Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(C|Net)   Congratulations Microsoft, Windows 8 now has a larger install base than "other"   (news.cnet.com ) divider line
    More: Amusing, Mac OS, Net Applications, Windows, installed base, operating systems, traffic reporters, Windows XP  
•       •       •

4141 clicks; posted to Geek » on 02 Apr 2013 at 9:41 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



87 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-04-02 09:17:04 AM  
Still bigger than linux.
 
2013-04-02 09:55:17 AM  
I just bought a laptop and I am a casual comouter user, meaning internet and email primarily. It came with Windows 8. I was prepared to hate the OS, but it's really not bad. Having done so much of my computer functions through a smart phone for months, the tiles don't bug me.
 
2013-04-02 09:58:11 AM  
blog.laptopmag.com
 
2013-04-02 09:58:28 AM  
So Win8 is seeing steady growth of about 1/2% of all end user computers every month, already has 3x's the share of *all* versions of Linux, and more users than any one flavor is OSX, and I'm sure we'll hear about how it's an abject failure from the usual crowd.
 
2013-04-02 09:59:31 AM  
"Linux was a distant third with 1.17 percent. "


Finally, I'm a 1%-er at something!

/Occupy DNS
 
2013-04-02 10:06:12 AM  

MrSteve007: So Win8 is seeing steady growth of about 1/2% of all end user computers every month, already has 3x's the share of *all* versions of Linux, and more users than any one flavor is OSX, and I'm sure we'll hear about how it's an abject failure from the usual crowd.


Basically what I get out of it is that Windows has been virtually perfect for a decade, and all other OSes suck so badly even a "failure" OS release from Microsoft will usually end up bigger than all of them combined, and only really that small because of competition/inertia from other versions of Windows.
 
2013-04-02 10:07:22 AM  

MrSteve007: So Win8 is seeing steady growth of about 1/2% of all end user computers every month, already has 3x's the share of *all* versions of Linux, and more users than any one flavor is OSX, and I'm sure we'll hear about how it's an abject failure from the usual crowd.


Does this mean Vista is better than 8? I'm not understanding the logic in this.
 
2013-04-02 10:26:08 AM  

Coffee Snob: I just bought a laptop and I am a casual comouter user, meaning internet and email primarily. It came with Windows 8. I was prepared to hate the OS, but it's really not bad. Having done so much of my computer functions through a smart phone for months, the tiles don't bug me.


It is not a terrible OS, the Modern UI could be better intimated but considering most people are going to live in desktop anyway its not that much of a problem. I think its silly that Microsoft wants you to live in Modern, that isn't going to happen. I think they should of made it easier to bring back the start screen/boot right into desktop. Instead you have to jump through hoops to do the same thing through third party applications.

It could be better, but overall its more stable than 7/faster and that was enough to make Windows 8 my home OS.
 
2013-04-02 10:42:17 AM  

Coffee Snob: I just bought a laptop and I am a casual comouter user, meaning internet and email primarily. It came with Windows 8. I was prepared to hate the OS, but it's really not bad. Having done so much of my computer functions through a smart phone for months, the tiles don't bug me.


Same here (apart from having used a smart phone).  The only laptops in the range I wanted had Windows 8 so it was either get something that didn't quite meet my needs or suck it up.   And yeah, it really isn't that bad.  Just a few minor annoyances where they seem to have made certain functions a little slower to do than in previous Windows editions.  Things like getting the calculator, getting to the desktop, getting to the shutdown command.

The one thing I am curious about is it's performance.  The GUI looks very clean and uncluttered and with the absence of a start menu it gives the impression of there being very little going on other than what the user wants to be happening.  I find myself wondering if there is actually a ton of bloat running in the background.
 
2013-04-02 11:02:13 AM  

The sound of one hand clapping: I find myself wondering if there is actually a ton of bloat running in the background.


Why would that even matter, since it is demonstrably faster than 7?
 
2013-04-02 11:13:04 AM  

Jackson Herring: The sound of one hand clapping: I find myself wondering if there is actually a ton of bloat running in the background.

Why would that even matter, since it is demonstrably faster than 7?


Yeah, my wording was a bit poor there.  What I meant to imply was that it seems faster but I can't be certain and I might be tricked into thinking it's faster by a cleaner interface.  But I'm sure much of the speed of an OS comes not just from the stuff the end user see's but the operations running in the background, unseen.  I've not used 7 so I wasn't sure if 8 was faster.  And I've used XP and Vista but those were on older PC's so I'm sure that's not a fair comparison (plus boot times and load times seem to slower over a PC's life anyway).  I've not yet read any tech reports about the speeds of the new OS.

Good to hear that it is faster.  That kind of makes up for it being a bit stripped down.
 
2013-04-02 11:18:15 AM  

The sound of one hand clapping: Coffee Snob: I just bought a laptop and I am a casual comouter user, meaning internet and email primarily. It came with Windows 8. I was prepared to hate the OS, but it's really not bad. Having done so much of my computer functions through a smart phone for months, the tiles don't bug me.

Same here (apart from having used a smart phone).  The only laptops in the range I wanted had Windows 8 so it was either get something that didn't quite meet my needs or suck it up.   And yeah, it really isn't that bad.  Just a few minor annoyances where they seem to have made certain functions a little slower to do than in previous Windows editions.  Things like getting the calculator, getting to the desktop, getting to the shutdown command.

The one thing I am curious about is it's performance.  The GUI looks very clean and uncluttered and with the absence of a start menu it gives the impression of there being very little going on other than what the user wants to be happening.  I find myself wondering if there is actually a ton of bloat running in the background.


Dude, holy shiat is it fast.  Boot up from dead power off -- less than 10 seconds is typical.  Recover from hibernate mode takes less than 2.  As far as power down goes, it's kind of weird but the way you do it is by pushing the power button on your computer.
 
2013-04-02 11:19:25 AM  
For the so called "Tech savy" that  complain about booting to desktop http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/39487/windows-8-boot-directly-desktop- w ithout-additional-software/ /No software needed
//You're welcome
 
2013-04-02 11:22:57 AM  
Windows 8 is a pile of sh*t.

How long until they take away the desktop "app"?

Why is the desktop a f*cking "app"?

Windows is not a #loltablet, stop trying to be Apple. You're abandoning the main userbase of your entire system.
Next time if this sh*t keeps up, I'm going to get a mac, or Linux or some sh*t.

/no one can ever answer why there are TWO internet explorers
//Win8 is the Vista of the 20-teens
 
2013-04-02 11:24:18 AM  

meanmutton: As far as power down goes, it's kind of weird but the way you do it is by pushing the power button on your computer.


I know I'm going to sound like a total noob for asking this, but is that safe?  Pushing the power button on a laptop to shut it down.  I thought that would class as an unexpected shutdown and might cause any unfinished tasks to fail.
 
