Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Releases Windows 8

Posted by timothy on from the you-knew-it-was-coming dept.

Orome1 writes "Microsoft today announced the global availability of Windows 8. Beginning Friday, Oct. 26, consumers and businesses worldwide will be able to experience all that Windows 8 has to offer, including a new user interface and a wide range of applications with the grand opening of the Windows Store. Launching at the same time is a new member of the Windows family — Windows RT — designed for ARM-based tablets and available pre-installed on new devices. In addition to Microsoft Office 2013, Windows RT is designed exclusively for apps in the new Windows Store. In addition to the range of new Windows-based devices available, consumers can also upgrade their existing PCs. Through the end of January, consumers currently running PCs with Windows XP, Windows Vista or Windows 7 are qualified to download an upgrade to Windows 8 Pro for an estimated retail price of US$39.99." Also at Slash Cloud, where Nick Kolakowski writes: "If the operating system and its associated hardware capture the attention (and dollars) of mobile-device users, Microsoft will have successfully expanded the Windows brand to a new and rapidly growing market segment. But if it fails, and Apple and Google continue to rule the mobility space, then Microsoft is left with few alternatives."

71 of 403 comments (clear)

  1. First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Posted using Windows XP Technology

    1. Re:First post! by ZiakII · · Score: 5, Funny

      Posted using Windows XP Technology

      See if you were on Windows 8! Your computer would of ran faster and you would of gotten that first post!

    2. Re:First post! by dstyle5 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Especially with the Slashdot Windows 8 app consuming your entire 24" display!

    3. Re:First post! by robthebloke · · Score: 4, Funny

      So what you're saying is that it's worth me upgrading from my 14" CRT and windows 95? I do hope they've made clippy into a fullscreen app. I still can't fathom how to use these 'PC' things without its insightful guidance.....

    4. Re:First post! by Vanderhoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm just glad the first post wasn't another of those "I've been using Windows 8 for x months now and it's so fantastic I've constantly jizzed all over my keyboard and am going to say all kinds of untrue things about how it's soo much better that that linuz and Mac crud blah blah blah".

      I don't think they realize all they're doing is making it hard to determine if someone is in fact using windows 8 and is happy with it and what the positive features are or if all positive post concerning it are just paid shrills out there to spread FUD. There frick'n everywhere any forum concerning Win8 has a massive log of people obviously just trying to make sure anything negative about windows is pushed right off the map. And yes I had considered that maybe it's because it's just a good OS, then I remember using the developers preview and watching all the "how windows will succeed" videos thinking, "Are they bat shit crazy!!!?"

    5. Re:First post! by linebackn · · Score: 4, Funny

      > So what you're saying is that it's worth me upgrading from my 14" CRT and windows 95?

      A 14" CRT would work great with Windows 8's metro apps. That is about the screen size it was designed for. Your fancy 40" monitor is obsolete now as you must replace it with something SMALLER.

      BTW, happily posted with:
      Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win95; en-US; rv:1.8.1.25pre) Gecko/20110912 SeaMonkey/1.1.20pre

    6. Re:First post! by arbulus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      98 SE was better. I've not been a fan of the NT line. I wish they had kept DOS as the base and just updated it. Even if they stopped calling it DOS and caled it Windows Core, or something, made it multi-user and multi-tasking. I like keeping an OS' base system abstracted from the GUI. It just makes sense.

    7. Re:First post! by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 2

      Core wise, Win 8 seems better then Win 7 and there are a number of 'real' benchmarks out there to show the cases. I have to say the evaluation hasn't made my PC any slower or used any more ram then 7. Really they did improve on 7 and make it better... other then this Metro thing that is a backwards step on desktops.

    8. Re:First post! by jmerlin · · Score: 2

      I haven't used Windows 8, but I do have to admit that I like the simplicity in the Metro UI look/feel. Not necessarily how the UI is functionally constructed in Windows 8, but for a web interface, it's pretty solid IMO. The Windows 8 standalone apps I've used on Windows 7 have been pretty good. I suppose if it was just Windows 7 with less focus on Aero and more focus on Metro-style minimalistic display, I'd be quite happy (none of this full-screen metro nonsense). When I install Windows 7 on my beastly gaming machine, I turn the visuals to best performance and disable Aero. I still maintain that it is/was a stupid idea, and I find the fact that Linux desktop distros are heading down the Aero path simply horrifying (wtf @ compiz, seriously?).

    9. Re:First post! by cbhacking · · Score: 2

      Win7 is faster on the same hardware than Vista, and Win8 is faster still, on the same hardware, than Win7. I'm typing this on a very "slow" convertible tablet (Core 2 Duo ultra-low voltage @ 1.2GHz, 80GB 1.8" 4200RPM HDD) from 2008 (it came with Vista) and have observed this progression first-hand. It also uses less RAM, although that's less of a concern since I upgraded the RAM (the only easily upgradable component, sadly) to 4GB almost immediately after buying it, which made the Vista performance... acceptable.

      So, sorry but you're wrong. Not only does Win8 get better performance than Win7, it's not even the first time MS has managed such a speedup.

      In fact, by some metrics, Windows XP was faster than 2000 on the same hardware too. That's not true overall, though, the way it is with Vista -> Win7 - > Win8.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  2. Why? by sdo1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Confession: I'm a Windows/PC user. Win 7 works fine for me. I use it at work. I use it a home. I can run pretty much anything I want on it. It's stable and mostly trouble free for me.

