Out of the 6, there are maybe 3, (and that's a bit of a stretch) that I think that actually would be considered benefits.
Windows to go: Not seeing the real benefit there when everything is moving to virtual Os environments, and alot to cloud based storage. If anything I would have liked to see more advanced Remote desktop support. Honestly I would rather have my users connect to there environment in a terminal server then carry it around with them in any from. They can use there own device but they can run in my environment.
Improved task manager: Ok I admit this is cool and I will concede the point with this one. However I am not seeing why this cant be just an add on in the next windows 7 service pack.
Hyper V on Desktop: Can we say late to the party? Forget the fact that VMware, Virtual box, and Virtual PC are already here and work well, and with enough resources can run multiple OS's effectively. I am not seeing the real advantage to a full blown Hyper V to a standard business user. Yes for a select few having and second OS loaded is great but the current VM technology and duel boot configs already fill that hole, and pretty well. This is just one more thing for me to disable to save horsepower on a standard desktop.
Secure Boot: This is a good idea, as long as there is a way to disabled it when needed. I use a few Linux boot discs and other tools for repair and virus removal when systems get hosed or the test the hardware.
SMB3: good idea.
Improved monitor support: Solved with third party utilities and registry modification. Hell there is even a MS power toy that can fix this.
It comes down to this there is just not enough gravy here to justify the grief that this OS is going to cause.
Where is the good stuff? Where is the stuff that would make our lives as techs easier. How about more precise error codes? Something that would make it easier for us to locate research and fix problems within an OS. How about that new file system to replace NTFS that we have been promised since Windows Vista? The ability to mount Iso files from the OS not just burn them, without third party software? More granular control of the OS? Let us choose the interface we are most comfortable with?
I have said this many times back when it was vista and it applies again. "its pretty and that's about it" I don't need pretty, I need powerful. I don't need another toy, I think we need better tools. It's time that MS stops trying to be apple, stops trying to be fisher price it needs to be craftsman again. On the other hand just like Vista was to Win 7, this will be a very costly beta test. So I have hope for Win 9.
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
Any device that supports boot from USB.
I've run it on Window XP boxes, Linux boxes, and even MacBook Pro.
as a matter of fact, I'm building a Windows To Go development box on a 240GB SSD with USB3. That was I can use it on my workstation at work, home computer, and my Mac laptop.
I've run it on Window XP boxes, Linux boxes, and even MacBook Pro.
as a matter of fact, I'm building a Windows To Go development box on a 240GB SSD with USB3. That was I can use it on my workstation at work, home computer, and my Mac laptop.
This same capability is part of what Microsoft has been pushing for about 15 years as part of their long term vendor lock in process. It's had many names in the past and been trounced each time, but they have been slipping it in a little at a time over the last 15 years. The next stage will be a major service pack where Secure Boot, once activated can NOT be turned off.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next-Generation_Secure_Computing_Base
When they first put this out as Palladium it was intended to be a lot more intrusive and restrictive that what wiki says about it.
As to the rest, some of the items are long overdue and simple copies of what Linux has been doing for a few years. I see absolutely no innovation here by Microsoft at all. They claim they want to give the user choice, but most of the changes in each new version remove choice and restrict user personalization capability.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next-Generation_Secure_Computing_Base
When they first put this out as Palladium it was intended to be a lot more intrusive and restrictive that what wiki says about it.
As to the rest, some of the items are long overdue and simple copies of what Linux has been doing for a few years. I see absolutely no innovation here by Microsoft at all. They claim they want to give the user choice, but most of the changes in each new version remove choice and restrict user personalization capability.
So, if it can be disabled in the bias, why all the press over Debian forking out to get a signed cert? If it's not absolutely required, what does it matter? Or is there something I'm misunderstanding.
devices like tablets and phones etc. The Secure Boot MUST be turned on and locked down by the OEM or MS will spit the dummy with them and not sell them any more. I suspect the reason is the OS is so big and kludgy that ARM devices like tablets without huge amounts of resources will not be able to handle any third party apps that aren't cut down the way MS wants.
Aside from that, if I'm interested in hacking on it/rooting it/etc, why would I buy a tablet with Win8 in the first place? Strictly my opinion, of course, but if that's the direction I were inclined to take it, I'd likely be better off with Android anyway. The Asus Transformer is quite nice.