2013-04-02 11:35:08 AM  

Jackson Herring: it is demonstrably faster than 7?


It is demonstrably slower.  I have a tiny little graphics program that I use for screenshots.  It loads almost instantly on any flavor of Windows up to 7.  It takes 3-4 seconds to launch on Win8.
 
2013-04-02 11:36:00 AM  

The sound of one hand clapping: meanmutton: As far as power down goes, it's kind of weird but the way you do it is by pushing the power button on your computer.

I know I'm going to sound like a total noob for asking this, but is that safe?  Pushing the power button on a laptop to shut it down.  I thought that would class as an unexpected shutdown and might cause any unfinished tasks to fail.


Most computers come with a BIOS that defaults to a soft shutdown when the button is pressed. The motherboard receives the shutdown signal and the software initiates a clean shut down. Back in the day hitting the power button would cut power instantly to the entire machine. Among other things, this could cause issues with the hard drive or information stored in RAM.
 
2013-04-02 11:39:29 AM  
Windows 8 + a simple install of Classic Shell = a slightly improved version of Windows 7. My new laptop has Windows 8 and I'm not complaining.
 
2013-04-02 11:40:16 AM  

MightyPez: Back in the day hitting the power button would cut power instantly to the entire machine. Among other things, this could cause issues with the hard drive or information stored in RAM.


CSB: The only time my brother (7 years older than I) ever punched me was when I pressed the power button instead of shutting down properly.
/lost some programming work he had been doing
//don't blame him at all
///CSB
 
2013-04-02 11:40:59 AM  

The sound of one hand clapping: meanmutton: As far as power down goes, it's kind of weird but the way you do it is by pushing the power button on your computer.

I know I'm going to sound like a total noob for asking this, but is that safe?  Pushing the power button on a laptop to shut it down.  I thought that would class as an unexpected shutdown and might cause any unfinished tasks to fail.


There are two shutdown modes, I don't know what the technical terms are, but it's essentially a normal shutdown and an emergency shutdown. The normal shutdown mode should not result in any data corruption, but might result in a loss of unsaved data.

If you just hit the power button once, like you would to turn it on, you put the computer into normal shutdown mode. The operating system asks all running programs to terminate themselves and gives each a little bit of time to save data and do any cleanup in order to ensure a safe shutdown. Once all programs are finished quitting, the operating system itself shuts down and turns off the computer.

If you press and hold the power button (for 10 seconds or so), you will initiate an emergency shutdown. This kills the power supply to the computer, shutting it down instantly. In this situation, programs are not given any grace period to terminate. This can cause corruption and will almost definitely cause a loss of all unsaved data. One particular danger is that data will be incorrectly or incompletely written back to the hard drive, which can cause permanent data corruption and system failure (modern computers have all but solved this, but the possibility remains). This sounds scary, but it's actually a good and necessary thing: this special shutdown mode must circumvent the normal operating system shutdown process in order to deal with the contingency of the operating system itself having problems. Without this, the only way to recover from such a situation would be to unplug the computer from the wall. (But how do you do that with a tablet and a non-user-serviceable battery?)

If I recall correctly, you can actually configure the power button and what you want it to do. You can set it so the power button puts the computer to sleep or hibernate, etc.
 
2013-04-02 11:42:19 AM  
I know this is probably a troll but:

sure haven't: Why is the desktop a f*cking "app"?


It isn't and it never has been. It's a tile shortcut that simply suspends the Metro overlay. Where the fark have you been?

sure haven't: /no one can ever answer why there are TWO internet explorers


Several people, articles and even a few books have answered this. But just for teh lulz, and in the hopes of someone who actually wants to be educated reads this, it's because one is for touch enabled devices and lives in Metro and the other is the "regular" version which is built for traditional keyboard and mouse and is accessed from the taskbar when you're at the desktop.
 
2013-04-02 11:45:38 AM  
sure haven'tused Windows 8. A simple Google search would have gave you the answer http://www.askvg.com/windows-8-comes-with-2-flavors-of-internet-explo r er-10-ie10-metro-style-app-and-desktop-app/
 
rpm
2013-04-02 11:51:51 AM  

sure haven't: Why is the desktop a f*cking "app"?


Because it always has been since Windows 3, if not earlier?
 
2013-04-02 11:51:58 AM  

sure haven't: Windows 8 is a pile of sh*t.

How long until they take away the desktop "app"?




Hey! I started saying this when it came out.

Desktop as a service.
 
2013-04-02 12:04:08 PM  

rpm: sure haven't: Why is the desktop a f*cking "app"?

Because it always has been since Windows 3, if not earlier?


95/NT4 brought in the concept of a desktop area to Windows.  In 3.xx you had the Program Manager window but it wasn't functionally the same as the desktop system we have now (or had in the case of Win8).
 
2013-04-02 12:10:18 PM  

rpm: sure haven't: Why is the desktop a f*cking "app"?

Because it always has been since Windows 3, if not earlier?


Windows 3 was a shell running in DOS, which was the OS.  Beginning with (I think) 95, Windows became the OS, and the DOS prompt was a shell.
 
2013-04-02 12:22:55 PM  

Caelistis: It isn't and it never has been. It's a tile shortcut that simply suspends the Metro overlay. Where the fark have you been?


While they haven't gone this route yet, what I would like to see is that the desktop "app" would be used to sandbox the desktop environment from the operating system - so if you have a major crash in application software or within the desktop itself, it doesn't take down the OS.

syrynxx: Jackson Herring: it is demonstrably faster than 7?

It is demonstrably slower.  I have a tiny little graphics program that I use for screenshots.  It loads almost instantly on any flavor of Windows up to 7.  It takes 3-4 seconds to launch on Win8.


Let's take a look at 3rd party testing of a wide variety of usage patterns, benchmarks, and software:

Source 1: Some guy- Cold startup is 40% faster, shutdown is 40% faster. Wake from sleep is 30% faster. Graphics benchmarks are 9% faster, x264 video rendering is 6% faster and encoding via handbrake is 1% faster.

Source 2: PC Mag - Boot time is half. Better prediction for file transfers (although it was slightly slower due to automated malware scans during transfers). In prime number, encryption, compression and image manipulation, Win 8 is a tad faster (both in 32 and 64 bit flavors) than Win 7. PCMark 7 = 15% faster. JavaScript = 20% faster. Google V8 browser testing = 50% faster

Source 3: Kotatku - Pretty much the same as the rest. Everything is a lot faster - including Chrome internet browsing. Office is faster. The only performance drop they saw was SSD benchmarking is 9% faster on Windows 7.

Why do you use a separate program for screenshots when the "print screen" button is instant - and the more specialized "snipping tool" is built right in?
 