    I've yet to see a single compelling reason to move to Windows 8 for desktop/laptop. Maybe it's OK for tablets? I don't know... I use Android and I'm happy with that. Is there *any* "ohhh... gotta have that" feature in Windows 8? Looks like a usability step backwards from Windows 7 to me. Am I missing something?

    -S

    --
    --- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
    1. Re:Why? by perpenso · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Am I missing something?

      Given that people general prefer Windows because they already know how to use it and their existing software already runs on it ... I'm no so sure that this "re-imagining windows" idea is such a good idea.

      Then again ... Microsoft may be doing something smart, avoiding a trap that many large established companies fall in to. Large established companies tend to innovate less and more commonly merely offer what customers ask for and/or incremental improvements. This has historically allowed small innovative companies to come in with radically different things and get a foothold in the market, maybe even disrupt the market.

      Plus, isn't there an option to switch the UI to Windows 7 style? If so then the risk to Microsoft may be somewhat low. IF it is true that Windows 8 uses less memory and runs fewer processes/services then maybe a switch would be a good idea even when switching to the Windows 7 style interface.

    2. Re:Why? by Missing.Matter · · Score: 3, Informative

      I've yet to see a single compelling reason to move to Windows 8 for desktop/laptop.

      There probably isn't a single "killer feature" that can get you to move, but rarely is there ever such a thing. I use Windows 8 on my laptop and desktop, and find myself in desktop mode 99% of the time.I personally don't mind the metro interface, I actually like some of the apps, and I especially don't miss the start menu (never used it in Windows 7 TBH).

      However, there are various niceities I enjoy in Windows 8 including the multi-monitor improvements, fast boot time (~8 seconds on my Desktop), explorer enhancements (thank god the up directory button is back), vastly improved task manager (especially love the detailed performance graphs and startup options right there, instead of in msconfig.exe), improved copy dialogue, etc.

      On the other hand, you can get many of the improvements by bolting add-ons to Windows 7, I suppose. They probably won't be as nicely integrated, but they will work. At any rate, I'm happy with Windows 8 on my laptop, tablet, and desktop. I don't find the Metro interface any less usable with a mouse and keyboard, especially with the plethora of shortcuts for each.

    3. Re:Why? by Bigbutt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, you should have said: "Check out my blog post for a little more on the subject"

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    4. Re:Why? by Emetophobe · · Score: 2

      Gartner: Android to beat Windows by 2016.

      Google's Android operating system will be used on more computing devices than Microsoft's Windows within four years, data from research firm Gartner showed on Wednesday, underlining the massive shift in the technology sector.

      At the end of 2016, there will be 2.3 billion computers, tablets and smartphones using Android software, compared with 2.28 billion Windows devices, Gartner data showed.

    5. Re:Why? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      However, there are various niceities I enjoy in Windows 8 including the multi-monitor improvements

      I've heard that phrase several times, but I don't think I've seen anyone explain just what these "multi-monitor improvements" are; for example, my Win7 box handles multiple monitors just fine.

      Care to elaborate?

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    6. Re:Why? by Missing.Matter · · Score: 5, Informative

      This should explain it well enough: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/21/enhancing-windows-8-for-multiple-monitors.aspx

    7. Re:Why? by cbhacking · · Score: 4, Informative

      4) Improved out-of-the-box multi-monitor support (it's been likened with Ultramon, but without requiring third-party software).
      5) Client HyperV. If you do anything with virtualization on your PC, or have even thought you might like to, this is a solid reason to look at Win8. There simply aren't any better virtualization solutions available for client Windows versions right now, certainly not at anything close to the same proce.
      6) If you use multiple computers (most of us, probably, just like I imagne most use multiple monitors when posible), the ability to use Lindows Live for single-sign-on and profile roaming is excellent.
      7) The Windows Store, which holds both "Metro-style" and desktop apps (at least on the x86 version of Win8). You may choose to avoid it for its tablet-friendly UI, or for the fact that it's basically a DRM system (like other commercial and integrated "app stores"), but you may find the ease of software discovery, installation, and updating to be useful.
      8) Built-in antivirus. Just like a certain vocal portion of /. has been clamoring for MS to add for ages.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    8. Re:Why? by JoshRosenbaum · · Score: 2

      Storage Spaces sounds interesting to me. Basically, you can create a pool of disks and by using mirroring or parity you can have redundancy. The mirroring allows data to be backed up to 1 or more drives. The parity part is most interesting to me, because it sounds similar to Unraid for those that have heard of that. Could be nice to get extra storage space that is portable to any computer as long as it has Windows 8. (Not held down by certain hardware such as motherboard raid controller.) Here is the article from Microsoft on it.

      That along with faster booting, better file copying interface (which still could use work in my opinion), better task manager, and some other things make me interested for sure. However, all the bad information I am hearing about the Metro interface has me hesitant. I will probably wait until service pack 1 to decide whether to pick it up. It sounds like a good OS if you aren't worried about the UI, though. Since UI is so important, I'm not sure why Microsoft didn't give the option to just use the classic interface. I guess they want to try and force people to accept the Metro interface.

    9. Re:Why? by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 2

      I'm sure that there is some setting that would fix this for me, but I really dislike the feeling of Windows 7 with regard to traversing directories and library management.

      1. I like my address bar on my windows to show the old style "C:/folder/1/2/3/another/andthefile.file"
      2. The behavior of the 'back' button is different than the 'up' button.