My concern was more with x86 hardware. If that were coming, I'd horde all the current-gen motherboards I could afford and hang onto them like grim death.
Either way, though, still wondering what the big deal with Debian was, and thinking a little more every day that Win 8 will be another disaster for MS, but they'll get it right in Win 9. I'm more than happy to hang onto Win 7 until I get to see if I'm right.
My concern was more with x86 hardware. If that were coming, I'd horde all the current-gen motherboards I could afford and hang onto them like grim death.
Either way, though, still wondering what the big deal with Debian was, and thinking a little more every day that Win 8 will be another disaster for MS, but they'll get it right in Win 9. I'm more than happy to hang onto Win 7 until I get to see if I'm right.
back in the mid 1990s Microsoft mentioned some aims that equate to a total vendor lock in which got a lot of angry responses - the current version is called Trusted Computing, and a past one was called Palladium. The aim is to make the hardware and software such that once installed you can't change it but the vendor can via updates etc, they also want to get it so that you can't talk to anyone who isn't using one of their systems. They got into hot water at the time and have been introducing the intended changes slowly via stealth processes.
When MS first introduced the over the Internet verification as against the serial number code on the software package they assured everyone that it wasn't able to disable the software and never would - right, it didn't for a couple of years and then MS WGA was introduced and later versions started killing legit systems because of the poor way it worked.
Now we have Secure Boot as a hardware software lock down on the system, but only for ARM devices - never mind explaining why it's needed on the ARM devices apart from them thinking not many will object. I'm sure that windows 9 or Windows 10 will have compulsory Secure Boot lock down on all devices, just wait and see.
When MS first introduced the over the Internet verification as against the serial number code on the software package they assured everyone that it wasn't able to disable the software and never would - right, it didn't for a couple of years and then MS WGA was introduced and later versions started killing legit systems because of the poor way it worked.
Now we have Secure Boot as a hardware software lock down on the system, but only for ARM devices - never mind explaining why it's needed on the ARM devices apart from them thinking not many will object. I'm sure that windows 9 or Windows 10 will have compulsory Secure Boot lock down on all devices, just wait and see.
I boot from USB occasionally on a pocket Linux but this inevitably fails after a few writes and rewrites. Ditto Puppu so Win 8 seems to me to be a no no for this approach. Dedicated SS HDs will fix this though
either, but they won't as that means actually thinking about the users and not their bank account. The big deal is familiarity of operation for all those people with many years of menu driven computer usage and the trouble with having to learn a new method.
No thought to the literally millions it will cost the enterprise in lost productivity. The mighty M$ can be changed - Just stop buying this junk!
all I can where it suits them. However, there are many organisations and people that have a specific piece of software that's critical to their business operation or they just 'can't live without it' and it will only run on Windows. The sad side of this is that for most it will only run on one particular version of Windows and they get caught with having to pay for a new version of it when Windows changes how it talks to software with each new version. However, I'm finding people who weren't that interested in Linux in the past are now interested as they want new hardware but don't want Win 7 or Win 8 they want something that looks and works like what they're used to, and that's where Zorin OS 5 Premium with the Win 2000 graphics interface look comes in very handy for them.
The only one of those six things that is really a new feature in Windows is Windows to go, the other five are just improvements (arguably) to things already there. Secure Boot for example is just an extension of blocking unsigned drivers in the x64 version of Windows 7.
Having played around with it, yes it's a nice feature, but the reality is that most users need access to some sort of resource that is only on the domain, so it's not that useful to be able to take that environment home with you. If you have DirectAccess set up, then it becomes more useful but DirectAccess is a bit too tied down to Microsoft technology and it's not widely used. Not yet anyway.
Having played around with it, yes it's a nice feature, but the reality is that most users need access to some sort of resource that is only on the domain, so it's not that useful to be able to take that environment home with you. If you have DirectAccess set up, then it becomes more useful but DirectAccess is a bit too tied down to Microsoft technology and it's not widely used. Not yet anyway.
I'm trying to use it but I just don't like the OS. I can't get use to the new UI. I really think Microsoft BLEW it.
I think, they should have made the ****** new UI an option.
I think, they should have made the ****** new UI an option.
It seems the performance increase is only small at best and not worth the headache.... I just don't get what they're doing. They're certainly not going after me as a desktop user. I think they believe that touch screen and "iPads" are the future and WE (desktop users) need to get use to it so we can buy their new surface computers.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
