Windows 10

Downloaded the iso last night and installed it in a virtual machine.

To anyone who uses Oracle, just opt for PAE , IHC9 chipset and Intel Pro
net card.

I used the 32 bit version and have only assigned one CPU core and 1.5
gigs of ram


Only have used it for a short time but it runs pretty well in the
virtual machine and the good news, the start button is back and so far
all seems intuitive just like all versions of Windows from Win95 and up

philo wrote:

Downloaded the iso last night and installed it in a virtual machine.

To anyone who uses Oracle, just opt for PAE , IHC9 chipset and Intel Pro
net card.

I used the 32 bit version and have only assigned one CPU core and 1.5
gigs of ram


Only have used it for a short time but it runs pretty well in the
virtual machine and the good news, the start button is back and so far
all seems intuitive just like all versions of Windows from Win95 and up

windows still have not learned their lesson. The start menu is a waste
of time.There is no customization for the start menu. There is no option
to enable the metro interface. or an option just to have a basic start menu.

If i am wrong on this please correct!

As for the installation. You can't finish the install unless you create or
have a windows account! As far as i am concerned this is another mistake.
You should be able to just install the dame thing and do what you want with
it. Which you can't.

I run it for about 10 mins. It ran well in virtualbox control panel was the
same as it always is.

Will i be using it no. Why no option to choose what kind of start menu you
want. This was the only problem with windows 8. And they still want to push
people to do what they want. And expect people to pay for it.

I have since deleted it.

Owe and another thing it looks like linux. Not a bad thing i suppose.

Compared to linux or mac os, windows is a dinosaur. Linux and mac os's have
evolved in terms of user interface. Windows has stood still.

What is or was the difference between winxp, vista, win 7, win 8 and win 10
in terms of user ability?

from my point of view it is the start menu.

On 10/03/2014 06:50 AM, Darklight wrote:



snipped but read

Compared to linux or mac os, windows is a dinosaur. Linux and mac os's have
evolved in terms of user interface. Windows has stood still.

What is or was the difference between winxp, vista, win 7, win 8 and win 10
in terms of user ability?

from my point of view it is the start menu.



Aha, you've got it.

Other than re-arraigning the GUI there has not been much difference.

A few utilities added and with Win8 a few steps backwards.


I switched to Linux a long time ago but need to keep current with
Windows so I can keep supporting it.


Plus...I still use Windows occasionally when there is something I can't
run in Linux.

On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 12:50:47 +0100, Darklight
wrote:

windows still have not learned their lesson. The start menu is a waste
of time.There is no customization for the start menu. There is no option
to enable the metro interface. or an option just to have a basic start menu.

If i am wrong on this please correct!

I haven't done much with it yet, but actually you can customise the
Start menu. It's just that part of it's not really a menu at all in
the traditional sense, but a big panel full of those tiles, with which
Microsoft still appear to be besotted. If you right-click and choose
"Pin to Start", that's where it appears - as a new tile. I suppose
it's an improvement on the tiles covering the entire screen, and this
is of course only a preview version, so it'll be interesting to see
where they go with it, and whether I feel like going with them.

Rod.

Darklight was thinking very hard :
philo wrote:

Downloaded the iso last night and installed it in a virtual machine.

To anyone who uses Oracle, just opt for PAE , IHC9 chipset and Intel Pro
net card.

I used the 32 bit version and have only assigned one CPU core and 1.5
gigs of ram


Only have used it for a short time but it runs pretty well in the
virtual machine and the good news, the start button is back and so far
all seems intuitive just like all versions of Windows from Win95 and up

windows still have not learned their lesson. The start menu is a waste
of time.There is no customization for the start menu. There is no option
to enable the metro interface. or an option just to have a basic start menu.

Right-click on the taskbar and choose properties. The navigation tab
lets you select Desktop or Start on boot\login for touchscreen systems.

The start tab on the same properties lets you decide if you want a
Start menu or Start Screen (Metro).

As for basic start menu, depends on what you mean by that. You can
right-click and unpin al the Metro\Live tiles form the Start menu
making it a "Basic Start menu".

If i am wrong on this please correct!

As for the installation. You can't finish the install unless you create or
have a windows account! As far as i am concerned this is another mistake.
You should be able to just install the dame thing and do what you want with
it. Which you can't.

