Actually NT was more stable than XP.
The problem with NT was that it was not the same and would not run the same applications and games that XP would run.
So Win2K was the integration of NT and XP.
XP then turned into Win2k light. In effect we all now are using the NT branch instead of the Win 3.1 branch.
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
Yes, jdunster, always we complain when a new version of Windows comes out, but why is that? Because they change the interface in bad ways, and they also remove backwards-compatibility. Some key things Win95 did well, were removed in Win98; some key things 98 did well, were removed in XP. The interfaces changed a lot, too. Vista and Win7 make HUGE changes in the OS to render much of the old XP stuff, problemmatic or obsolete, with the result that even IBM cautioned me against upgrading to Win7.
So too, the software written for each OS by third-party vendors, changes to eliminate backwards-compatibility, and key formerly-useful features were removed. With the result that, I have 22 machines going all the way back to 286, and can't retire ANY of them, because the features removed in later versions, I still need to use. So for SOME uses, yes I'm still happy with 3.1 and 95. But the cost is enormous. Still less enormous, than moving solely to one or any one new OS.
So too, the software written for each OS by third-party vendors, changes to eliminate backwards-compatibility, and key formerly-useful features were removed. With the result that, I have 22 machines going all the way back to 286, and can't retire ANY of them, because the features removed in later versions, I still need to use. So for SOME uses, yes I'm still happy with 3.1 and 95. But the cost is enormous. Still less enormous, than moving solely to one or any one new OS.
The cost of our recent upgrade to Win 7 was staggering.
Not just the cost of the new software, but the training required, the upgrades to Office 2010, the associated costs up upgrading all of our other programs to be compatible with Win 7, the downtime when our other programs weren't compatible with Win7 in spite of what the vendors claimed. Not to mention hardware upgrades, and massive hardware/software incompatibilities that had to be rectified.
Not going through that for Win 8!!! MS can just ***** themselves.
XP worked fine and lasted a long time. Not happy with the changeover to 7, but hey, that's progress. Win 8 is just another Vista waiting to happen IMHO.
Not just the cost of the new software, but the training required, the upgrades to Office 2010, the associated costs up upgrading all of our other programs to be compatible with Win 7, the downtime when our other programs weren't compatible with Win7 in spite of what the vendors claimed. Not to mention hardware upgrades, and massive hardware/software incompatibilities that had to be rectified.
Not going through that for Win 8!!! MS can just ***** themselves.
XP worked fine and lasted a long time. Not happy with the changeover to 7, but hey, that's progress. Win 8 is just another Vista waiting to happen IMHO.
should be talking to the people over at React OS as they're working on doing to Win XP what Linus did to Unix
http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html
It may be cheaper to fund these people to finish the job quicker than to rewrite all their legacy software. It would also give them a long term solution to the Microsoft upgrade cycle of costs.
http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html
It may be cheaper to fund these people to finish the job quicker than to rewrite all their legacy software. It would also give them a long term solution to the Microsoft upgrade cycle of costs.
50% said they may consider it in the future. stop hating on Windows8
or of any use in the majority of work places.
"50% said they may consider it in the future." That's a shocking overnight loss of market share from a company that has totally dominated the market for decades.
Even faster than Nokia's loss of the phone market.
Even faster than Nokia's loss of the phone market.
Does anyone know if Windows 8 will support the classic windows mode as an option? If so then it should not be a deployment blocker.
that doesn't mean someone may not develop a third party app to overlay on Win 8, as it's not yet clear if this is possible or not. However, the MS material on Win 8 makes it clear Win 8 will NOT run any Win 32 APIs at all.
So far, all the Win 32 apps I have tried under Win 8 Pro run just fine. I can continue to use VS languages to develop for it. They are all desktop apps, just as with Windows 7. The difference, however, is that these are not Metro/Modern UI apps, and won't run under Windows 8 RT--a consumer platform.
