Anyone using Windows 8 as Primary OS?

[zbaracki]

I use win 8 (RP) as the only os (ok, got xp in virtual machine for a few things, that coulnd't be done even on vista/7)

Also had win8 on my hp hdx laptop, with built in tv tuner (that was some aver media). Latest drivers available were for vista, but even with that, tuner was working flawlessly on win8 (CP), just required manual installation of drivers, as original installer didn't work.

 

[Tully]

Sorry for the confusion!

I'm not trying to show off - i KNOW how little i know !

PC = Personal Computer
HTPC = Home Theater PC
STB = Set Top Box (device provided by Cable company to watch TV)
USB, PCI, and PCIe - google it or look in wikipedia

TV Cards are add in cards that allow viewing (and recording) directly on a PC.
They support connecting antennae, cable STB, VCR, or just about any video input device.
These cards are installed in slots in the PC available on the motherboard (MB).

I add PCI and PCIe TV cards to my primary PC as my needs evolve.
I also may add USB media devices if and when i want them.

If you are sitting 10 feet away! Do you hate your computer?

Nope.
I'm 62 years old and my eyesight is not what it was when i was 20.
I can't sit 2 ft away from large screen LCD's (TV's) and work well.
And i don't want to sit 2 ft. from a large screen!

I am 83 & have been in computers since the start.

However, these discussion are always helpful to others if they can follow the thread.

The technology is changing every day!

I learn a lot just by following the thread.

Tully

 

[Kat]

Well, I wouldn't dual-boot or triple-boot at gunpoint.

Simply not worth the hassle, and totally unnecessary.

On-topic, no, I don't run Win 8 as the primary OS on THIS machine
although it IS installed in VirtualBox.

But, I do on my old lappy (Penryn dual-core). It has win 8 CP, and
has been pretty well issue-free.

I'll be installing the RP sometime this week, and will try it out.

But, the more I see of the RTM, the less I like it.

 

[Paul V]

gizbug mate you don't need to format it will do it when you install, well I didn't have to anyhow

 

[Paul V]

XP for real ???????? go with vista or windows 7 but not xp mate, we have moved on from there, 8 years is about right I think although in computer terms it was like 2 generations ago, the grandfather, or even great grandfather of modern software

having said that

Seetec a business in luton got new computers and put xp Prof on it, I did accuse someone of having a back hander as I cant see any other reason why a company would use it, also, the cpu does not have an ( or is a ? ) Sd slot so its pen drive or floppy, I was surprised they didn't have the old 3 quart inch floppy, I have an external one which I keep for sentimental reasons, anyway, there computers are not quite in the ark, but, not far off it

 

[SmartEyeball]

Well, I wouldn't dual-boot or triple-boot at gunpoint.

Simply not worth the hassle, and totally unnecessary.

I'm curious, why so anti-multiboot?

I've personally always got a minimum of dual boot, usually a triple.

I've never found it to be a hassle at all :huh:

And unnecessary?

Often it's very necessary if you like running an OS with all available resources. Virtual machines can only take you so far - if you want the full 'experience' of an OS, you have to go a proper/native install. Linux distros especially.


*

I tend to run W8 as a primary OS on my laptop since it works flawlessly, but not on my desktop due to a component compatibility issue.

But even my Laptop is a triple boot of 7/8 and Mint - any one of the three could be a primary if so desired.

 

[rich4421972]

Please stop using Initials & spell out the words!

Some of don't understand the "Computer Jargon" or are you just showing off!

If you are sitting 10 feet away! Do you hate your computer?

What do you mean by a TV card?

Do you mean a card with a TV tuner?

Tully

I think he means "Home Theater Personal Computer."

I think it's a very interesting question but I, for one, use Windows 8 "Release Preview" as a regular desktop computer to do various things for school, my job and even for games like Warcraft and Diablo.

In my opinion, The ultimate home theater PC's are the Mac Mini (very expensive and only uses OS X) and some of the smaller Acer Revo's. I think that ViewSonic also has a theater PC that is rather nice. Just erase Windows 7 and install Windows 8 Release Preview and you might come up with something you like. I don't think it is even practical to hook up a desktop to a TV or cable box.

Even Commodore USA has a Home Theater PC called the AMIGA Mini that runs Mint Linux and functions as a Home theater device.

 

[slpman]

I am running windows 8 as my primary system from the laptop I a typing this from. The laptop is about 8 years old, a 2Ghz dual core processor with 2 G of memory, with a dual boot into 7 also on the hard drive. I have experienced no problems with it. I also have I installed on a virtual machine on my desktop, specs shown under My system specs, but do not run it as my primary. I have found that the more I use it on my laptop, the more I enjoy it. I have found many of the objections people list are easy to overcome, and there are ways to configure the desktop with all your folders and apps you want on it to make if familiar to use, but it seems many have not learned of these tricks (if you want to call them that,, they are part of the O/S, you just have to discover them.

 

[Frank1]

I've been using it for a couple of weeks. If I had to, I could get used to it and learn to like it. But since I don't have to, I prefer to stay with 7.

 

[rich4421972]

I've been using it for a couple of weeks. If I had to, I could get used to it and learn to like it. But since I don't have to, I prefer to stay with 7.

I hope that MS will let users continue with Win7 for a very long time. It's was a revolutionary OS and deserves a place among their best products. Some times Windows 8 feels like a bit of a minor upgrade, albeit with a completely new character and interface.

 

[pparks1]

I'm curious, why so anti-multiboot?

I've personally always got a minimum of dual boot, usually a triple.

I've never found it to be a hassle at all :huh:

And unnecessary?

Often it's very necessary if you like running an OS with all available resources. Virtual machines can only take you so far - if you want the full 'experience' of an OS, you have to go a proper/native install. Linux distros especially.