2013-04-02 12:25:04 PM  

Caelistis: Several people, articles and even a few books have answered this. But just for teh lulz, and in the hopes of someone who actually wants to be educated reads this, it's because one is for touch enabled devices and lives in Metro and the other is the "regular" version which is built for traditional keyboard and mouse and is accessed from the taskbar when you're at the desktop.


My Windows 8 machine is a desktop PC, why in the blue f*ck would I ever want to use it as a touch screen enabled device?
Further to that, making every program run fullscreen like an "app" is retarded. Changing the default software makes it serviceable, until they take away that ability.
 
2013-04-02 12:29:54 PM  
I'm building a Win 7/Win 8 dual boot machine at work now...getting a kick ...etc.

/other than having to futz around a bit finding the desktop, it's ok, I guess.
 
rpm
2013-04-02 12:31:30 PM  

NeoCortex42: Windows 3 was a shell running in DOS, which was the OS.  Beginning with (I think) 95, Windows became the OS, and the DOS prompt was a shell.


Windows is the OS (and, prior to 95, Windows was a shell. Still was in 95, they just hid it better).

However, the deskop is a shell as well. It can be replaced. It's just an app implemented a certain way. Nothing is stopping you from replacing it with another.
 
2013-04-02 12:31:55 PM  
Metro UI is trash. There's a reason millions of dollars have been spent on third party apps to neuter or remove it. Almost all the native apps are horrible. And management of the windows is terrible too. seven was perfect. You can tweak 8 to make it ok, but that consists mostly of making it more like seven. its a solid tablet/phone os, but a horrid desktop laptop os
 
2013-04-02 12:37:45 PM  

Coffee Snob: I just bought a laptop and I am a casual comouter user, meaning internet and email primarily


The problem is that for "hardcore" users like me, who is often running Visual Studio, SQL Server, Chrome, Fiddler, Notepad++ and who knows what else, it's terrible. I don't want to be taking my focus off half a dozen windows to open an application. So, either people just pin everything to their task bar, or else they pay out $5 for Start8 and get the damn start menu back.

One woman I know bought Start8 just because she couldn't find the shut down button. Because the design is so tablet heavy that they've hidden it, because you don't shut down a tablet.

I might despise Apple with the fire of a million suns, but at least they understood that desktops and tablets need different UIs.
 
2013-04-02 12:38:13 PM  
8 is fine. The tiles are great on my tv from across the room. Metro works great, unless you still can't let go of your Windows 98.
 
2013-04-02 12:56:03 PM  
I can understand people not wanting to move to Windows 8...but staying on XP and not going to 7?  Really?

Windows 8 sucks...I tried it and hated it.  Sticking with 7.
 
2013-04-02 12:58:11 PM  

Coffee Snob: I was prepared to hate the OS, but it's really not bad.


The windows 8 hatred is way overblown, much like what happened with Vista.
 
2013-04-02 01:02:22 PM  

The sound of one hand clapping: meanmutton: As far as power down goes, it's kind of weird but the way you do it is by pushing the power button on your computer.

I know I'm going to sound like a total noob for asking this, but is that safe?  Pushing the power button on a laptop to shut it down.  I thought that would class as an unexpected shutdown and might cause any unfinished tasks to fail.


It's one of those things where we've been programmed for like 15 or 20 years -- you turn off the power by clicking on something in the computer and NEVER TOUCH THE POWER BUTTON.
 
2013-04-02 01:05:43 PM  

sure haven't: Caelistis: Several people, articles and even a few books have answered this. But just for teh lulz, and in the hopes of someone who actually wants to be educated reads this, it's because one is for touch enabled devices and lives in Metro and the other is the "regular" version which is built for traditional keyboard and mouse and is accessed from the taskbar when you're at the desktop.

My Windows 8 machine is a desktop PC, why in the blue f*ck would I ever want to use it as a touch screen enabled device?
Further to that, making every program run fullscreen like an "app" is retarded. Changing the default software makes it serviceable, until they take away that ability.


It sounds like you're confusing the start menu with the actual operating system.  I almost never go in there.
 
2013-04-02 01:07:41 PM  

farkeruk: Coffee Snob: I just bought a laptop and I am a casual comouter user, meaning internet and email primarily

The problem is that for "hardcore" users like me, who is often running Visual Studio, SQL Server, Chrome, Fiddler, Notepad++ and who knows what else, it's terrible. I don't want to be taking my focus off half a dozen windows to open an application. So, either people just pin everything to their task bar, or else they pay out $5 for Start8 and get the damn start menu back.


As someone running nearly the same stuff you are -- I don't see how the new start menu takes your focus off any more than the old one did.
 
2013-04-02 01:10:27 PM  

meanmutton: It sounds like you're confusing the start menu with the actual operating system. I almost never go in there.


I'm not technically-minded, so forgive my ignorance, but I don't know if I'm concerned with the OS, the shell, or what. All I know is they took Windows, and made it look like a cartoon... which is going to lose 100% of their business customers. I Want a computer that looks like a computer. If I wanted a sh*tty tablet with fun "apps", I'd get a tablet.
 
2013-04-02 01:14:49 PM  

MrSteve007: While they haven't gone this route yet, what I would like to see is that the desktop "app" would be used to sandbox the desktop environment from the operating system - so if you have a major crash in application software or within the desktop itself, it doesn't take down the OS.


Haven't used Windows 8, so I don't know if this is what you mean or not, but Windows has had a separation between the desktop and the OS since at least Windows XP. The desktop environment was called Windows Explorer, and you could use the task manager to kill off exporer.exe to make it go away. The rest of the OS would be fine (including, you could use CTRL-ALT-DELETE to get the task manager back and invoke a new explorer.exe, and recover from there on.

I don't know what would happen if the windowing system itself died.
 
2013-04-02 01:33:54 PM  
I have an Asus Vivotab ME400 with full Windows 8 OS. On a tablet, it's a great OS. Switches easy from tiles to desktop and back again. Pretty easy to use, and boots really quickly.
On a desktop, Win 8 sucks ass.
Microsoft needs to let desktops boot straight into the fricken desktop. And give people back the damn start button.
There are work-arounds, and add-ons that can make this happen. But people should not have to add third party programs to make a familiar UI.
 
2013-04-02 01:48:17 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: sure haven't: Windows 8 is a pile of sh*t.

How long until they take away the desktop "app"?

Hey! I started saying this when it came out.

Desktop as a service.


Keep your voice down and stop giving them ideas.
 
2013-04-02 02:07:38 PM  
sure haven't:
My Windows 8 machine is a desktop PC, why in the blue f*ck would I ever want to use it as a touch screen enabled device?
Further to that, making every program run fullscreen like an "app" is retarded. Changing the default software makes it serviceable, until they take away that ability.


