A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 8 » Windows 8 Help Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 1st 12, 08:01 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Alias[_43_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 516
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...than_Windows_7

--
Alias
Ads
  #2  
Old December 1st 12, 08:43 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Drew[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 89
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

On 12/1/2012 11:01 AM, Alias wrote:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...than_Windows_7


No offense to anyone but at least Vista worked!.. a resource hog that
required lots of horsepower but at least it worked on computers built
more than 2yrs ago. Go figure that Vista worked on my wife's touchsmart
iq804 but not win 8. It is frickin ridiculous that some manufacturers
will not update computers older to run win 8. although I think win 8 is
a fisher price toy operating system and will definitely not put it on a
system that requires any work to be performed with it. My system will
stay win7 until something better comes along or start looking at other
products.
  #3  
Old December 1st 12, 08:57 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Alias[_43_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 516
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

On 12/1/2012 8:43 PM, Drew wrote:
On 12/1/2012 11:01 AM, Alias wrote:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...than_Windows_7



No offense to anyone but at least Vista worked!.. a resource hog that
required lots of horsepower but at least it worked on computers built
more than 2yrs ago. Go figure that Vista worked on my wife's touchsmart
iq804 but not win 8. It is frickin ridiculous that some manufacturers
will not update computers older to run win 8. although I think win 8 is
a fisher price toy operating system and will definitely not put it on a
system that requires any work to be performed with it. My system will
stay win7 until something better comes along or start looking at other
products.


Check out http://www.netrunner-os.com/

--
Alias
  #4  
Old December 1st 12, 09:40 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Auric__
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 295
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

Alias wrote:

On 12/1/2012 8:43 PM, Drew wrote:
On 12/1/2012 11:01 AM, Alias wrote:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...uptake_More_li
ke_Vista_than_Windows_7

No offense to anyone but at least Vista worked!.. a resource hog that
required lots of horsepower but at least it worked on computers built
more than 2yrs ago. Go figure that Vista worked on my wife's touchsmart
iq804 but not win 8. It is frickin ridiculous that some manufacturers
will not update computers older to run win 8. although I think win 8 is
a fisher price toy operating system and will definitely not put it on a
system that requires any work to be performed with it. My system will
stay win7 until something better comes along or start looking at other
products.


Check out http://www.netrunner-os.com/


Please. Keep your distro adverts in the Linux groups.

(Personally, I avoid the Ubuntu family, and prefer Slackware. If I wanted a
..deb-based system, I'd just go with Debian.)

--
- Are there any broken bones?
- No.
- Dead bodies?
- Noooo?
- Illegal drug smuggling?
- No!
  #5  
Old December 1st 12, 10:32 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Drew[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 89
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

On 12/1/2012 11:57 AM, Alias wrote:
On 12/1/2012 8:43 PM, Drew wrote:
On 12/1/2012 11:01 AM, Alias wrote:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...than_Windows_7




No offense to anyone but at least Vista worked!.. a resource hog that
required lots of horsepower but at least it worked on computers built
more than 2yrs ago. Go figure that Vista worked on my wife's touchsmart
iq804 but not win 8. It is frickin ridiculous that some manufacturers
will not update computers older to run win 8. although I think win 8 is
a fisher price toy operating system and will definitely not put it on a
system that requires any work to be performed with it. My system will
stay win7 until something better comes along or start looking at other
products.


Check out http://www.netrunner-os.com/

Since this machine is a custom home built box that is a few yrs old and
will still smoke most newer machines I will stick with Windows 7 for
quite some time yet. For all we know somebody by then will have
something to compete with Microsoft. Doubtful as Microsoft gets too
bitchy with competition!
  #6  
Old December 1st 12, 11:28 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
charlie[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 707
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

On 12/1/2012 4:32 PM, Drew wrote:
On 12/1/2012 11:57 AM, Alias wrote:
On 12/1/2012 8:43 PM, Drew wrote:
On 12/1/2012 11:01 AM, Alias wrote:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...than_Windows_7





No offense to anyone but at least Vista worked!.. a resource hog that
required lots of horsepower but at least it worked on computers built
more than 2yrs ago. Go figure that Vista worked on my wife's touchsmart
iq804 but not win 8. It is frickin ridiculous that some manufacturers
will not update computers older to run win 8. although I think win 8 is
a fisher price toy operating system and will definitely not put it on a
system that requires any work to be performed with it. My system will
stay win7 until something better comes along or start looking at other
products.


Check out http://www.netrunner-os.com/

Since this machine is a custom home built box that is a few yrs old and
will still smoke most newer machines I will stick with Windows 7 for
quite some time yet. For all we know somebody by then will have
something to compete with Microsoft. Doubtful as Microsoft gets too
bitchy with competition!