MS is say they will not bring the Start menu back (the single big factor that everyone is harping about), but there are quite a number of third party alternatives already. Here is one list:
http://www.howtogeek.com/127699/6-start-menu-replacements-for-windows-8/
http://www.howtogeek.com/127699/6-start-menu-replacements-for-windows-8/
The start screen is easier to organise into useful groups and can still be accessed with a single keystroke (Windows key). The default startup opens the start menu so you can choose what you want to do including pressing the enter key to go to Desktop if you place it top left.
My habit was to press Win, then start typing, then use the arrows to move through the matched programs. That still works.
They want to is all that counts. They prefer a different interface, one closer to what they're used to using and are more comfortable with (and probably more productive).
You could just as easily ask why MS is forcing a tablet / phone / gaming console interface onto desktop and laptop platforms where it is ill-suited.
You could just as easily ask why MS is forcing a tablet / phone / gaming console interface onto desktop and laptop platforms where it is ill-suited.
Enterprise usually waits for a period so what s the big deal? Where's the story? We're still on XP where I am, and just getting into Win7 modestly.
I can't believe there are so many doubters of touch technology. Get with it; you dont need to use it and it doesn't negate a keyboard and mouse. Why are there so many folk can't see it as a positive enhancement? Did we go through the same drivel when they added the wheel to the mouse?
I can't believe there are so many doubters of touch technology. Get with it; you dont need to use it and it doesn't negate a keyboard and mouse. Why are there so many folk can't see it as a positive enhancement? Did we go through the same drivel when they added the wheel to the mouse?
I went through the same drivel at one company when we first started introducing mice at all! (Yeah, I'm that old.)
I will look into Win 8, but I feel pretty sure it wont be implemented at my work for at least several years, they are just rolling out Win7 to replace XP at a huge cost. At the time they will start thinking about upgrading, if ever... it probably will be to something after Win8 or another platform all together.
MS should just give the market what it wants not what it thinks will benefit MS and DRM's concerns. Roll out a Classic XP without the bells and whistles taking away cpu power and gumming up the works, or lose to Linux eventually. What in the hell were they thinking they could pull off this time around I don't know, but people will only stand so much corralling. Nobody wants to be forced into what they will use on their PC and how they will have to use it. After all, isn't self empowerment what a PC is all about anyway? XP Pro will run everything better so far than anything else out there, leave it alone!
While I am sure that Win 8 may be nice for tablets and smart phones, I just don't see how it is an "improvement" for a desktop. We already have millions of people wearing wrist braces caused by mousing. Imagine the shoulder harnesses and neck braces needed after reaching up to a desktop touch screen and swiping across the whole screen 8 hours a day for a decade. Sure, you can use your mouse and keyboard instead of a touch screen. But the huge swiping motion needed to navigate the strip of tiles on your screen would also cause ergonomic problems in the long run. As we get larger and larger screens, this problem is amplified. I would prefer to have hideable quick launch bars with "tiles" I want grouped together. Hmmm, what OS had that feature? Oh yeah, XP.
now they want you to have it close enough to touch anywhere on it. Just see how you 23 inch or 26 inch monitor looks at that range, it's damn big.
nor does a touch screen make Windows 8 performance more efficient. So the point is moot.
you don't have a touch screen?
It supports touchscreen.
It also supports mouse, stylus, trackpad, track ball, touch pad, wacom graph pads, touch mouse, gamepad, and keyboard.
You can navigate Windows 8 just as easily with mouse.
It also supports mouse, stylus, trackpad, track ball, touch pad, wacom graph pads, touch mouse, gamepad, and keyboard.
You can navigate Windows 8 just as easily with mouse.
which says it's designed around a touch screen, and they added on some mouse and keyboard capability etc as well.
Now, since Microsoft tell me their product is designed around a touch screen, I have very little reason to think they're lying to me about it - but then, they do lie about so much other stuff, so they may be lying here as well as part of their marketing push, and you could be right.
Now, since Microsoft tell me their product is designed around a touch screen, I have very little reason to think they're lying to me about it - but then, they do lie about so much other stuff, so they may be lying here as well as part of their marketing push, and you could be right.