Because a "desktop PC" now often comes with a touchscreen. Hell, you can use a trackpad/touchpad as a touch "screen" for controlling Metro. I've even used my tablet as a touch screen interface for my PC.

Further to that, I've yet to see most, let alone "every", program run exclusively, or even default, run as a full screen app. The only thing retarded here is your understanding of Windows 8, the clear design departure Microsoft took with it, Windows Server and Xbox, and what's coming on the horizon. Like it or not, the average user will not be using a traditional PC in five years. Hell, they barely do it now. Microsoft isn't stupid, regardless of their CEO or what we say here on Fark. They know miniaturized handheld devices are the future of Windows and, just like they did with Windows 95, they are beginning to groom their userbase on moving to more personally interactive devices.

Whether you like it or not is irrelevant, that is where personal computing is heading to. Even Apple is doing with the slow merger of iOS and OS X. Linux, well, as much as I like Linux in the enterprise space, they can't even put together a desktop window manager that doesn't act like a retarded, bipolar schizophrenic off their medication. Until one distribution rises to rule them all, it's going to remain fragmented, tractionless and meaningless in the desktop space.
 
rpm
2013-04-02 02:08:27 PM  

ProfessorOhki: Keep your voice down and stop giving them ideas.


Too late. ChromeOS
 
2013-04-02 02:08:48 PM  

sure haven't: meanmutton: It sounds like you're confusing the start menu with the actual operating system. I almost never go in there.

I'm not technically-minded, so forgive my ignorance, but I don't know if I'm concerned with the OS, the shell, or what. All I know is they took Windows, and made it look like a cartoon... which is going to lose 100% of their business customers. I Want a computer that looks like a computer. If I wanted a sh*tty tablet with fun "apps", I'd get a tablet.


This is what it looks like:
www.extremetech.com

That thing you're thinking of is the new start menu.  Heck, they even call it the start menu when you're in it:

www.eightforums.com
 
2013-04-02 02:16:09 PM  
So - Windows 8 - the horrible red-headed step-child of an OS everyone hates has managed to get a bigger install base than the sum of all Linux based desktops?

Oh well.  I'm sure *next year* is going to be the year of the Linux Desktop.  No seriously, I can feel it.

// Only half trolling...
/// Runs Linux
//// But it's in a VM so I'm not l33t
 
2013-04-02 02:24:00 PM  

meanmutton: farkeruk: Coffee Snob: I just bought a laptop and I am a casual comouter user, meaning internet and email primarily

The problem is that for "hardcore" users like me, who is often running Visual Studio, SQL Server, Chrome, Fiddler, Notepad++ and who knows what else, it's terrible. I don't want to be taking my focus off half a dozen windows to open an application. So, either people just pin everything to their task bar, or else they pay out $5 for Start8 and get the damn start menu back.

As someone running nearly the same stuff you are -- I don't see how the new start menu takes your focus off any more than the old one did.


It does temporarily take up the entire screen.  I also found it 'distracting'.  With the old Start Menu, I could click in the corner but I'd still *see* most of whatever was on my desktop.  When I go into the Windows 8 Start Screen, it feels like I'm leaving the desktop and whatever I was doing, and then digging through the Live Tiles to find what I want.

Most 'power user' types I've talked to (and this is what I do now as well) is they just press 'start' and 'type what they want'.  There are countless freeware apps that would give you that same functionality back in Windows XP too - SlickRun was one I remember by name.

For the user who is, literally, just typing enough letters to locate a match - we're essentially talking about a limit-to-list drop-down that takes up THE ENTIRE SCREEN.

It doesn't serve much point at all.  And it doesn't offer anything over something like SlickRun or even me putting together an old school batch script that can launch programs I use by name.

I really like the new Metro look and feel - I do all of my day-to-day 'checking stuff / reading e-mails / surfing the web / playing really stupid free games' in Metro.

But once I'm done and I need to do 'real work' I go into the desktop and find the Start Screen to be very, very annoying.
 
2013-04-02 02:38:41 PM  

MrSteve007: So Win8 is seeing steady growth of about 1/2% of all end user computers every month, already has 3x's the share of *all* versions of Linux, and more users than any one flavor is OSX, and I'm sure we'll hear about how it's an abject failure from the usual crowd.


Fark_Guy_Rob: So - Windows 8 - the horrible red-headed step-child of an OS everyone hates has managed to get a bigger install base than the sum of all Linux based desktops?

Oh well.  I'm sure *next year* is going to be the year of the Linux Desktop.  No seriously, I can feel it.

// Only half trolling...
/// Runs Linux
//// But it's in a VM so I'm not l33t


Captive audience mean anything to you guys? There are a lot of things that just don't work properly anywhere but in a Windows environment. There are also a whole lot of users who will use Windows stuff until (...) because of inertia. Or momentum. One of those two. They've used Windows forever and it's what they know. Although with Microsoft reinventing the wheel every other OS release, it's a really good thing they have the captive audience thing going.

Same thing for Apple. A lot of things that work beautifully on Apple stuff is horrible (perhaps intentionally) or flat out non-functioning on any other platform. It's actually somewhat entertaining to watch the computer behemoths box themselves in after beating down the big bad IBM corporate overlords. Now Google has sprung up and offers a third way to do things in some cases. Gotta wonder what the landscape will look like in another decade.

If only there were some organization that could promote cross platform standards!
 
2013-04-02 02:47:48 PM  

Caelistis: sure haven't:
My Windows 8 machine is a desktop PC, why in the blue f*ck would I ever want to use it as a touch screen enabled device?
Further to that, making every program run fullscreen like an "app" is retarded. Changing the default software makes it serviceable, until they take away that ability.

Because a "desktop PC" now often comes with a touchscreen. Hell, you can use a trackpad/touchpad as a touch "screen" for controlling Metro. I've even used my tablet as a touch screen interface for my PC.

Further to that, I've yet to see most, let alone "every", program run exclusively, or even default, run as a full screen app. The only thing retarded here is your understanding of Windows 8, the clear design departure Microsoft took with it, Windows Server and Xbox, and what's coming on the horizon. Like it or not, the average user will not be using a traditional PC in five years. Hell, they barely do it now. Microsoft isn't stupid, regardless of their CEO or what we say here on Fark. They know miniaturized handheld devices are the future of Windows and, just like they did with Windows 95, they are beginning to groom their userbase on moving to more personally interactive devices.

Whether you like it or not is irrelevant, that is where personal computing is heading to. Even Apple is doing with the slow merger of iOS and OS X. Linux, well, as much as I like Linux in the enterprise space, they can't even put together a desktop window manager that doesn't act like a retarded, bipolar schizophrenic off their medication. Until one distribution rises to rule them all, it's going to remain fragmented, tractionless and meaningless in the desktop space.