First, judging an OPs system right after it comes out is fair, but the
original release is often lacking.

Win 7 & 8 are sorta birds of the same feather, etc. Add this, add that,
tweak a bit here and there, take something out, and you might come close
to the win 7 win 8 differences.
Win 7 had it's origins in Vista.


  #7  
Old December 2nd 12, 12:55 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Alias[_43_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 516
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

On 12/1/2012 9:40 PM, Auric__ put on his net nanny cap wrote:


No offense to anyone but at least Vista worked!.. a resource hog that
required lots of horsepower but at least it worked on computers built
more than 2yrs ago. Go figure that Vista worked on my wife's touchsmart
iq804 but not win 8. It is frickin ridiculous that some manufacturers
will not update computers older to run win 8. although I think win 8 is
a fisher price toy operating system and will definitely not put it on a
system that requires any work to be performed with it. My system will
stay win7 until something better comes along or start looking at other
products.


Check out http://www.netrunner-os.com/


Please. Keep your distro adverts in the Linux groups.


I'll post what I want. Don't like it? Kill file me.

--
Alias
  #8  
Old December 2nd 12, 03:08 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Drew[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 89
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

On 12/1/2012 2:28 PM, charlie wrote:
On 12/1/2012 4:32 PM, Drew wrote:
On 12/1/2012 11:57 AM, Alias wrote:
On 12/1/2012 8:43 PM, Drew wrote:
On 12/1/2012 11:01 AM, Alias wrote:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...than_Windows_7






No offense to anyone but at least Vista worked!.. a resource hog that
required lots of horsepower but at least it worked on computers built
more than 2yrs ago. Go figure that Vista worked on my wife's touchsmart
iq804 but not win 8. It is frickin ridiculous that some manufacturers
will not update computers older to run win 8. although I think win 8 is
a fisher price toy operating system and will definitely not put it on a
system that requires any work to be performed with it. My system will
stay win7 until something better comes along or start looking at other
products.

Check out http://www.netrunner-os.com/

Since this machine is a custom home built box that is a few yrs old and
will still smoke most newer machines I will stick with Windows 7 for
quite some time yet. For all we know somebody by then will have
something to compete with Microsoft. Doubtful as Microsoft gets too
bitchy with competition!


First, judging an OPs system right after it comes out is fair, but the
original release is often lacking.

Win 7 & 8 are sorta birds of the same feather, etc. Add this, add that,
tweak a bit here and there, take something out, and you might come close
to the win 7 win 8 differences.
Win 7 had it's origins in Vista.


Since I ran both Vista business and now win 7 pro I agree there are
similarities and both small and vast differences. One thing I am finding
about Windows8 is that it does not like to run on a lot of machines that
are more than a couple of years old. Vista would run and quite well. I
know as I did it. My original opinion stands as I believe Microsoft is
heading in the wrong direction but since I am just the buying public my
opinion does not count. Microsoft has never listened to what the buying
public wants only what they want to sell you.I think Win 8 is another
Millenium or Vista and if windows blue is any indication of what is
coming then I think Pc sales will drop even more.
  #9  
Old December 2nd 12, 03:13 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
BillW50
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,556
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

In ,
Drew typed:
Since I ran both Vista business and now win 7 pro I agree there are
similarities and both small and vast differences. One thing I am
finding about Windows8 is that it does not like to run on a lot of
machines that are more than a couple of years old. Vista would run
and quite well. I know as I did it. My original opinion stands as I
believe Microsoft is heading in the wrong direction but since I am
just the buying public my opinion does not count. Microsoft has
never listened to what the buying public wants only what they want to
sell you.I think Win 8 is another Millenium or Vista and if windows
blue is any indication of what is coming then I think Pc sales will
drop even more.


Odd! I am running Windows 8 on a Gateway M465 manufactured back in 2006.
And it runs just fine. Neither Windows 7 or Windows 8 needed any special
drivers for my either of my eight M465 machines. Just take the Windows
install disc and it has everything.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo T5600 1.83GHz - 4GB - Windows XP SP2


  #10  
Old December 2nd 12, 03:25 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Auric__
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 295
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

Alias wrote:

On 12/1/2012 9:40 PM, Auric__ put on his net nanny cap wrote:


Anyone who knows me would find that line hilarious.

Check out http://www.netrunner-os.com/


Please. Keep your distro adverts in the Linux groups.


I'll post what I want. Don't like it? Kill file me.


I don't need to, to ignore people. (Not that I do very often, but still.)