Designing something from the ground up with touch in mind is not the same as touch-centric.
Windows 8 was designed for both touchscreen and mouse input.
If it was touch-centric, it would be easier to use touch input over traditional input and that is not the case.
To prove it, use Windows 8 on a computer without a touchscreen.
You can navigate on it just as easily with a mouse - and usually more efficiently.
The Metro style Start screen slides back and forth with the scroll
wheel just as easily a finger swipe - and probably quicker because presumably, the mouse is closer to your hand.
When you are on the desktop, the mouse works better than touch because legacy programs were not designed with much attention paid to touch. Most business programs are legacy programs - not apps designed for the Metro screen.
To get back to the Metro screen, whip the mouse to the lower left corner of the screen and Start pops up - well, would ya look at that?! It's in almost the same location as the ol' start button. and it pops up like auto-hiding the task bar. (since windows xp?)
To shut down using the mouse, whip the mouse to the lower right corner, click settings, and choose the power button. That is not any more complex than using touch input and touch input is slower.
- This is a discussion about Windows 8 - not RT
RT is more of a tablet with an optional keyboard. Hence, more closely designed for touch.
Windows 8 was designed for both touchscreen and mouse input.
If it was touch-centric, it would be easier to use touch input over traditional input and that is not the case.
To prove it, use Windows 8 on a computer without a touchscreen.
You can navigate on it just as easily with a mouse - and usually more efficiently.
The Metro style Start screen slides back and forth with the scroll
wheel just as easily a finger swipe - and probably quicker because presumably, the mouse is closer to your hand.
When you are on the desktop, the mouse works better than touch because legacy programs were not designed with much attention paid to touch. Most business programs are legacy programs - not apps designed for the Metro screen.
To get back to the Metro screen, whip the mouse to the lower left corner of the screen and Start pops up - well, would ya look at that?! It's in almost the same location as the ol' start button. and it pops up like auto-hiding the task bar. (since windows xp?)
To shut down using the mouse, whip the mouse to the lower right corner, click settings, and choose the power button. That is not any more complex than using touch input and touch input is slower.
- This is a discussion about Windows 8 - not RT
RT is more of a tablet with an optional keyboard. Hence, more closely designed for touch.
said about the systems:
1. Win 8 is built from the ground up to be a touch screen system and thus very touch centric - since I don't work in that field I have to accept their statements.
2. It can work with the older style inputs but isn't really meant to - again their statements.
3. Win RT is a truncated and abbreviated version of Win 8 to fit on ARM devices but using the same core code.
Due to the volatility of the Win 8 discussions I try very hard to limit my comments to:
1. MS statements and media releases on capabilities etc.
2. Direct quotes of others on Win 8 capabilities etc.
3. My own observations and experiences with the Win 8 trial version I had. But not with touch capability as I've no touch screen devices to fit it to - even my phone is not a touch screen one.
4. My analysis of the above applied to my decades of experience and knowledge of the work place and how things are done.
With the last two I try to make it clear it's my analysis and or point of view. Most absolute statements are reserved for the clear cut stuff from MS.
Although Win 8 will work on non touch systems, it's clear to me they are fully optimised for use on a touch screen system.
Either way, I'm not buying any touch devices in the near future, and I'm not buying or using Win 8 either as my experience is it lowers productivity for me, and I don't like the way MS is pushing for more and more vendor lock-in to stop you using non MS software and products unless they get a good cut of the cash cow.
1. Win 8 is built from the ground up to be a touch screen system and thus very touch centric - since I don't work in that field I have to accept their statements.
2. It can work with the older style inputs but isn't really meant to - again their statements.
3. Win RT is a truncated and abbreviated version of Win 8 to fit on ARM devices but using the same core code.
Due to the volatility of the Win 8 discussions I try very hard to limit my comments to:
1. MS statements and media releases on capabilities etc.
2. Direct quotes of others on Win 8 capabilities etc.
3. My own observations and experiences with the Win 8 trial version I had. But not with touch capability as I've no touch screen devices to fit it to - even my phone is not a touch screen one.