Right, so my fault for just not "getting" it.  Thanks, professor.

/owner of a windows phone, I like their mobile direction
//desktop... is not mobile, and never will be for those who use them for any type of work on earth
 
2013-04-02 03:05:45 PM  

sure haven't: //desktop... is not mobile, and never will be for those who use them for any type of work on earth


And that illustrates perfectly why you don't get it and how out of touch you are with the enterprise, i.e. "work", segment. Tablet adoption and deployment rate is through the roof in not just the enterprise space but also in higher ed with it trickling down to primary ed.

People want to be mobile and people want to work in spaces that aren't 5'x5' beige cubes. Most people's "work" involves the use of an office suite, a web browser and possibly a dedicated email client. Your average worker isn't doing development work at all, that's only a very small niche in contrast to the overall workforce. For what they need, a tablet or ultrabook is perfect.

If Jane wants to work on her sales presentation out on the south lawn of the company campus, there's no reason she can't with modern hardware. If Bill wants to write his research paper from the backseat of his '57 Chevy convertible, he can do that too. They can use ultrabooks for weight savings or tablets for the convenience of portability.

Outside of a small niche, no one goes tot technology based work and says "Man, I LOVE sitting in this cube staring at a monitor all day."

You may enjoy the traditional desktop and you may enjoy sitting at a battered, recycled desk and you may find comfort in the ages old standby of the mouse and keyboard. However, your sweeping generalizations about workflow and the future of systems are silly, antiquated and have no bearing as to what is actually happening.
 
2013-04-02 03:09:11 PM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: So - Windows 8 - the horrible red-headed step-child of an OS everyone hates has managed to get a bigger install base than the sum of all Linux based desktops?


8 is apparently fine functionally, it's just that Metro interface is trash.  I suspect that the problem that both Linux and Win8 are having right now is not so much that they're bad as that they're unnecessary.  Win7 runs everything fine out of the box, with some settings tweaks you can run everything very will without distracting UI bullshiat and manage permissions without even thinking about it.  To get some vital functionality with Win8 (several windows of varying sizes displaying simultaneously, for instance) you have to fiddle with some settings, which is annoying.

8 boots up, shuts down, and file transfers better... great.  How often do you even shut off your desktop, and how often is the choke on your data rate in your  computer rather than your network?

Summary: 8's basically only getting sold with new computers, no one's bothering with upgrading.  Give it a decade and it'd probably be universal, since there's nothing wrong with it, but that seems an unlikely amount of time to go between versions.
 
2013-04-02 03:11:27 PM  

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: I have an Asus Vivotab ME400 with full Windows 8 OS. On a tablet, it's a great OS. Switches easy from tiles to desktop and back again. Pretty easy to use, and boots really quickly.
On a desktop, Win 8 sucks ass.
Microsoft needs to let desktops boot straight into the fricken desktop. And give people back the damn start button.
There are work-arounds, and add-ons that can make this happen. But people should not have to add third party programs to make a familiar UI.


Read my post above
 
2013-04-02 03:14:15 PM  
Caelistis:

Further to that, I've yet to see most, let alone "every", program run exclusively, or even default, run as a full screen app. The only thing retarded here is your understanding of Windows 8, the clear design departure Microsoft took with it, Windows Server and Xbox, and what's coming on the horizon. Like it or not, the average user will not be using a traditional PC in five years. Hell, they barely do it now. Microsoft isn't stupid, regardless of their CEO or what we say here on Fark. They know miniaturized handheld devices are the future of Windows and, just like they did with Windows 95, they are beginning to groom their userbase on moving to more personally interactive devices.

Whether you like it or not is irrelevant, that is where personal computing is heading to. Even Apple is doing with the slow merger of iOS and OS X. Linux, well, as much as I like Linux in the enterprise space, they can't even put together a desktop window manager that doesn't act like a retarded, bipolar schizophrenic off their medication. Until one distribution rises to rule them all, it's going to remain fragmented, tractionless and meaningless in the desktop space.



So basically I'm never going to have to buy another damn OS "upgrade"? Sweet!

Perfectly happy PC desktop user thanks.
 
2013-04-02 03:15:20 PM  

Jim_Callahan: How often do you even shut off your desktop,


Ask Abe Vigodas ghost and the countless other talking about booting to desktop
 
2013-04-02 03:35:32 PM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: Oh well. I'm sure *next year* is going to be the year of the Linux Desktop. No seriously, I can feel it.


Don't laugh.  I know more than a few large companies are waiting to see what Microsoft does with Windows 9.  I've spoken to 3 high-level IT executives that I know personally and they've told me that If Microsoft doesn't return Windows to something usable for their end-users, they will consider Linux.

Why?  Because if companies need to retrain people it's better to dump Microsoft and the ridiculous licensing fees and move to a desktop linux variant.
 
2013-04-02 03:56:42 PM  

slayer199: Why? Because if companies need to retrain people it's better to dump Microsoft and the ridiculous licensing fees and move to a desktop linux variant.

Linux is great for most work!
 
2013-04-02 03:57:55 PM  

sure haven't: Windows 8 is a pile of sh*t.

How long until they take away the desktop "app"?

Why is the desktop a f*cking "app"?

Windows is not a #loltablet, stop trying to be Apple. You're abandoning the main userbase of your entire system.
Next time if this sh*t keeps up, I'm going to get a mac, or Linux or some sh*t.

/no one can ever answer why there are TWO internet explorers
//Win8 is the Vista of the 20-teens


This ^
 
2013-04-02 04:35:08 PM  

Caelistis: People want to be mobile and people want to work in spaces that aren't 5'x5' beige cubes. Most people's "work" involves the use of an office suite, a web browser and possibly a dedicated email client. Your average worker isn't doing development work at all, that's only a very small niche in contrast to the overall workforce. For what they need, a tablet or ultrabook is perfect.


Because nothing says "good for spreadsheets and word processing" like a touchscreen. Ultrabook I'll give you, but tablets are useless for work with the exceptions of data entry or reference in the field. If you've got the keyboard attached to your tablet 100% of the time, there's no point in it being a tablet. It's the equivalent of buying a laptop, bolting it to your desk, and using an external screen and keyboard. Sure, you get the same functionality, but you paid for portability and integration that you'll never use.
 
2013-04-02 04:52:46 PM  
Wow, the tablet OS they claim is a desktop OS is failing on the desktop. What a surprise.
 
2013-04-02 05:51:49 PM  

xanadian: Still bigger than linux.


Given that this graph isn't factoring in Android, no, it's not.
 
2013-04-02 06:19:02 PM  
With Windows 8, install Classic Shell, have it auto launch into the desktop, change all the default applications to desktop versions,  and never look back. I haven't seen the "metro" screen in over a month. It's all good.
 