You can finish install with a non-MS account, making a local account.

On 03 Oct 2014, Darklight wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8:

Compared to linux or mac os, windows is a dinosaur. Linux and mac
os's have evolved in terms of user interface. Windows has stood
still.

There is no "Linux user interface", and what there is is no more usable
than Windows's.

Nil wrote:

On 03 Oct 2014, Darklight wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8:

Compared to linux or mac os, windows is a dinosaur. Linux and mac
os's have evolved in terms of user interface. Windows has stood
still.

There is no "Linux user interface", and what there is is no more usable
than Windows's.

Such an absolute statement demands elaboration. So, please elaborate.


Stef

On 03/10/14 16:51, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 16:36:28 +0100, Joe User wrote:

snip

I haven't got the time to evaluate so many interfaces.

Do you see the difference?

Yes, I'm expected to do all the work myself.

You're not *expected* to do anything.
You are free to use what ever you like.

Stick with the default or try something else.
Do you see the difference?


--
Not confused, just ... bewildered

Joe User wrote:
On 03/10/14 16:51, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 16:36:28 +0100, Joe User wrote:

snip

I haven't got the time to evaluate so many interfaces.

Do you see the difference?

Yes, I'm expected to do all the work myself.

You're not *expected* to do anything.
You are free to use what ever you like.

Stick with the default or try something else.
Do you see the difference?


With things like Classic Shell and in the past, themes,
you could change how Windows looks in limited ways.
You just cannot replace all the code, all that easily.
(Explorer is the entire desktop, as well as providing
file windows to look at.)

Linux and Unix have used Xwindows/Xorg as a core engine
of graphics. That was for when you wanted more than a 24x80 terminal
and ASCII text for entertainment. Windows Managers
sit on top of that. With such classics as the barely
decorated XWM.

The main disadvantage of Windows, is all of that stuff
is closed source. Which makes it almost a miracle
that the Classic Shell and similar projects, do
so much with what information is available. In the
case of themes, on an OS like WinXP, occasionally
hacking of uxthemes is required (Microsoft didn't
make it as easy as they should have).

They both offer a GUI, and the difference even between
GUIs on either system, is a matter of annoyance (KDE user
cannot stand GNOME interface or vice versa). Rather
than completely preventing you from getting anything
at all from the computer. I can use the Unity interface
on Ubuntu, but the annoyance ie easy to avoid by switching
to Linux Mint Mate. And on Windows, I can use Classic Shell
to help change how things look. And we can spend hours
discussing the subtle differences between control-alt-delete
and control-alt-backspace. Exciting discussion material.

And wasting long threads on GUI, means less time to
spend on the stuff that really counts. Like the
broken Task Manager on Windows 8.

I gave up on discussing GUI issues on Windows 8, after the
Preview period was over. And then it's just a matter of living
with it (and being ready to use alt-F4 when something ****s up).

I've had the Charms bar die on me, so I had no way to
shut down, and I'm damn glad I had Alt-F4 as my friend.
It's a damn sight more reliable than Charms. I could
wave my mouse around the four corners of the screen,
and nothing was happening. I couldn't even get
"Start" to work. But really, what I would like,
is a Task Manager in Windows 8 (or 10), that is
*guaranteed* to work and to be able to kill
an errant task. Right now, I don't have that.
I don't have guaranteed control of my Windows 8 machine.
I would like them to fix issues like that, before
they're allowed to go re-arranging the deck chairs
yet again. That's just to distract people.

Windows 8 is a step backwards, from the behaviors
of WinXP. WInXP was far from perfect (crappy Pool
memory model), but at least when I needed Task Manager,
it was there for me. No matter what the computing load.
The only time I really "lost" WinXP, was when a game
crashed and still had control of the video card. And
while alt-tab did occasionally work, you might not have
enough functionality to "escape" the clutches of the
game.

Paul

On 03 Oct 2014, Stef wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8:

Nil wrote:

There is no "Linux user interface", and what there is is no more
usable than Windows's.

Such an absolute statement demands elaboration. So, please
elaborate.

Others have already done so. In short, there are several available UIs,
so you can't speak of "The Linux Interface" and all of them that I've
used have been far more difficult to use than Windows's.