      Sometimes what is 'back' is NOT one level up in the directory structure. I didn't like having to click on the weird folder list thing that the address bar became. It required extra thought. Here is how I like to work:

      1. I have a 'Project' Folder with a /budget and a /contract folder in it.
      2. Under /budget there may be /archive, /proposed, /alternative, etc
      3. I'm working in /proposed and I decide I want to open up a SOW to double check a task description.
      4. by muscle memory I know I can go "CLick CLick" on the up arrow and I'll be in 'root' of my project directory structure.

      Sure, I could look at the address bar and click the 'Project folder' but somehow that just doesn't work as well for me. Probably because I will combine it with use of the back button.

      Up Up "Contract" click on SOW, Back Back Back and I'm again in my 'proposed' directory.

      It may not be logical why I like it like that, but it's what I find to have become my method and... well, it works for me damnit.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    10. Re:Why? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      This should explain it well enough: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/21/enhancing-windows-8-for-multiple-monitors.aspx

      Thanks for the intel!

      Couple of points:

      Span desktop background across all monitors.
      Multi-monitor taskbar

      About. Damn. Time.

      Launch and move Metro style apps to any monitor

      I can already move programs from one screen to another. This is nothing new (more a step back, really, since "Metro apps" all default to full screen, thus reducing overall screen real estate)

      Show a different desktop background on each monitor.
      Multi-monitor slide show.

      Okay, now that is a neat feature. Not really the most useful thing in the world, but hey, who said computing was all about productivity? Dickheads, that's who.


      So, in other words, Windows 8 integrates all the reasons we love MultiMon and Ultramon into the OS.

      As I said before: About. Damn. Time.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    11. Re:Why? by McGruber · · Score: 2

      Am I missing something?

      Microsoft needs your money.

    12. Re:Why? by vux984 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      6) If you use multiple computers (most of us, probably, just like I imagne most use multiple monitors when posible), the ability to use Lindows Live for single-sign-on and profile roaming is excellent.

      I'm not sure I actually want this. I don't want the same desktop background, and other settings on the htpc as my home office pc, or much of anything from either on the laptop I use... am i unusual here? how many people want roaming profiles at home?

      I'm also extremely unlikely to spend the several hundreds of dollars it would take to upgrade my computers. So while the next laptop i get next year might be win 8 as I have no objections to the OS, that roaming profile support is not going to do me much good anytime soon, even if i wanted it.

    13. Re:Why? by Penguinisto · · Score: 2, Insightful

      4) I'm running a Windows 7 laptop with excellent multi-monitor support right now. I happen to have good video drivers though, which leads me to wonder why multi-monitor support would be Microsoft's problem...

      5) I've been able to download VMWare products for free that do the same thing and more... with the added benefit of using something that already has massive industry-wide support. Besides, what the hell would Joe Sixpack need with this?

      6) No need for profile roaming and the like here (I have a home server which does additional auto-backups), but this is the first feature that actually makes any sense for the average consumer - well, those who use multiple computers on a regular basis.

      7) I've been able to do this in Ubuntu for ages, and the costs are way, way lower.

      8) Meh. I use AVG, it seems to work better. This leads to the fact that it is far better to have a choice in the matter than to have one solution rammed down your throat. BTW - if I remember right, most of /. has been clamoring for Microsoft to fix the $#@! security holes and bad security design for ages - and not just glom an AV suite onto the OS.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    14. Re:Why? by dell623 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Wait how the hell did this get voted +5? Microsoft astroturfing out on a grand scale?

      The Ars Technica reviews points to problems using multiple monitors: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/10/windows-reimagined-a-review-of-windows-8/5/

      How the hell is the Windows store an advantage?? Programs like Chrome update just fine by themselves. The store is an excuse to close down the ecosystem and earn Microsoft more money, there is absolutely nothing about it that's good for users. I use Google for software discovery, I have never in my life wished there was an app store where I could find applications to try out jsut for the heck of it. You want an application to perform a specific task, you look up what's avaialble, try trial versions. Don't need no damn app store for that.

      Microsoft Security Essentials is free and works just fine on Windows 7, Vista, and XP. Not a reason for upgrading.

      The ability to use an account tied to Microsoft and their services for Windows? No thanks.

      All changes that basically clamp down the ecosystem and tie you to Microsoft's services, now that anti-trust is off chasing Google.

      Touch screens on desktops and laptops? Useless. Look up Gorilla arm. How many touch screen laptops and desktops did Apple, the pioneer of touch based devices, launch? None.

      If I get a tablet someday I'll look at Windows RT/8, but not at the current price. No way in hell is it getting anywhere near my primary work machine.

    15. Re:Why? by dpx420 · · Score: 2

      4) Improved out-of-the-box multi-monitor support (it's been likened with Ultramon, but without requiring third-party software).

      That's nice, but pretty useless for the laptop I run 90% of the time. The few times I have used multiple monitor displays (work, mainly) the standard support in friggin XP does everything I need it to.

      5) Client HyperV. If you do anything with virtualization on your PC, or have even thought you might like to, this is a solid reason to look at Win8. There simply aren't any better virtualization solutions available for client Windows versions right now, certainly not at anything close to the same proce.

      Client what now? For most people including myself this isn't remotely useful. Under what circumstances does the average consumer need to make use of virtualisation?