2013-04-02 07:20:20 PM  

drjekel_mrhyde: For the so called "Tech savy" that  complain about booting to desktop http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/39487/windows-8-boot-directly-desktop- w ithout-additional-software/ /No software needed
//You're welcome


...Or just install classic shell. No mucking in settings.
 
2013-04-02 07:43:07 PM  
I too hate what Microsoft has done. Windows 8 is an atrocity and they should never have removed the Desktop app or the Start Menu app. It renders the whole operating system USELESS because Windows 8 removes all access to the files on your computer. I have had Windows 8 for three months now and I turn on my compter in the morning, watch tiles flip all day, then the battery runs out and it shuts off. I had to type this post from my iPhone.

I've just ordered a new operating system built by real people, for real people. It's called Wondows 8 and it's a real time saver. When first installed, your Desktop loads full of shortcuts, half of which no longer link to a program. When you've finished surveying your Desktop in all it's corner-arrowed glory, click the Start button. You know you want to. Yes, Wondows 8 comes with a complete 6-column start menu prefilled with New Folder (2) through New Folder (84). And they're just the way you like them...empty. Or are they? Did I mention that Wondows 8 also comes with fun minigames? The Start Menu game lets you try to find that pesky New Folder (1). Where is it? Is it in New Folder (23)? Maybe New Folder (47)? Only you will know.

Wondows 8. It knows how you computer.
 
2013-04-02 08:06:39 PM  

Caelistis: I know this is probably a troll but:

sure haven't: Why is the desktop a f*cking "app"?

It isn't and it never has been. It's a tile shortcut that simply suspends the Metro overlay. Where the fark have you been?

sure haven't: /no one can ever answer why there are TWO internet explorers

Several people, articles and even a few books have answered this. But just for teh lulz, and in the hopes of someone who actually wants to be educated reads this, it's because one is for touch enabled devices and lives in Metro and the other is the "regular" version which is built for traditional keyboard and mouse and is accessed from the taskbar when you're at the desktop.


Thanks, not only did I not know there were two versions, but now I know why!
 
2013-04-02 10:32:37 PM  
So Windows 8 hasn't gotten to 4% usage after five months. Guess what? Vista was at 4% by five months. Windows 7 got there in less than three weeks. Windows 8 adoption is pathetic.

Meanwhile, Dell is predicting a major crash in the PC market. This was a bad moment for Microsoft to lay an egg.
 
2013-04-02 11:08:37 PM  
leviosaurus:Meanwhile, Dell is predicting a major crash in the PC market. This was a bad moment for Microsoft to lay an egg.

Lets take a look at their announcement . . . Uncertain sales of Win 8, a slowdown of enterprise adoption of Win 7, and people moving away from conventional laptops and desktops to tablets and smartphones.

Wow, with that sort of announcement, you'd think that Microsoft would focus attention to developing an operating system that'll work on both touch screen tablets and phones, along with conventional machines, to help people transition. If they were smart, they'd make their interfaces similar, and allow people to run the same software they're used to with conventional PC's, but with a more touch centric approach. A more "modern" UI, if you will.
 
2013-04-03 12:28:44 AM  

leviosaurus: Windows 8 adoption is pathetic.


And it should be, here's how that works:

1. Large swaths of people whine about how horrible "metro" is on desktops/laptops non-stop for months before Windows 8 is released, more vocally than anything we heard about Vista.
2. The average consumer reads these complaints, and listens to them deciding to skip Windows 8 (not understanding that "metro" is not the entire OS).
3. The same people that wouldn't shut up about "metro" now pat themselves on the back and point at Windows 8's adoption rate is proof they were right.

Why is no one buying Windows 8? Among other things, you told them not to.
 
2013-04-03 12:39:06 AM  

MrSteve007: leviosaurus:Meanwhile, Dell is predicting a major crash in the PC market. This was a bad moment for Microsoft to lay an egg.

Lets take a look at their announcement . . . Uncertain sales of Win 8, a slowdown of enterprise adoption of Win 7, and people moving away from conventional laptops and desktops to tablets and smartphones.

Wow, with that sort of announcement, you'd think that Microsoft would focus attention to developing an operating system that'll work on both touch screen tablets and phones, along with conventional machines, to help people transition. If they were smart, they'd make their interfaces similar, and allow people to run the same software they're used to with conventional PC's, but with a more touch centric approach. A more "modern" UI, if you will.


Ballmer, is that you?

So sales of Win8 tablets have been doing how well, exactly? Oh right, since the numbers in TFA include all Win8 as discrete Internet traffic, then Windows tablets are represented in the >4% number. Meanwhile, non-Windows tablets aren't there at all, despite the fact that they represent 8% of all internet traffic, just ahead of the 7% of Internet traffic from (overwhelmingly non-MS) phones. Overall, if you add non-MS devices into the picture, things start looking a lot less rosy for Microsoft really quickly. Their market dominance has taken a gigantic hit in a very short time, and their latest creation is missing Vista's numbers. The two areas they really owned were desktop, and MS Office. Win 8 will not stop the erosion of MS dominance, and O365 will not rescue Office from its competitors.

This isn't the end for Microsoft, not by a long shot. This is just the beginning of the end.
 
2013-04-03 12:56:11 AM  

Wonktnod: leviosaurus: Windows 8 adoption is pathetic.

And it should be, here's how that works:

1. Large swaths of people whine about how horrible "metro" is on desktops/laptops non-stop for months before Windows 8 is released, more vocally than anything we heard about Vista.
2. The average consumer reads these complaints, and listens to them deciding to skip Windows 8 (not understanding that "metro" is not the entire OS).
3. The same people that wouldn't shut up about "metro" now pat themselves on the back and point at Windows 8's adoption rate is proof they were right.

Why is no one buying Windows 8? Among other things, you told them not to.


LOL, so it's my fault, is it?

First thing people saw when they logged into XP:
dreamerkid.com

First thing they saw when they logged into Vista:
farm1.static.flickr.com

Windows 7:
cdn.papyimg.com

Windows 8:
betanews.com

Yeah, Win 8 isn't ugly as shiat or anything. It doesn't destroy the standard experience. I'm making it all up.

For the record, I didn't try Win 8 until after it was released, so I wasn't one of those complaining about metro when it was in Beta. I installed it fully expecting that I would love it, despite the criticism. I've been an exclusive Windows user and a lifelong fanboy going all the way back to 2.0. Hell, I still defend Vista, which I think was unfairly maligned. You think I enjoy trashing Win 8? Nothing could be further from the truth. It amazes me that you can't see it for the crap it is.
 
2013-04-03 01:19:39 AM  

leviosaurus: Wonktnod: leviosaurus: Windows 8 adoption is pathetic.