On 03/10/14 18:11, Paul wrote:
Joe User wrote:
On 03/10/14 16:51, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 16:36:28 +0100, Joe User wrote:

snip

Windows 8 is a step backwards, from the behaviors
of WinXP. WInXP was far from perfect (crappy Pool
memory model), but at least when I needed Task Manager,
it was there for me. No matter what the computing load.
The only time I really "lost" WinXP, was when a game
crashed and still had control of the video card. And
while alt-tab did occasionally work, you might not have
enough functionality to "escape" the clutches of the
game.

I still have an XP system here, IMHO it's the best Windows to date.
I'm giving Unity a chance and it's not all bad and actually I like the
Metro interface, it was a brave attempt to deliver something genuinely
new and 'modern' looking. It works well IMHO on a nice big touch screen
it just seems to be a step too far for most people ... and my views on
all these 'apps' are probably well known by now. I personally will be
sorry to see it (almost) go but I'm hoping this ridiculous obsession
with requiring a Microsoft account to do anything useful will go with
it, I doubt it though.

WRT WinXP

When I shut it down I have to do it twice. I'm certainly no XPert
(sorry, couldn't resist it) I've tried comparing Task manager views
before and after first shut down but can't immediately see any obvious
pointers. Any ideas?

Thanks


--
Not confused, just ... bewildered

Joe User wrote:


WRT WinXP

When I shut it down I have to do it twice. I'm certainly no XPert
(sorry, couldn't resist it) I've tried comparing Task manager views
before and after first shut down but can't immediately see any obvious
pointers. Any ideas?

Thanks

Sometimes a system resists shutdown, because something
is crashing during the shutdown process. And the setting
for what to do on a crash, says to restart. You could
try looking in Event Viewer, for a hint, but even that
isn't guaranteed to contain a message. Some subsystem
crashes are nasty enough, no log entry can be generated,
and the OS just panics in its own special way.

You want your restarting option set so the system stays
in the BSOD screen. Rather than accepting the default,
which is to "automatically restart". You want to
untick this box. This should really be the default.

http://www.winvistatips.com/attachme...start3-jpg.75/

Another reason for a system to resist, is if a power management
event immediately wakes the computer. That would be
more for sleep/hibernate. You then have to review how the
individual device power management settings (Device Manager)
are set. A LAN (NIC) entry with "carrier detect" as the
waking option, just "won't stay asleep".

The computer can also freeze up for a minute or two, if
the OS is having problems writing out the profile (a
section of registry). My ATI video card software, used
to keep the hive busy for that part of the registry,
and there was a tool that could cause it to cease and
desist. That shouldn't be happening on OSes later
than WinXP, as the "tool" to fix that, was rolled
into the OS.

I'm no XPert either - I just fix **** when it
breaks on me. And learn by accident.

Paul

Nil wrote:

On 03 Oct 2014, Stef wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8:

Nil wrote:

There is no "Linux user interface", and what there is is no more
usable than Windows's.

Such an absolute statement demands elaboration. So, please
elaborate.

Others have already done so. In short, there are several available UIs,
so you can't speak of "The Linux Interface" and all of them that I've
used have been far more difficult to use than Windows's.

I see. Yes, for Linux there are 4 or 5 Desktop Enviornment GUIs, but
they all work similarly. Learn one, you've pretty much learned the
others. Also there are dozens of window managers from the simple to the
feature laden. Personally, I prefer a choice of options over
Microsoft's One-Interface-Fits-All-Barely-Configurable solution. That's
why my primary system is a Linux one, but I work with Windows and
Macs, too. Although, switching among them can cause one to falter,
particularly when you haven't used a particularly GUI in a while, The
same goes for different Linux GUIs. You have to stop and think.

The reason the LInux GUIs are more difficult is you've used Windows for
years not just hours. Or hour. It takes about a month for a
Windows users to "learn" Linux. Ditto for a Mac.


Stef

On 03 Oct 2014, Stef wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8:

The reason the LInux GUIs are more difficult is you've used
Windows for years not just hours. Or hour. It takes about a
month for a Windows users to "learn" Linux. Ditto for a Mac.

I've used Linux for decades.

Paul posted this via :

My ATI video card software, used
to keep the hive busy for that part of the registry,
and there was a tool that could cause it to cease

Can you elucidate where/what tool and/or web link?

TIA.

--

I AM Bucky Breeder, (*(^;
Repent, the end is near... Or
just smoke 'em if you got 'em.