      6) If you use multiple computers (most of us, probably, just like I imagne most use multiple monitors when posible), the ability to use Lindows Live for single-sign-on and profile roaming is excellent.

      Woo, more cloud bullshit and opportunities to give M$ control over my personal life. Again, I can't think of many circumstances where this would actually be useful. People who need to keep accessing the same files from different computers all the time (for some reason) are probably already well equipped with established cloud services or even *gasp* memory sticks.

      7) The Windows Store, which holds both "Metro-style" and desktop apps (at least on the x86 version of Win8). You may choose to avoid it for its tablet-friendly UI, or for the fact that it's basically a DRM system (like other commercial and integrated "app stores"), but you may find the ease of software discovery, installation, and updating to be useful.

      Well isn't this Windows 8's Un-unique Selling Point. i.e. their answer to the App Store. Hint: most people with a fetish for walled gardens are probably already well established with Apple. Those of us who actually value a choice and freedom already know how to use Google to find free Apps (remember when we didn't have the need to abbreviate and capitalise the word 'applications').

      8) Built-in antivirus. Just like a certain vocal portion of /. has been clamoring for MS to add for ages.

      Because criticising M$'s grasp on anything related to security is like picking on the disabled kid in the playground, I'll just mention that Windows Defender already exists (and contradicting myself here, isn't actually too bad). The vast majority of the planet who are already using older M$ products no doubt already have one or more antivirus solutions. Since as anyone with half a brain knows, it's lunacy to rely on a single point of protection. So again, while this is a nice feature (and arguably should have been standard on an OS since at least a decade ago) what exactly new does it bring to the table?

      Of course, all the above counter arguments for upgrading are pretty irrelevant since there is still enough momentum in the Windows empire that you can guarantee new PCs will be sold with it as standard before long. However, this release probably has the least compelling reasons to upgrade thus far. XP and 7 were tangible and substantial improvements over their predecessors. Vista was a turd as we all know, but at least it was a shiny turd. People won't be as impressed by the UI changes this time around. I'm thinking from the point of view of the average non-geek and I still can't see why anyone would rush out to buy this.

    16. Re:Why? by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      By the way, building an AV into an OS is the worst idea, ever.

      Do you suppose that ANY professional virus coder out there will release a virus that hasnt been thoroughly checked against that AV, now? By making it a baseline for all computers, MSSE is now utterly worthless. This is why a monoculture is retarded.

  3. Comments Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    something something linux something something it works for me something something micro$oft tax something something free beer something something

  4. If I don't like 8 by suprcvic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Can I reinstall 7 or does upgrading invalidate my Windows 7 key?

  5. Dear Windows 7 users. by Severus+Snape · · Score: 2, Funny

    The wall is a little steep, I'm sure you can all make it though. The grass is greener on the other side, honest.

    1. Re:Dear Windows 7 users. by fabioalcor · · Score: 2

      The wall is a little steep, I'm sure you can all make it though. The grass is greener on the other side, honest.

      Someone who betrays Dumbledore do not deserve my trust.

    2. Re:Dear Windows 7 users. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dear windows 8 user,

      I already have a mobile phone, I don't need one on my desktop. Honest.

    3. Re:Dear Windows 7 users. by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      What if Im actually HAPPY where I am, and dont WANT to like it?

      Cant I just be stubborn, and be left alone?

    4. Re:Dear Windows 7 users. by RedHat+Rocky · · Score: 2

      Gee, where's all the usual complaining about how "people will have to relearn, don't do it!!", "Dummies won't be able to pick up how to use the new interface, no matter how much it makes sense!"?

      Yes, all the arguments used against switching folks to say Ubuntu or another useful Linux OS suddenly get ignored. Not surprised but very annoyed.

      --
      Anything is possible given time and money.
  6. Already? by MeNeXT · · Score: 2

    Wow! What a surprise. up until yesterday there was absolutely no mention of this Windows 8 version that you are talking about. Who would have thought that Microsoft would develop a whole OS so secretly.

    Do we need to keep this up. Let it come out already and see. This has been in the news for sooooo long now that it's probably going to be overshadowed by Windows 9 on Monday.

    --
    DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
  7. Windows 8 is the best system ever by concealment · · Score: 2

    ...for running Linux in a virtual machine.

    At this point my setup depends heavily on virtualization.

    I need to run the desktop software for which Windows is famous, and prefer the Windows "everything has a device driver" model to fiddling with configuration files.

    But when it comes to getting stuff done, it's time to drop into the virtual machine where everything is configured as I'm used to, and I have all the tools built-in that I need to get the job done.

    Microsoft could perhaps sway me by making SSH, an advanced command parser, etc. available for Windows, but for now I just delegate that to Linux, although "technically" my home OS is Windows.

    Did you hear that, Redmond? * shakes floppy at empty sky *

    1. Re:Windows 8 is the best system ever by wed128 · · Score: 2

      They don't really care about your use case. they got your dollar.

    2. Re:Windows 8 is the best system ever by VGPowerlord · · Score: 3, Informative

      Microsoft could perhaps sway me by making ... an advanced command parser... available for Windows

      Wasn't that the entire point of PowerShell? Granted, I've never used it...

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    3. Re:Windows 8 is the best system ever by cbhacking · · Score: 4, Informative

      You're probably already aware of Client Hyper-V, but since you didn't mention it, I'll drop a mention here; not only isn Win8 lighter weight than previous versions (making it a good choice for a host OS), it also includes a seriously excellent hypervisor-based virtualization system.

