Windows 8 Consumer Preview

[(◕‿◕✿)]

What? No Windows platform has ever been a substantial failure. Also, why do you state this without support?

Are you a Microsoft representative?

To me, Windows 8 looks terrible, but so did Vista and 7. The last few iterations has added a ridiculous amount of badly performing eye candy, which for the most part I find annoying. I feel that the move towards touch screen interfaces and modern GUIs overall is detrimental to people's ability to effectively compute and use devices. Many people have the idea that it makes it 'simpler', or easier, and somehow inherently better. I really disagree. I think it hides more of the system from the user and encourages locked up software. Also, the less the user knows about their system, the more easy it is for them to be taken advantage of. There's nothing wrong with having a graphically rich and intensive interface, but I don't think it should be the only option ( or lack thereof ).

 

[A Link In Time]

Are you just not old enough to remember Vista or what?

The hatred for Vista is completely unwarranted. It may have lacked the stability of earlier operating systems and failed in becoming as mainstream as its predecessors but it certainly was not a technical or commercial failure.

To me, Windows 8 looks terrible, but so did Vista and 7.

Complain about Apple's operating systems and now Microsoft's. What do you perceive to truly be great?

 

[Austin]

The hatred for Vista is completely unwarranted. It may have lacked the stability of earlier operating systems and failed in becoming as mainstream as its predecessors but it certainly was not a technical or commercial failure.

I think the fact that there are still more people using XP than Vista or 7 should speak for itself. It was, in fact, both a technical and commercial failure. Actually, now that I read what you just wrote, you basically admitted to both ffs. "Lacking the stability of earlier operating systems" = technological failure. "Failed in becoming as mainstream as its predecessors" = commercial failure.

Complain about Apple's operating systems and now Microsoft's. What do you perceive to truly be great?

How is this not obvious. Unless you think he's posting from a Commodore 64 or something there's really only one option left. And I swear to God, if you say Chromebook I will destroy you.

 

[A Link In Time]

I think the fact that there are still more people using XP than Vista or 7 should speak for itself. It was, in fact, both a technical and commercial failure. Actually, now that I read what you just wrote, you basically admitted to both ffs. "Lacking the stability of earlier operating systems" = technological failure. "Failed in becoming as mainstream as its predecessors" = commercial failure.

I'm pretty sure 7 is on pace to outsell XP although products from that period are slow to die. *cough*PS2*cough Also, if I'm correct 7 had the most successful operating system launch in history.

How is this not obvious. Unless you think he's posting from a Commodore 64 or something there's really only one option left. And I swear to God, if you say Chromebook I will destroy you.

I'm rather positive that leaves Linux, which while more open source than Windows or Mac is definitely not as mainstream. I see nothing beneficial in supporting such a platform.

 

[Austin]

I'm pretty sure 7 is on pace to outsell XP although products from that period are slow to die. *cough*PS2*cough Also, if I'm correct 7 had the most successful operating system launch in history.

Which part of that doesn't make Vista a failure?

I'm rather positive that leaves Linux, which while more open source than Windows or MAC is definitely not as mainstream. I see nothing beneficial in supporting such a platform.

Yeah man, free, stable and open source software is just awful. We wouldn't want to like, encourage anyone to follow that path. Just imagine what people would do if they had complete control over their operating system or software in general.

 

[A Link In Time]

Which part of that doesn't make Vista a failure?

I won't bother with Vista, however, I did offer some support for 7.

Yeah man, free, stable and open source software is just awful. We wouldn't want to like, encourage anyone to follow that path. Just imagine what people would do if they had complete control over their operating system or software in general.

Personally, it just lacks the major backing of its principal two opponents.

 

[Austin]

I won't bother with Vista, however, I did offer some support for 7.

I never said 7 was a failure. In fact, I'm using 7 right now.

Personally, it just lacks the major backing of its principal two opponents.

How is that a reason to not support it?

 

[A Link In Time]

Because it isn't made and run by big, anti-competitive companies who want you to buy their software and their software only. Also, there isn't one Linux, there are many and they are supported by different people.

While greater freedom is allowed with Linux, it's precisely this disunity that is a major turnoff. Then again, for those looking for customization and a wider range of options Linux does indeed appear to be a more viable option...

 

[(◕‿◕✿)]

While greater freedom is allowed with Linux, it's precisely this disunity that is a major turnoff. Then again, for those looking for customization and a wider range of options Linux does indeed appear to be a more viable option...