--
Loud shouts are often the easiest to ignore.
  #11  
Old December 2nd 12, 04:01 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
charlie[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 707
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

On 12/1/2012 9:08 PM, Drew wrote:
On 12/1/2012 2:28 PM, charlie wrote:
On 12/1/2012 4:32 PM, Drew wrote:
On 12/1/2012 11:57 AM, Alias wrote:
On 12/1/2012 8:43 PM, Drew wrote:
On 12/1/2012 11:01 AM, Alias wrote:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...than_Windows_7







No offense to anyone but at least Vista worked!.. a resource hog that
required lots of horsepower but at least it worked on computers built
more than 2yrs ago. Go figure that Vista worked on my wife's
touchsmart
iq804 but not win 8. It is frickin ridiculous that some manufacturers
will not update computers older to run win 8. although I think win
8 is
a fisher price toy operating system and will definitely not put it
on a
system that requires any work to be performed with it. My system will
stay win7 until something better comes along or start looking at other
products.

Check out http://www.netrunner-os.com/

Since this machine is a custom home built box that is a few yrs old and
will still smoke most newer machines I will stick with Windows 7 for
quite some time yet. For all we know somebody by then will have
something to compete with Microsoft. Doubtful as Microsoft gets too
bitchy with competition!


First, judging an OPs system right after it comes out is fair, but the
original release is often lacking.

Win 7 & 8 are sorta birds of the same feather, etc. Add this, add that,
tweak a bit here and there, take something out, and you might come close
to the win 7 win 8 differences.
Win 7 had it's origins in Vista.


Since I ran both Vista business and now win 7 pro I agree there are
similarities and both small and vast differences. One thing I am finding
about Windows8 is that it does not like to run on a lot of machines that
are more than a couple of years old. Vista would run and quite well. I
know as I did it. My original opinion stands as I believe Microsoft is
heading in the wrong direction but since I am just the buying public my
opinion does not count. Microsoft has never listened to what the buying
public wants only what they want to sell you.I think Win 8 is another
Millenium or Vista and if windows blue is any indication of what is
coming then I think Pc sales will drop even more.



Win 95 was the release I didn't particularly like. It had problems with
timing and interrupt response. It seemed like the delay before an
interrupt was serviced doubled from the previous version. About then, I
also remember something about modem command responses not being parsed
correctly. The microsoft supplied software would "hickup", then fall
through. It was OK for "normal" data usage, and didn't always work
properly with fax & voice modems. Having basically stopped using modems,
I have no idea if the problems were ever really solved. Some still
existed with the beta XP versions. (About the time I quit worrying about
such things!)

Win ME actually wasn't that bad after all the patches and SPs.

I always thought it amusing that about the time the last Win release was
pretty well straightened out, MS releases a new version, and the cycle
starts all over.

  #12  
Old December 2nd 12, 04:05 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,275
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

BillW50 wrote:
In ,
Drew typed:
Since I ran both Vista business and now win 7 pro I agree there are
similarities and both small and vast differences. One thing I am
finding about Windows8 is that it does not like to run on a lot of
machines that are more than a couple of years old. Vista would run
and quite well. I know as I did it. My original opinion stands as I
believe Microsoft is heading in the wrong direction but since I am
just the buying public my opinion does not count. Microsoft has
never listened to what the buying public wants only what they want to
sell you.I think Win 8 is another Millenium or Vista and if windows
blue is any indication of what is coming then I think Pc sales will
drop even more.


Odd! I am running Windows 8 on a Gateway M465 manufactured back in 2006.
And it runs just fine. Neither Windows 7 or Windows 8 needed any special
drivers for my either of my eight M465 machines. Just take the Windows
install disc and it has everything.


I have only two machines here capable of running Windows 8,
and on one there is no video driver. And there never will be
a video driver, since Nvidia announced there won't be. In
response, Windows 8 uses a fallback driver. It runs the
screen at 1024x768 or so, fixed. Too bad the LCD is 1440x900 and
the results look terrible.

Other potential candidate machines, are ruled out by the
NX/XD requirement.

Windows 8 started out with such promise, because it had
a relatively small memory footprint. I reported some
time ago, being able to run the Developer Preview, in
a VM with something like 128MB allocated. (Practically
speaking, it needs a little more than that, but that's
not important now.) As a result of that, it could have
run on my first PC. But the NX/XD requirement, kinda chops
a major chunk of the market away.

The graphics are simple-minded enough, that they could
have been emulated with a little effort (allowing crappy
video cards to work with the new OS). It would allow
more of the market to buy copies of Windows 8 and
experiment with it. For those segments of the market,
where they'd only try Windows 8, if they picked up
an OS box at Best Buy, complete with DVD installer disc.

It's like there was just complete ignorance about
hardware, like the developers had a field day. Maybe
that touch screen article, where it said "developers
might feel constrained by less than 5 finger touch",
is indicative of how "developers" felt about other
aspects of the computers. It's good to have
a potential market, dismissed out of hand like
that. Good... business... sense...