      As for *nix tools, there's things like Cygwin, and even Interix (full POSIX environment running on top of the NT kernel, but not through win32). Sadly, Interix appears to be deprecated; it's still possible to use it in Win8 but it may be gone in Win9. I've been using Interix bash as my primary command line on Windows since 2006. It also offers ssh (both client and server), incidentally (although you have to install them it a Microsoft-funded repository rather than having it in the base install).

      As for "advanced command parser", have you looked at Powershell? Included in all recent versions of Windows, and in some ways much more powerful than *nix shells. Commands consume and produce, and pipes pass, objects. These objects are sometimes just strings (especially if you pipe in text), but are often more complex data which are simply presented in text form when the end of the pipe is reached. PS also supports aliases (and comes pre-configured with a bunch of *nix-like ones), command completion, scripting, and so on. Additionally, because it's built on top of .NET, you can actually create .NET objects and invoke methods on them in your scripts, which is handy if you're familiar with the framework. It's basically .NETscript.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    4. Re:Windows 8 is the best system ever by Bengie · · Score: 3, Informative

      PowerShell gives you full access to .Net and Server 2012 allows every feature of the server to be configurable via powershell. There is nothing you can do with the UI that can't be done with the cli... finally....

  8. Not really by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is a better OS from a technical standpoint. It is faster (Cakewalk found it sped up Sonar X1 in all heavy load cases) and some of the tools like the task manager are much better. However it isn't major.

    On the down side its UI is ugly, and the metro stuff is crap. You don't have to use the metro stuff. Start 8 or Classic Shell will get you a real start menu and you can then ignore the tablet crap.

    I'm fine with it, I use it at work since Windows support is my profession and I need to be familiar with it and it works well. However it is not a major update. Internally it calls itself Windows NT 6.2, 7 being NT 6.1. It is improved some, uglied up some, and has tablet bits it tries to shove down your throat.

    In general I would say don't worry about it. If you've a reason to get it or a system comes with it, it'll work fine. You'll want to get a start menu replacer but it'll be fine after that. However I wouldn't rush out and upgrade. 7 works fine and 8 really does have an ugly UI.

    1. Re:Not really by Cinder6 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      For myself, I actually vastly prefer the new start screen over the old menu. It's more customizable, with more space for icons, and has a much faster and more intuitive universal search feature than Windows 7. It's enough for me to be willing to pay $39 for an upgrade. On the other hand, Metro is dumb on a desktop monitor, but at least you aren't forced to use it--for now. I'm worried that new apps will come out that will use Metro and only Metro. I like using the newest version of things in general, but that alone would be reason enough not to upgrade in that hypothetical case.

      --
      If you can't convince them, convict them.
    2. Re:Not really by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Interesting you should mention search. If you type in "printer" on Windows 7 the first result is the Printers and Devices applet. On Windows 8 you get no results.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Not really by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      So universal search that "just worked" is now segregated... I never found the Windows 7 search to be cluttered, it always had the result I wanted as the first or second item.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  9. Re:This isn't news! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Shills now own slashdot.

    That isn't news either.

  10. Requires new drivers by JBMcB · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Looks like hardware drivers are being updated for Windows 8 support (WDDM 1.2 / DXGI 1.2 / etc). This means, even if you really want to upgrade, wait at least a few months. All the problems I had (and most people I know) going from XP to 7 were driver related. New driver models = new drivers = buggy drivers = unstable machine = let someone else be the beta tester.

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
  11. Why Win8? Let me explain... by Toreo+asesino · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'll get this in before the hundreds of "omg don't want" posts. Windows 8 is significantly different from previous versions, not just for the interface which takes some initial getting used to (although many, predictably, end up warming to it - http://www.zdnet.com/dont-hate-windows-8-7000006297/).

    Nope, this Windows is the first release that presumes/pre-empts that you, the user, will do your computing across multiple devices and that you don't want to have to worry about your data & user experience being tied to any one device.

    Want to see it in action? Log into Win8 with an MS account on any machine - your apps, data, settings, everything will magically appear (assuming you've allowed it) even if the machine has never heard of you before (and again, assuming this isn't locked down). Load Office 2013 - again, your files & data appear as if you created them on that very machine, all completely seamlessly. All the apps & social integration stuff also follows you wherever you go - the idea being you wouldn't know you were on a new/different device - again all seamlessly streamed from whatever sources of social networking you have setup. That's huge; it effectively eliminates the concept of local file-systems for user data. Everything is transparently in the cloud and just works, as it should be. This is the first Windows to be built from day 0 on this basis.

    Now, for people that don't like metro because they don't have touch? The answer is simple - don't use metro-style apps if you don't like them. Your old desktop works just as well (although it doesn't have the same level of cloud syncing) and all the apps you had on Win7 will work just the same way. If a killer game/app comes out in metro-style, guess what, you have the option to run that too. It would be like Mac OS users being able to natively load iOS apps if they wanted - the choice to be able to is good.

    Not to mention the benefits for developers having a single & consistent API set to target every form-factor from multi-CPU gaming monster to WinRT/ARM tablet, and that's before we mention WP8 being as it is the same kernel. That's a benefit for users too; pick up any modern MS powered device from Xbox to tablet to desktop PC and the user will be in a familiar UI.