Firstly, I find your earlier quote about Linux being "more opensource than the others" rather amusing. Namely because the Linux kernel is opensource. It is not more or less opensource, it just is,

And this statement is just hilarious. Disunity? Have you ever seen a Linux distro project? Canonical, Fedora Project, Arch Linux, etc? Linux is built and maintained by the community, for the community, all with community support. What you said is like saying that software isn't whole because the source is stored in more than one file. It's ridiculous and utterly wrong.

Linux isn't just about "wider ranges of options and customization". The whole idea is that the kernel and by extension the core OS is free as in freedom. You are free to do what you want with it, however you see fit, and even share that with your friends. The point isn't that it looks different or anything purile like that. GNU and Linux has a totally different outlook and philosophy when it comes to software.

[qoute=ALIT]Personally, it just lacks the major backing of its principal two opponents. [/quote]

You do realize that makes little to no sense, right? Essentially you're saying "Well, no one told me to back Linux, or advertised it ad nauseum, therefore I can't support it or like, or even know what it is".

 

[A Link In Time]

Firstly, I find your earlier quote about Linux being "more opensource than the others" rather amusing. Namely because the Linux kernel is opensource. It is not more or less opensource, it just is,

And this statement is just hilarious. Disunity? Have you ever seen a Linux distro project? Canonical, Fedora Project, Arch Linux, etc? Linux is built and maintained by the community, for the community, all with community support. What you said is like saying that software isn't whole because the source is stored in more than one file. It's ridiculous and utterly wrong.

Linux isn't just about "wider ranges of options and customization". The whole idea is that the kernel and by extension the core OS is free as in freedom. You are free to do what you want with it, however you see fit, and even share that with your friends. The point isn't that it looks different or anything purile like that. GNU and Linux has a totally different outlook and philosophy when it comes to software.

[Qoute=ALIT]Personally, it just lacks the major backing of its principal two opponents.

You do realize that makes little to no sense, right? Essentially you're saying "Well, no one told me to back Linux, or advertised it ad nauseum, therefore I can't support it or like, or even know what it is".[/QUOTE]

Alright. You convinced me.

Also, I just wanted to clarify that I am not one of those ignorant people who don't know what to buy or where to get it unless they see an ad for it on television or the Internet.

***

The being said, this is not a discussion regarding Linux but Windows 8. The derailing is not appreciated. :/

 

[Austin]

The being said, this is not a discussion regarding Linux but Windows 8. The derailing is not appreciated. :/

Derailing that you fully participated in and perpetuated. Back on topic though, you're right.

Windows 8 is going to be just awful.

 

[A Link In Time]

Windows 8 is going to be just awful.

Depends on what platform. Looks to fit those new ultrabooks or whatever they're called-the netbook, with a detachable tablet screen-are the perfect breeding ground for Windows 8.

 

[A Link In Time]

Basically, you're saying it fits outdated and dumbed down hardware, labled a cool name to get sales. Ultrabooks and Netbooks usually go little further than having the internet. If Windows 8 caters to these, it really is going to be terrible.

If I think of more examples, I'll add them. Basically any laptop configuration works...

 

[Ronin]

Hmmm. Pretty sure my iPod Touch can is capable of pretty much all this already. And even if the procedures aren't exactly like it, they are close enough to the iTouch's as it is. I can't help but wonder, though, if Windows 8 will be on a laptop or tablet. Probably something more of a tablet since it's touchscreen.

 

[Fraxinus]

I mostly trust that Windows 8 will be a wonderful operating system. However, I will not be upgrading. I'm the kind of person who is somewhat stubborn to change, and I like what I'm used to. That being said, I'm still using Windows XP and am overall very pleased with it. I just don't like how user-friendly the new operating systems are. It's just a quirk of mine--nothing is truly wrong about having simple navigation and such.

Though, there does seem to be a trend with Microsoft's operating systems; that being they alternate back and forth in quality and convenience. Such as, many users loved XP but were not fans of Vista. And then, Windows 7 was a success (I could have gone back further to better paint the picture, but I really don't see the point of that). So, hopefully Microsoft would break that pattern with Windows 8.

But I do agree that Microsoft seems to have been adapting more due to competition, and that can be both good and bad. As long as they keep their individuality to a certain extent.