Maybe the idea is, it's an all-out bet about
mobile. Desktops are obsolete, and "we'll bet the
farm on mobile". In one sense that's true. I can
understand that sentiment from the likes of Ballmer.
But most reasonable people (people trying to grow
or maintain a business), also weigh heavily the possibility
of making more money with zero effort. And that's why
some of the decisions just don't make a lot of sense.
Two releases of preview, were free of any NX/XD absolute
requirement. Up it pops in the last release.

Sometimes, when a product seems to lack focus,
you conclude there were "too many fingers in the pie".
And a lot of the decisions were just arbitrary
"shoot from the hip" decisions. I used to work
for people who did that, shoot from the hip, but,
they were remarkably good shots. What sucks, is
when you have management that shoot from the hip,
and aim for the toes.

Paul
  #13  
Old December 2nd 12, 04:16 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
charlie[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 707
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

On 12/1/2012 9:13 PM, BillW50 wrote:
In ,
Drew typed:
Since I ran both Vista business and now win 7 pro I agree there are
similarities and both small and vast differences. One thing I am
finding about Windows8 is that it does not like to run on a lot of
machines that are more than a couple of years old. Vista would run
and quite well. I know as I did it. My original opinion stands as I
believe Microsoft is heading in the wrong direction but since I am
just the buying public my opinion does not count. Microsoft has
never listened to what the buying public wants only what they want to
sell you.I think Win 8 is another Millenium or Vista and if windows
blue is any indication of what is coming then I think Pc sales will
drop even more.


Odd! I am running Windows 8 on a Gateway M465 manufactured back in 2006.
And it runs just fine. Neither Windows 7 or Windows 8 needed any special
drivers for my either of my eight M465 machines. Just take the Windows
install disc and it has everything.


"Custom built" machines can be quite troublesome, in that the exact
hardware configuration may exist only on that particular system.
(I've built them now and then since the 386 days!)

Lessons learned

Don't try for all the latest and greatest with price no object.
A level or so down from that usually works out better in the long run.

Choose components with an eye to commonality.
I.E. Just because you can get off brand modems, sound cards,
motherboards, etc. for cheap doesn't mean that they will be supportable.
Don't buy limited production high or low end components, unless there is
a real need. They usually have more problems than you'd like, and
limited production usually means a rapid decline in OEM support.


  #14  
Old December 2nd 12, 02:28 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Joe Morris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 289
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

"charlie" wrote:

I always thought it amusing that about the time the last Win release was
pretty well straightened out, MS releases a new version, and the cycle
starts all over.


Microsoft certainly seems to follow that pattern, but in fairness to Redmond
it's hardly the first company to use that idea. 'Way back in the mainframe
days the user community expected that behavior from vendors.

In the early 1960s Jackson W. Granholm published a series of humorous
articles in _Datamation_, collectively known as "The Kludge Kapers" (or
occasionally "The Kludge Papers"). In the article titled "The Master Plan
for Kludge Software" you can find these items:

TENET 3. "Distribute new versions of each system as soon as the previous one
is showing signs of being checked-out." This guarantees job security for a
very large segment of the programmer community known as "System
Programmers."

TENET 4. "Whenever a new system is proposed or implemented, refuse to
continue maintenance on some other (any other) existing system." How far
can you make a rubber band stretch? We've already provided for keeping our
programmers busy!

http://www.landsnail.com/thedatadoma...per-papers.pdf

At some point in the early 1970s - when I was the chief system programmer
for my POE - I quoted a couple of the Kludge items to the IBM salesdroid
responsible for my (large) account - and he got up and walked out of the
room. (All in fun; he had a good sense of humor.)

Joe


  #15  
Old December 2nd 12, 06:01 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Alias[_43_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 516
Default Windows 8 uptake: More like Vista than Windows 7

On 12/2/2012 5:12 PM, chrisv wrote:
Alias wrote:
On 12/1/2012 9:40 PM, Auric__ put on his net nanny cap wrote:


No offense to anyone but at least Vista worked!.. a resource hog
that required lots of horsepower but at least it worked on
computers built more than 2yrs ago. Go figure that Vista worked on
my wife's touchsmart iq804 but not win 8. It is frickin ridiculous
that some manufacturers will not update computers older to run win
8. although I think win 8 is a fisher price toy operating system
and will definitely not put it on a system that requires any work
to be performed with it. My system will stay win7 until something
better comes along or start looking at other products.

Check out http://www.netrunner-os.com/

Please. Keep your distro adverts in the Linux groups.


I'll post what I want. Don't like it? Kill file me.


Consider it done!
*PLONK*


You don't have to be a drama queen about it. Or do you?


--
Alias
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.