    Also, keyboard shortcuts make up for any lack of touch. WinKey + X brings up the power-user menu; WinKey + C brings up the right-swipe bar; there's absolutely loads to help mouse/keyboard users feel at home, but there is a learning curve and from what I've seen from feedback, this is the most objectionable thing. People don't like change; bears have also been know to take dumps in the woods, life goes on.

    Are you happy on Win7? Good for you; if you are on Win7 & have no other devices or intention of sharing data on anything but your trusty desktop, then frankly the benefits of Win8 are lesser.. There's a new & vastly improved task manager; Win8 is faster in almost all metrics, and there are some nice desktop GUI enhancements that you'd likely appreciate, however the face of IT is changing to one where it will be rare to have just the one computer, and Windows 8 has that front & center of the design.

    One day your average IT worker will find the idea of saving personal data directly to a device actually most amusing I suspect, and the shift in thinking has already started.

    There you go; that's my take on the best of Win8. I don't expect many here to appreciate it as I do but there's some real benefits in Win8, despite that being an unpopular opinion in the group-think echo chamber that Slashdot can be sometimes. Now lets return to the flaming.

    --
    throw new NoSignatureException();
    1. Re:Why Win8? Let me explain... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      So...you're saying it magically syncs data and apps across various devices? Like CromeOS or Android or iOS? Not really new stuff; people have been doing that for quite a while now.

    2. Re:Why Win8? Let me explain... by nschubach · · Score: 2

      Nope, this Windows is the first release that presumes/pre-empts that you, the user, will do your computing across multiple devices and that you don't want to have to worry about your data & user experience being tied to any one device.

      So I can save my office document and open it on my Android Phone or my Linux laptop?

      Not to mention the benefits for developers having a single & consistent API set to target every form-factor from multi-CPU gaming monster to WinRT/ARM tablet, and that's before we mention WP8 being as it is the same kernel. That's a benefit for users too; pick up any modern MS powered device from Xbox to tablet to desktop PC and the user will be in a familiar UI.

      You see, that's the thing, I don't own an XBox or a Windows Tablet... I already have a PS3 and an Android phone. I'm not going to go out and buy everything I own again in Microsoft flavor just to feel self important. In fact, I'd argue that everyone should avoid putting all their eggs of data in one companies basket... but you keep doing it. If Windows allowed me to log in with my Google ID and synced with my Google Drive and let me switch at any time (or even use both services for backup), it might be worth my time. So far, all I see out of Microsoft is more lock in and dependency on Microsoft tools.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    3. Re:Why Win8? Let me explain... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Dear Astro, believe it or not, we get it. Many of us get what Microsoft is attempting to do. And many of us think that parts of it are not even half bad ideas. Not particularly original - but then, who is? This thing is, we just have very little faith that Microsoft is going to get it right. Why? Because of Microsoft's track record. Microsoft has tried it again and again and again, and the one thing they're left with which is really solid and stands for itself is the OS - which works best when it is not perceived. See, people don't actually enjoy using WIndows - it's just there, and it runs all their software. It's still quite annoying, but then so are all OSs. Windows does a worse job than others in keeping out of the way and acting as a platform for actual productive stuff, but also better than some. Office? Format lock-in. Xbox? Good stuff. Wouldn't actually sell if not at a loss, though. Zune? Dead. Kin? Never got to the stage of being alive I think. "Plays for sure"? Isn't playing anymore. And that last one is maybe the best - They actually succeeded in branding something "Plays for sure" - and then knock it down? That takes a *special* kind of talent. Silverlight? Microsoft really appreciates that you attempted the switch from Flash and became a stakeholder. Remember? "Developers developers developers"? But now not so much anymore. They thew it at the wall, it didn't stick .. next!
      So yeah ... W8. Good stuff. Good concepts. Now if I somehow managed to get the feeling that, say, MS employees were actually eating their own dog food, and not only that, that they actually had some kind of influence of any kind to say what might be improved, what is inconsistent, a wording, a button, anything ... then you might actually be on to something. Trouble is, we don't get that feeling. It's going to be another buzz-word compliant three-quarters finished piece of work built by a group of people where those who have vision have no influence, and those who call the shots have their eyes firmly fixed to the bottom line with complete disregard for anything else.
      So yeah, again. It's not that we're not going to use it. Microsoft still has enough money at the moment to make sure there isn't much of a realistic alternative. The sales numbers are going to look good on paper. But that's doesn't mean that we actually like it. It's going to be an OS which is slightly more annoying than the last one. And it certainly doesn't mean that it's actually any good.

    4. Re:Why Win8? Let me explain... by thoth · · Score: 2

      Are you happy on Win7? Good for you; if you are on Win7 & have no other devices or intention of sharing data on anything but your trusty desktop, then frankly the benefits of Win8 are lesser.. There's a new & vastly improved task manager; Win8 is faster in almost all metrics, and there are some nice desktop GUI enhancements that you'd likely appreciate, however the face of IT is changing to one where it will be rare to have just the one computer, and Windows 8 has that front & center of the design.

      I'm happy on Win7, but have run Win8 for a few months at work (yeah, I'm one of those lucky people). I find Win8 absolutely fine when I stick to desktop/classic mode, which is most of my usage.

      The downside is the integration and work flow between Metro and Desktop is god awful. I'd explain but I see Ars Technica already did a better job that I can. Read their review under the "Mixed Mayhem" header (http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/10/windows-reimagined-a-review-of-windows-8/5/). I find it a nightmare and confusing; I think the general public will we have a really tough time trying to do simple things like view pictures, save files, and find them again, when it all changes arbitrarily based one what app and which mode you are operating in.

