind of shill.

I never tried out Win8, so I don't have a definite opinion on it. As a matter of fact it's geared towards touchscreens and tablets though, even MS themselves acknowledge this. Now of course some people may ask the question "is my desktop PC a tablet?", answer it and draw a (unobjective?) conclusion... 😀

Decided to give Windows 8 Pro a try since I get it free as part of my University education. It's really not as bad as initially thought. It's a lot better than the previews that Microsoft offered a while ago and as someone else mentioned workflow/productivity wise you won't notice a great difference. I'm somewhat indifferent about the whole Modern UI. It's nicely integrated and it doesn't seem to cause as much of a disconnect as I initially thought. I have only installed Windows 8 on my MacBook however and I don't need to use Windows all that often on it as I find OS X better for my needs.

If you're currently on Windows 7 there isn't any reason to upgrade but if you're on something archaic such as Windows XP (get with the times people) then I heartily recommend it. I'm stunned to think that people (not businesses which might depend on XP) still install XP on NEW machines. Madness.

XP users on this site?! I'm shocked! You need a letter from your doctor for anything newer than W98se!..😀

RichB93 wrote:

I'm stunned to think that people still install XP on NEW machines. Madness.

Like here, XP everywhere:
slow boot times, decreased productivity, incompatibility with new software and hardware, security problems abound, decreased hardware performance, high maintenance, memory limitations (x64 edition) ...NOT! 😀
DirectX-10/11 would be nice to have, but I don't care for new games.

It is the law of diminishing returns at work: 3 generations of windows no longer increases productivity 10%+10%+10%, not by a long shot. And age is no reason on itself, Why should one scrap everything from before 2001-2006.

I suppose it will end someday when hardware must be upgraded, but drivers are no longer available.

Even the totally hyped up Windows 7 has not much over XP other than eye candy, obvious newer API support and a decent x64 version. But that's it, I use both and find XP simply easier to navigate, and, in the end, more productive.