And it should be, here's how that works:

1. Large swaths of people whine about how horrible "metro" is on desktops/laptops non-stop for months before Windows 8 is released, more vocally than anything we heard about Vista.
2. The average consumer reads these complaints, and listens to them deciding to skip Windows 8 (not understanding that "metro" is not the entire OS).
3. The same people that wouldn't shut up about "metro" now pat themselves on the back and point at Windows 8's adoption rate is proof they were right.

Why is no one buying Windows 8? Among other things, you told them not to.

LOL, so it's my fault, is it?

First thing people saw when they logged into XP:
[dreamerkid.com image 435x326]

First thing they saw when they logged into Vista:
[farm1.static.flickr.com image 500x375]

Windows 7:
[cdn.papyimg.com image 500x375]

Windows 8:
[betanews.com image 600x400]

Yeah, Win 8 isn't ugly as shiat or anything. It doesn't destroy the standard experience. I'm making it all up.

For the record, I didn't try Win 8 until after it was released, so I wasn't one of those complaining about metro when it was in Beta. I installed it fully expecting that I would love it, despite the criticism. I've been an exclusive Windows user and a lifelong fanboy going all the way back to 2.0. Hell, I still defend Vista, which I think was unfairly maligned. You think I enjoy trashing Win 8? Nothing could be further from the truth. It amazes me that you can't see it for the crap it is.


1/10
 
2013-04-03 02:26:18 AM  
mtylerjr.smallbizdepot.com

Win8 + Start8 is unbeatable, IMHO
 
2013-04-03 02:41:39 AM  

leviosaurus: It amazes me that you can't see it for the crap it is.


Metro isn't the greatest design decision ever, sure, but you're being misleading by saying the entire operating system is bad because you don't like the start menu.
 
2013-04-03 02:54:36 AM  
Caelistis:
Because a "desktop PC" now often comes with a touchscreen. Hell, you can use a trackpad/touchpad as a touch "screen" for controlling Metro. I've even used my tablet as a touch screen interface for my PC.

Very, very few new desktops or laptops are sold with touchscreens. They're a niche item that has a few legitimate uses, but most users will have a better experience with a traditional mouse driven UI.

Like it or not, the average user will not be using a traditional PC in five years. Hell, they barely do it now.

The average home user will probably use a tablet for most computing in 5 years, like you said. The average business user will still be on a traditional computer, unless they're standing in front of a terminal at a fast food counter. Business users are Microsoft's bread and butter.

Microsoft isn't stupid, regardless of their CEO or what we say here on Fark. They know miniaturized handheld devices are the future of Windows and, just like they did with Windows 95, they are beginning to groom their userbase on moving to more personally interactive devices.

Just like they knew that Windows was the future of phones, everyone would have a PocketPC PDA in their pocket, people wanted all of their desktop applications in a cute little room where you click on items to do things, a talking paperclip is an awesome interface for help, and browsers should definitely be able to automatically run unsigned code.

Whether you like it or not is irrelevant, that is where personal computing is heading to.

It's not irrelevant if you're the IT decision maker in an organization.

Even Apple is doing with the slow merger of iOS and OS X.

OSX and iOS are not merging by any stretch of the imagination. Their interfaces look related, but act completely different.
 
2013-04-03 07:14:16 AM  

blue_2501: xanadian: Still bigger than linux.

Given that this graph isn't factoring in Android, no, it's not.


Headline FTFA: "Windows 8 ekes out 3.2 percent of desktop OS market"

Android on a desktop PC.........hmmmmm.
 
2013-04-03 07:42:10 AM  

leviosaurus: Wonktnod: leviosaurus: Windows 8 adoption is pathetic.

And it should be, here's how that works:

1. Large swaths of people whine about how horrible "metro" is on desktops/laptops non-stop for months before Windows 8 is released, more vocally than anything we heard about Vista.
2. The average consumer reads these complaints, and listens to them deciding to skip Windows 8 (not understanding that "metro" is not the entire OS).
3. The same people that wouldn't shut up about "metro" now pat themselves on the back and point at Windows 8's adoption rate is proof they were right.

Why is no one buying Windows 8? Among other things, you told them not to.

LOL, so it's my fault, is it?

First thing people saw when they logged into XP:
[dreamerkid.com image 435x326]

First thing they saw when they logged into Vista:
[farm1.static.flickr.com image 500x375]

Windows 7:
[cdn.papyimg.com image 500x375]

Windows 8:
[betanews.com image 600x400]

Yeah, Win 8 isn't ugly as shiat or anything. It doesn't destroy the standard experience. I'm making it all up.

For the record, I didn't try Win 8 until after it was released, so I wasn't one of those complaining about metro when it was in Beta. I installed it fully expecting that I would love it, despite the criticism. I've been an exclusive Windows user and a lifelong fanboy going all the way back to 2.0. Hell, I still defend Vista, which I think was unfairly maligned. You think I enjoy trashing Win 8? Nothing could be further from the truth. It amazes me that you can't see it for the crap it is.



Same here. I upgraded my PC from XP to W8 (a machine that I'd upgraded the mobo and chip a couple of years ago) and am very impressed with how fast it is and very happy that I upgraded. As long as I have Classic Shell that is, because the new UI (Metro, no Start button, hidden buttons, non-intuitive features etc) is terrible without it. Just yesterday I looked for an app and went to the app store. Now, how do I search the app store? Search box? Search button? No. "You just start typing". How farking stupid is that? Sure it's easy once you know how, but 100% non intuitive when you don't.
When you do start typing it brings up options on the right. Click "Apps" because that's what I'm looking for, duh,  and even though you are in the App Store that searches only the apps you already have on your PC. Again, non intuitive. I'm already in App Store. Why would I need to select Store again?

And that search only works in the main Store menu. If you click on Games and then try to search it doesn't work. You have to go back to the main Store page, start typing, click Store, and then when you get the results use the drop down menu to select Games.

I can see the logic in trying to unify your desktop PC and your tablet/phone OS experience but MS screwed up by trying to force that touch interface down the throats of desktop users. Touch interface is totally useless for the vast majority of PC users. You want me to spend hours sitting at my desk holding my arm out horizontal in front of me? Fark that.  Touch makes sense on a tablet since you are holding it in your hand already. On desktops it does not work. Unless you work in McDonalds running the checkout.
 
2013-04-03 07:51:01 AM  

Wonktnod: leviosaurus: It amazes me that you can't see it for the crap it is.

Metro isn't the greatest design decision ever, sure, but you're being misleading by saying the entire operating system is bad because you don't like the start menu.