      I've got some money saved up for an upgrade to my Win7 notebook, and I think my best way to spend it is on an SSD rather than Win8.

    5. Re:Why Win8? Let me explain... by Missing.Matter · · Score: 2

      and all his crap, applications, pictures of his dog, his porn... that all gets dumped on my PC?

      No. The settings that are synced are: Personalization, Accessibility, Language Settings, Application Settings, Explorer Settings, Windows Settings, Credentials. All his pictures and media are available by way of skydrive. Apps must be installed separately (although it takes two clicks), Further, an admin has to create the account; you can't just log into any machine with your windows ID.

  12. Re:Will they continue selling Windows 7? by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm guessing they'll kill Windows 7 ASAP. That's why I just bought the parts to build a new gaming PC, which should last me until at least Windows 9, if not 10.

    Assuming Microsoft is still around by that point.

  13. Re:Pay more for less... by mattventura · · Score: 4, Informative

    My assessment of the dev preview is pretty bad. I was doing some consulting for a company, and we had installed windows 8 on a PC there. Me, the IT admin, and another guy who was fairly tech-literate couldn't figure it out due to the unintuititve UI that ends up getting in the way. They have plenty of good ideas that are just poorly implemented.

  14. Re:Pay more for less... by Dunge · · Score: 2

    It's nothing less than seven. It added Metro that people don't like, just don't use it and Windows8 base is much better.

  15. Re:Pay more for less... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2

    Windows 8. It gave me cramps and diarrhea!

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  16. Re:Launch event by Algae_94 · · Score: 2

    The $40 upgrade deal is also going to get me to drop XP on some machines. The traditional Windows pricing has discouraged me to ever upgrade machines, its a huge chunk of the money that could go to a new machine with the new OS. $40 on the other hand for the Pro version, that's just nice.

  17. Re:Pay more for less... by mattventura · · Score: 2

    I'm not sure how much this is true in the release version, but MS seems to have not separated the normal UI and the Metro UI so it's not always possible to get away with only one or the other.

  18. Re:Pay more for less... by cbhacking · · Score: 2

    Really? I thought Flip3D was a cool tech demo of the desktop compositor, but aside from that I never used it after the first month or so - Alt+Tab was faster. On Win7 and Win8, Alt+Tab also shows you the full window (not just the thumbnail) if you hover (holding Alt) on one of the options for a moment.

    The Flip3D keyboard shortcut was remapped to now switch you immediately between "Metro" and the desktop, which is useful in its own way (although you can also Alt+Tab between "Metro" apps like normal).

    --
    There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  19. Re:The emperor's new clothes. by DeathFromSomewhere · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you think Hyper-V is the same as VirtualBox you know nothing of virtualization. Here's a start.

    --
    -1 overrated isn't the same thing as "I disagree".
  20. Re:Linux Still Beats Windows by Brian+Feldman · · Score: 2

    Calm down. Linux is on plenty of devices. It has never been on desktops and never will be.

    --
    Brian Fundakowski Feldman
  21. Re:Pay more for less... by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Isn't being 'stuck in your ways' the point of continuing to use Windows? I know a good number of people who got unstuck in their ways and moved to OSX about the time Vista came out. Microsoft stands to lose as much as they gain from that thinking. Maybe a new Mac to compliment that iPad you have, rather then a new Surface to compliment the Win8 PC you bought.

    It's not that 'Metro' can't be figured out, it's that Metro is a backward step in usability on the desktop. Here is an example I posted on another site...

    "You are surfing the web and click to read a PDF file. It opens the 'metro' default PDF viewer which takes up the entire screen (no viewing the webpage and pdf unless you have multi-monitors). When you are done reading the pdf, what do you do now? There is no X. You can use the hot spot in the upper left to go back to the desktop, but the pdf doesn't close. Or you can ALT+F4 which closes the PDF viewer, but now you are at the metro interface not your original webpage so you have to take an extra step of going back to the desktop."

    How the defaults work out of the box are very different from what people are used to. Yea, you can install foxit/adobe and default that, but that first impression of suck is going to stick.

  22. Re:Will they continue selling Windows 7? by Missing.Matter · · Score: 4, Informative
    If Microsoft stops selling Windows 7, you still have downgrade rights to Windows 7 if you buy a Windows 8 machine:

    Downgrade rights are an end-user right, documented in the Software License Terms that customers accept upon first running Windows software. Note that end user downgrade rights will be available through the sales life cycle of Windows and Windows Server operating systems, which is up to two years after the launch date of a new version. ... Windows 8 Pro includes downgrade rights to: Windows 7 Professional, Windows Vista Business

    So if you buy a Windows 8 PC, you can downgrade it to Windows 7 until 2014.

    Further, Windows 7 support continues until 2015, with extended support until 2020 (or 10 years after launch, for those counting).

    Windows 7 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

  23. Re:The issue by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

    Here is what I have on my Win 7 desktop
    1. Adobe PS, Dreamweaver, and Illustrator
    2. VS 2010
    3. Office 2010
    4. Vmware
    5. Utilities that include truecrypt, uTorrent, Firefox, Chrome, dropbox, truecrpyt, notepad++, skype, YahooIM, filezilla, Google Earth, Avast anti virus, Gimp 2, and Paint.net

    In other words an average PC setup for someone who works and plays. Do you have any idea how many freaking tiles that would create! 80+ tiles!!