4. My analysis of the above applied to my decades of experience and knowledge of the work place and how things are done.
With the last two I try to make it clear it's my analysis and or point of view. Most absolute statements are reserved for the clear cut stuff from MS.
Although Win 8 will work on non touch systems, it's clear to me they are fully optimised for use on a touch screen system.
Either way, I'm not buying any touch devices in the near future, and I'm not buying or using Win 8 either as my experience is it lowers productivity for me, and I don't like the way MS is pushing for more and more vendor lock-in to stop you using non MS software and products unless they get a good cut of the cash cow.
Considering the sluggish economy and the uncertain future, what is the compelling reason for the upgrade? All of the focus has been on Microsoft's attempt to compete with Apple, not how the new OS will improve the bottom line for organizations using the OS.
Microsoft management want more of your money so they can ask for a bigger bonus. That's the only reason for it.
not much different than your article on vista:
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/hiner/sixty-percent-of-it-leaders-have-no-plans-to-deploy-windows-vista/797
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/hiner/sixty-percent-of-it-leaders-have-no-plans-to-deploy-windows-vista/797
Windows 7, if configured right, will be as good as windows 8
Last week, I received and attempted to install Windows 8 Professional upgrade on my laptop, and having failed at that, on my desktop.
I had to get the Windows 8 Professional full to install Windows 8 on my laptop after doing a wipe and it took three times to do it. One of the things I found is that Windows Defender locked up and caused some problems for the 168MB upgrade to Windows 8 (and this was just after the immediate official release of Windows 8, mind you). I turned off Windows Defender, did a "repair" on Windows Update.
After trying it out for awhile with what should be considered a "pristine" system with absolutely no third party add ins, I found the interface annoying (but then, I don't have a touch screen). I also found that Internet Explorer 10 crashes exactly the same way Internet Explorer 9 crashes on a certain website I access regularly. I found email from the front page rather charmless as a functional but austere method of accessing email. Navigating the mess is an exercise in frustration, but I can see that for naive consumers with touch interface, it could be a superior system (at some point I will get Surface RT, which, as I understand it, has all the power of a tranquilized gnat).
I did finally manage to pretty much restore Windows 7 on my desktop over the past week. I'm certain I won't miss some of the third party products I didn't bother to buy again to get back up and going. Windows 8 upgrade had some problems and got locked up (probably a Windows Devender issue). It decided to drop back to Windows 7... except the boot was taking 24 hours without any improvement. So I lost my system and had to rebuild Windows 7.
All in all, it was not a satisfying experience.
Now then.
If corporate IT has any of the same sort of experience I did, I would think that they would simply not want to spend the money to take the risk and upgrade from a perfectly well working product (there would have to be some very compelling reasons, I would think). It is unimaginable to take my frustrating experience and multiply it 10,000 times.
Perhaps, some of you are a lot more sophisticated than I am and could easily overcome the challenge and triumph.
Good luck to you all.
I had to get the Windows 8 Professional full to install Windows 8 on my laptop after doing a wipe and it took three times to do it. One of the things I found is that Windows Defender locked up and caused some problems for the 168MB upgrade to Windows 8 (and this was just after the immediate official release of Windows 8, mind you). I turned off Windows Defender, did a "repair" on Windows Update.
After trying it out for awhile with what should be considered a "pristine" system with absolutely no third party add ins, I found the interface annoying (but then, I don't have a touch screen). I also found that Internet Explorer 10 crashes exactly the same way Internet Explorer 9 crashes on a certain website I access regularly. I found email from the front page rather charmless as a functional but austere method of accessing email. Navigating the mess is an exercise in frustration, but I can see that for naive consumers with touch interface, it could be a superior system (at some point I will get Surface RT, which, as I understand it, has all the power of a tranquilized gnat).