It's not just the Start menu (or Metro as I still call it). It's the fact that even in Desktop it hides controls in the corners. Annoying pop up controls. The number of times I'm trying to do something in a program and accidentally go near the corner and the charms bar appears. Or the fact that Metro is not just the Start menu, it is an environment in its own right. Like when you open a Metro app you then get full screen only, and no clue how you close apps.

I love W8, and have installed it on three PCs. But all have Classic Shell as well. The OS is great. The UI is bad. The entire UI, not just the Start menu.
 
2013-04-03 07:53:03 AM  

Flint Ironstag: Wonktnod: leviosaurus: It amazes me that you can't see it for the crap it is.

Metro isn't the greatest design decision ever, sure, but you're being misleading by saying the entire operating system is bad because you don't like the start menu.

It's not just the Start menu (or Metro as I still call it). It's the fact that even in Desktop it hides controls in the corners. Annoying pop up controls. The number of times I'm trying to do something in a program and accidentally go near the corner and the charms bar appears. Or the fact that Metro is not just the Start menu, it is an environment in its own right. Like when you open a Metro app you then get full screen only, and no clue how you close apps.

I love W8, and have installed it on three PCs. But all have Classic Shell as well. The OS is great. The UI is bad. The entire UI, not just the Start menu.


And the fact that third party add ons like Classic Shell, Start8 etc can fix those problems and work perfectly just proves that MS didn't need to force us into Metro to make the unified OS/UI work. They did not need to scrap the traditional Windows UI to add the touch UI.
 
2013-04-03 07:57:25 AM  
I'm looking forward to upgrading to Windows 7 in the next year. My 5 year old Vista box is starting to cough and sputter a bit, and it's struggling to play the newest games.

By the way, as long as PC gaming is alive and well, you will never see the PC going away. Anybody claiming that PCs are going away within 5 years is a crackpot.
 
2013-04-03 08:53:07 AM  

Boxingoutsider: Metro UI is trash. There's a reason millions of dollars have been spent on third party apps to neuter or remove it. Almost all the native apps are horrible. And management of the windows is terrible too. seven was perfect. You can tweak 8 to make it ok, but that consists mostly of making it more like seven. its a solid tablet/phone os, but a horrid desktop laptop os


I can get used to the shiatty launcher, but the goddamn native apps are a disgrace. That alone makes this an abject failure of integration.
 
2013-04-03 12:17:45 PM  

jack21221: I'm looking forward to upgrading to Windows 7 in the next year. My 5 year old Vista box is starting to cough and sputter a bit, and it's struggling to play the newest games.

By the way, as long as PC gaming is alive and well, you will never see the PC going away. Anybody claiming that PCs are going away within 5 years is a crackpot.


Sure, as a hardware platform, pcs will always be around. But does pc gaming require Windows? If you primarily use your pc for Office, do you need Windows to access O365, our can you get by with an android based terminal? Since the answers are obvious, what's the value proposition for Windows, again?

Keep in mind, the second largest chunk of people out there are still running XP. Happily. If the majority of Win7 users decide to wait 10+ years to upgrade, what options will be available for them? Do you seriously think Google or Amazon won't have a viable option in place within the next 5 years? Sure, pcs will be around for decades. Windows, maybe not.
 
2013-04-03 08:32:20 PM  
The Classic Shell app makes Windows 8 a much better OS for desktop PC's.
The Metro interface makes no sense without a touchscreen.
I have a suspicion that Microsoft needs to use a touch-interface to modernize the computer. Apple has spectacular touchpads on its laptops (and desktops!), and I suspect that they may also control numerous patents on that touchpad. That would prevent Microsoft from developing a decent touchpad UI, and thus Microsoft must jump ahead to a touchscreen-based interface.
I can't think of any other reason that Mac's have a more comfortable interface than PC's, without Microsoft trying to catch up.

A touchscreen should also be pretty, but most Windows laptops have a sad 720p resolution. 720p just isn't enough for clear, crisp text and images. Apple was very clever to use better screens across all their models.
 
2013-04-03 08:41:36 PM  

leviosaurus: But does pc gaming require Windows?


Is this a serious question? For the most part, yes, it does. It either requires Windows or running a virtual instance of Windows. If you're willing to wait a year or so, many games will also come out on Mac, and a few select games will come out on Linux, but the majority of games require Windows.
 
2013-04-03 11:45:36 PM  

browntimmy: Windows 8 + a simple install of Classic Shell = a slightly improved version of Windows 7. My new laptop has Windows 8 and I'm not complaining.


THIS. I have been using it for about 2 months now and 97% of the time, I don't even realise it's Windows 8. The other 3% of the time I realise because I discover some new feature that's actually quite useful.
 
2013-04-04 05:38:00 AM  

Chris45215: A touchscreen should also be pretty, but most Windows laptops have a sad 720p resolution. 720p just isn't enough for clear, crisp text and images. Apple was very clever to use better screens across all their models.



My very point in smartphone threads. My HTC has a 720p screen so I can watch HD video in proper HD while the iPhone only has 680 pixels.

But a quick check of a retailers website shows that most laptops anywhere near the price of Apple laptops have 1080 resolutions while Apple have lots of 900 pixel screens and do some pricy laptops with 768 screens.   Apple 768  and  Samsung 1080  for example.
 
2013-04-04 02:55:51 PM  

Flint Ironstag: My very point in smartphone threads. My HTC has a 720p screen so I can watch HD video in proper HD while the iPhone only has 680 pixels.


The iPhone is 19.56 x 34.78? What an odd resolution :)
 
2013-04-04 03:58:10 PM  

ProfessorOhki: Flint Ironstag: My very point in smartphone threads. My HTC has a 720p screen so I can watch HD video in proper HD while the iPhone only has 680 pixels.

The iPhone is 19.56 x 34.78? What an odd resolution :)


My bad. I meant to say vertical pixels.

But I've just checked. The iPhone 4, 4S and 5 all have only 640 lines! Actually far fewer than I said!

Thank you for putting me right.
 
2013-04-05 02:43:04 PM  

Iplaybass: browntimmy: Windows 8 + a simple install of Classic Shell = a slightly improved version of Windows 7. My new laptop has Windows 8 and I'm not complaining.

THIS. I have been using it for about 2 months now and 97% of the time, I don't even realise it's Windows 8. The other 3% of the time I realise because I discover some new feature that's actually quite useful.


Same. I use Start8/Stardock for the shell - everything just works now, I haven't had any issues with drivers (64 bit Win8 Enterprise) - Ive actually had fewer compatibility issues than with Windows 7. I still dual boot with win7 (actually I boot Ubuntu too occasionally) but there isn't anything left that I have that runs only on win7 and not win8, so I'm likely going to free up the win7 partition soon.

It -is- a performance upgrade from win7, and it seems to like my SSD more
 
Displayed 87 of 87 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report