    Visual studio has 15 links for utilities and websites (click here for Silverlight 3 SDk, click here for Silverlight 4 SDK ....). Adobe has shit like ActionScript Extender, Photoshop cs, Photoshop cs 64-bit ..

    If I had this on Windows 8 I would have to scroll over and over and over and over and over to find everything with 12+ pages! Sure if I had every command memorized I could hit the start key with its inferior search over Windows 7 but I do not except for 4 or 5 programs off the top off my head.

    Metro can't handle desktop apps because of the tile mess and I do not have a lot of programs compared to some folks who have +30 programs and shareware utilities. You are then talking about 100+ tiles.

    --
    http://saveie6.com/
  24. Windows Media Center by paenguin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...is no longer included in Windows 8.

    Earlier this week, I thought I'd upgrade my HTPC to Windows 8. I've been using WMC on W7 now for a couple of years and it has been working great using HDHomeRUn tuners for local broadcast reception and recording/time shifting.

    Imagine my surprise. No WMC. It's a paid upgrade. Ok, I'll bite. Where to I upgrade it? Clicky linky. Sorry, the licensing server is not available.

    So I said to myself, Self... Let's see what else this WIndows 8 has to offer. This user interface is a total abortion. After fumbling around for an hour and feeling like a fool, I eventually clicked some of the colored boxes on the screen. Not a single thing would launch with the exception of IE9. Reason? My TV is 720 lines of resolution, not 1080. Every stinkin' app said I didn't have the required resolution.

    My HTPC is now running Windows 7 again. And will be for a long time to come. It's way too good of a television to discard for a new operating system.

    --
    We should start referring to processes which run in the background by their correct technical name... paenguins.
  25. Re:Pay more for less... by jimmyfrank · · Score: 3

    I had the complete opposite of your experience.

  26. Re:Pay more for less... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I second this.

    Metro is absolutely terrible for multi-tasking. Try surfing the web in the metro UI, you will go crazy pretty soon from the backwards multi-tasking.

    I like the unified platform thing, I like the cloud think, but why are they trying to push a phone UI on the desktop? I can see the appeal from an engineering perspective, but it's just awkward from a usability perspective. If Windows 8 had always defaulted to desktop it would have been a much better OS. Now we are likely to see a bias towards metro apps in the appstore (in fact I'm not even sure desktop apps are possible in the appstore) and that is really going to be seriously annoying. MS is trying to dumb everything down. As a power user the OS might become unusable if they continue down that route.

  27. I could be wrong here but.... by erp_consultant · · Score: 2

    It seems to me that many of the people that now use Linux/OSX/Android/iOS are doing it precisely because they DON'T want to use MicroSoft products. All of the aforementioned systems work just fine without any assistance from MS. Ok, so MS has a new OS and a new tablet. That's great if you're looking to stay in that ecosystem. But if you're using one of the other operating systems why in the world would you want to change?

    I use a Mac and an Android phone and tablet. I've got a Windows VM on my Mac and haven't had to use it in probably a year. But I keep in around just in case. The phone and tablet work great. I've got tons of apps to choose from and I can do anything I want with it. Windows 8 and their shiny new tablet do no excite me in the least. I'm happy with what I've got.

  28. Except Aero Peek and all are still there... by cbhacking · · Score: 2

    It *would* be a shame, but they didn't, so that's irrelevant. Aero Peek, Aero Snap, Aero Shake, live thumbnails in Windows Flip (Alt+Tab), and limited use of transparency (the taskbar and the desktop overlays are still slightly transparent) are still present. The only Aero features that are gone are window border transparency (which I do miss) and Flip3D (which I don't). The keyboard shortcut of Win+Tab now switches among "Metro" apps and the desktop (as a whole), while Alt+Tab still switches among all open windows, including "Metro" ones. Aero Peek on Alt+Tab, hovering on Taskbar previews, or on the whole desktop using the lower-right corner (which also still functions as a "Hide/Show Desktop" button) all still work.

    Win8 Pro RTM (build 9200) x64, shitty Intel integrated "Mobile GMA X3100" graphics with WDDM 1.1 driver.

    --
    There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  29. Re:Pay more for less... by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 3, Informative

    You could just hit alt-tab when you're done with the PDF...

    That doesn't close the PDF, it's still open in the back ground. Luckily they were smart enough not to do file locking, so you can delete the PDF while its still open in the reader app.

    Also, you can close the app after you use the hot spot in the upper left corner by right clicking on it. But it's not obvious, you have go clicking around on things, RTFM, or be told by someone else.

  30. Rubbish by anilg · · Score: 2

    While Win 8 may have a whole bunch of other problems, what you've stated is not one. If you assume AV technology is so primitive so as to be completely ineffective simply because virus writers will check against it, well, your assumptions need to be reconsidered. Do you think current viruses are not checked against Norton/McAffee/etc?

    As long as users (or the software itself) updates the AV database regularly, the chances of an infection are indeed reduced to a huge degree. When a new virus hits, a few computers indeed will be compromised, but the flip side of that is that the signature will enter the database, so everyone else is safe.

    Including a AV by default is a good thing. I only hope it is a competently designed application.

    --
    http://dilemma.gulecha.org - My philospohical short film.