I did finally manage to pretty much restore Windows 7 on my desktop over the past week. I'm certain I won't miss some of the third party products I didn't bother to buy again to get back up and going. Windows 8 upgrade had some problems and got locked up (probably a Windows Devender issue). It decided to drop back to Windows 7... except the boot was taking 24 hours without any improvement. So I lost my system and had to rebuild Windows 7.
All in all, it was not a satisfying experience.
Now then.
If corporate IT has any of the same sort of experience I did, I would think that they would simply not want to spend the money to take the risk and upgrade from a perfectly well working product (there would have to be some very compelling reasons, I would think). It is unimaginable to take my frustrating experience and multiply it 10,000 times.
Perhaps, some of you are a lot more sophisticated than I am and could easily overcome the challenge and triumph.
Good luck to you all.
YOU WOULD HAVE THE INTERNAVEL.
Microsoft is clearly moving towards the much more dynamic market of mobile and ubiquitous computing. The innovative interface devices (kinect, surface, touch-based for tablets and smartphones and even more to come) proves that.
At the time being, it is hard to foresee who's gonna win in such a hard market: there are two strong competitors currently covering the whole area (Apple and Google Android). Probably, in the long run, Android will make it. But Microsoft seems to have a different idea.
At the time being, it is hard to foresee who's gonna win in such a hard market: there are two strong competitors currently covering the whole area (Apple and Google Android). Probably, in the long run, Android will make it. But Microsoft seems to have a different idea.
The future of what you can do with your O.S. is confusing. Those cheap upgrades may come back to bite you. I HIGHLY recommend you read the conditions before you upgrade or purchase windows 8 any version.
I know dozens of highly-respected, very conservative international corporations who wouldn't move off XP if 74% of their user base wasn't rebelling, so this is no real shocker. Also, Win8 has been available for a whopping....7 days? Hardly the timeframe within which corporate executives make any sort of educated purchase decisions. So, at the least, this article and its headline are just hype. We'll know in the next 24 months what the real impact of Win8 will be, and it's anyone's guess at this point.
One final thought - I was an IBM intern in 1991. Our exalted Branch Manager wouldn't debase himself by doing "secretary work" (e.g., typing on his very own desktop mainframe terminal). The relatively new PCs were a running joke among nearly everyone over 22 years of age in the corporation. It's safe to say that about 99.9% of organizations had "no plans to deploy" PCs...ever. I wonder how well that prediction turned out?
One final thought - I was an IBM intern in 1991. Our exalted Branch Manager wouldn't debase himself by doing "secretary work" (e.g., typing on his very own desktop mainframe terminal). The relatively new PCs were a running joke among nearly everyone over 22 years of age in the corporation. It's safe to say that about 99.9% of organizations had "no plans to deploy" PCs...ever. I wonder how well that prediction turned out?
The first of the three betas was released about a year ago. IT departments were looking at it long before the final RTM version. We've had plenty of time to make decisions about the Pro version. The RT version and the Surface tablets may reveal something new, but those are separate platforms and not upgrades to or replacements for existing systems.
Sorry, but I have to disagree. Nerdy guys in IT departments were looking at Win8 pre-release versions, it's true. Those same nerds generally have NO impact on the decision to role out major software overhauls in big companies, which was my point. And, while some higher-level execs -- who are the only folks who will make this decision in most large companies -- are aware of the OS and its potential advantages/disadvantages, the overwhelming majority of higher level executives a) aren't aware of this beyond the MS advertising, b) have no idea how it might or might not impact their organizations and c) probably could care less. Big companies don't usually get big by taking unusual, bleeding-edge risks, and this is no different. So, regardless of IT's take on this thing in the early days, much, much more time will be needed before older and wiser minds make the decision whether or not to spend multiple millions of shareholder dollars to upgrade. That's easily 2-3 years out from today.
We were tasked to check Windows 8 immediately after the first beta, and have retested it after each new release.
Taking a look at it just seemed like the professional thing to do.. I'm not sure where tms123 has worked, but few CIOs have the time to do their own testing. Indeed, CIOs shouldn't be wasting their time testing products. Their jobs are to be looking at the strategic picture. That's why they pay nerdy IT types to test the products and report their suitability.
cute secretary wants to use one at work
Windows 8 is a consumer-oriented operating system and it is not significantly faster than Windows 7. There is no compelling reason for the enterprise to upgrade its systems outside of its normal lifecycle upgrade schedules. Which means that, in any given year, the enterprise will replace between 20% and 33% of its computer hardware. Few enterprise-class business will fall outside a three-to-five year lifecycle so your 74% figure is just about where we should expect it to be.
For 2012-13, most enterprise customers who buy hardware pre-loaded with Windows 8 will downgrade to their standard Windows 7 build. A few of those new machines will be left with Windows 8 installed for testing purposes and, in a few month, the IT department will do a thorough evaluation and start developing a "test" build for Windows 8 in order to determine how they might benefit from an upgrade. In a year to eighteen months, I think you can expect that those numbers to be reverse
For 2012-13, most enterprise customers who buy hardware pre-loaded with Windows 8 will downgrade to their standard Windows 7 build. A few of those new machines will be left with Windows 8 installed for testing purposes and, in a few month, the IT department will do a thorough evaluation and start developing a "test" build for Windows 8 in order to determine how they might benefit from an upgrade. In a year to eighteen months, I think you can expect that those numbers to be reverse
This is expected for one because it's a new OS and most organizations may not have the budget/time/staff to thoroughly test the new OS with their systems/processes. Additionally, the push towards the touch interface may put people off.
The way I see it, Windows 7 will be the new "Windows XP" meaning that a lot of organizations will be using this OS for many years to come just as those have and continue to use XP on a daily basis.
The way I see it, Windows 7 will be the new "Windows XP" meaning that a lot of organizations will be using this OS for many years to come just as those have and continue to use XP on a daily basis.
I installed Win 8 Pro to see for myself the good, bad, & ugly.
Ugly :The Win 8 desktop has NO Start Menu...you must add a shareware replacement.
Bad: The new "Metro" Apps navigation on a desktop PC is poorly designed.
Good : The only good App is the Reuters News Videos.
Windows 8 is not ready for desktop prime time.
Better to install Windows 7 Pro for now.
Ugly :The Win 8 desktop has NO Start Menu...you must add a shareware replacement.
Bad: The new "Metro" Apps navigation on a desktop PC is poorly designed.
Good : The only good App is the Reuters News Videos.
Windows 8 is not ready for desktop prime time.
Better to install Windows 7 Pro for now.
Oh.. it's the Xbox 360 operating system! Can I play Xbox games on my PC now?
We just finished migrating the last of our user base to windows 7 primarily driven by hardware replacement. We plan to remain on Windows 7 and will likely skip Windows 8 altogether unless there is a compelling reason to upgrade. So far this reason has not presented itself.
I haven't found a persuasive answer to the question "How does 8 improve 7?"
My desktop's display is a non-touch screen. Experience with light pens tells me that using a touchable vertical display 2 1/2 feet in front of me is impossible. Reaching over to it a few times is OK, but then the human arm increases its weight to 85 pounds. (Is anyone else here old enough to remember light pens?)
Computer programmers -- being people, more or less -- think that "change" equals "improvement". Ain't so. (I use the Classic theme on Windows 7. Why? Because I like it. Tell your marketing people.)
Regards, Bob
My desktop's display is a non-touch screen. Experience with light pens tells me that using a touchable vertical display 2 1/2 feet in front of me is impossible. Reaching over to it a few times is OK, but then the human arm increases its weight to 85 pounds. (Is anyone else here old enough to remember light pens?)
Computer programmers -- being people, more or less -- think that "change" equals "improvement". Ain't so. (I use the Classic theme on Windows 7. Why? Because I like it. Tell your marketing people.)
Regards, Bob
They may be difficult at first, but after you've spent a few weeks lugging around your Compaq 'portable' you'll develop some fairly impressive upper body strength. Bowflex eat your heart out.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