I virtualize almost everything. I haven't set up a dual boot in probably 5+ years. The hassle is dealing with bootloaders, etc. Not too mention, if you are new to Linux and are setting up a Linux dualboot, but cannot get the Linux machine onto the internet...you often times have to reboot back into Windows and then Google for the issue. This isn't an issue with a vm.

As far as how far virtualization can take you...it's pretty darn far. I have over 200 fully virtualized servers in the company that I work for. We are slowly getting rid of each and every physical machine as they are just not useful anymore. VM's are so much more versatile. Can change the hardware, can up the RAM, can easily add hard drive space, can move them to another machine, can Vmotion them off 1 running host to another in the event that you have to upgrade the host, you can storage vMotion them to another SAN in the event that you have to migrate to new storage (all without downtime to customers). Can easily take a snapshot before a software upgrade and rollback if necessary. Can have extra hardware on standby that comes on during heavy load situations and powers up more servers to handle load and then powers them off when not needed. Virtualization is where it is at these days.

 

[enotar]

Windows 8 first daily os and Ubuntu second
Installation of Ubuntu went smoothly no hitch and boot perfectly if I want it, that was a surprise.

 

[TerryE]

VMs have come a very long way, and I could not possibly run my choice from among a couple different server OSs, Windows 7, Windows 8, and different Linux distros (Mint is my favorite at the moment) in a multi-boot scenario. Even outside an enterprise environment like the one pparks1 describes, VMware (or Hyper-V or VirtualBox) offers a great platform for testing, development, learning, and instruction.

Multi-boot lets you run one OS at a time. VMs let you run several of them concurrently on the same hardware - especially pre-release OSs. You can set up admins on a VM and turn them loose without allowing someone admin access to the native OS.

 

[DavidE]

I think each approach has Pros and Cons.
My use is for Home PC's.
I recently tried VM on my Home Test PC and it did not work well to say the least.

Hardware is 'emulated' or not available, and that didn't work well for me with HTPC as a primary use.
The overhead of the VM made the system unusable, or so slow i didn't want to use it.
This is an older AMD dual core with 4GB Ram, but it does work fine for my needs with native OS's.

 

[pparks1]

I think each approach has Pros and Cons.
My use is for Home PC's.
I recently tried VM on my Home Test PC and it did not work well to say the least.

Hardware is 'emulated' or not available, and that didn't work well for me with HTPC as a primary use.

Yeah, if you need physical hardware support like video cards and such then VM's aren't ideal.

The overhead of the VM made the system unusable, or so slow i didn't want to use it.
This is an older AMD dual core with 4GB Ram, but it does work fine for my needs with native OS's.

Yeah, you need enough horsepower to run 2 concurrent OS's. On Core 2 Duo's and up, there is usually plenty of CPU horsepower so as long as you have enough RAM they usually run pretty well. I run VM's all of the time on my Core 2 Duo E6400 (Which runs at 3.6Ghz) and my Core 2 Quad (Q9550) which runs at 3.4Ghz, each with 8GB of RAM and my VM's are very fast.

 

[TerryE]

I run VMware Workstation on a dual-core AMD Athlon 2.8 GHz box with 8 GB of RAM and while the VMs are not going to run at "native" speed they work for what I need them to do. "Bare metal virtualization" (where the hypervisor runs as a standalone OS) can achieve extremely good results.

 

[bitmodule]

After a couple of false starts, I have been using Windows 8 as my main OS for a few days now. Sort of...

I am booting directly to the Desktop, where I use Classic Shell/Start. It is really quite a nice new Windows this way. I have no use for Metro, with its full screen, near-useless apps. It's probably nice enough on a small touch-screen tablet or something, but I find it absurd in a real desktop situation. And before the fanbois jump down my throat... No, I'm not afraid of change. I explored several of the apps in some depth. Using a standard mouse/keyboard/decent-sized-monitor setup, I found them completely useless.

But I find the Windows 8 desktop to be fast, stable, and all-around pleasant, and will probably fork over the $40 for the upgrade in October...

There are some good apps that I use like Weather and Mail.

 

[bitmodule]

XP for real ???????? go with vista or windows 7 but not xp mate, we have moved on from there, 8 years is about right I think although in computer terms it was like 2 generations ago, the grandfather, or even great grandfather of modern software

having said that

Seetec a business in luton got new computers and put xp Prof on it, I did accuse someone of having a back hander as I cant see any other reason why a company would use it, also, the cpu does not have an ( or is a ? ) Sd slot so its pen drive or floppy, I was surprised they didn't have the old 3 quart inch floppy, I have an external one which I keep for sentimental reasons, anyway, there computers are not quite in the ark, but, not far off it

I would not with Vista over XP, heck I would use Windows 95 rather than Vista. Vista has so many bugs. Business still use XP because they know it works and when they find something that works they stick with it.

 

[leeingrove]

I have win8 installed on a dual core Vaio as the only OS. Running preview have yet to come up with any kind of problems!

Installed on a new h/d which apparently formatted drive, but not sure as from start to finish took only 10 minutes which I find staggering...

Have read and heard so many gripes and moans about win8, that I am baffled by. Too many people are associating win8 with Vista and ME. Why? I don't know of any OS which can come out of sleep mode and be up and running in under 3 seconds.

I have a lot to say on win8 and will post soon

 

[rich4421972]

Have read and heard so many gripes and moans about win8, that I am baffled by. Too many people are associating win8 with Vista and ME. Why? I don't know of any OS which can come out of sleep mode and be up and running in under 3 seconds.

I have a lot to say on win8 and will post soon

Win Vista was a revolutionary OS, in its day. IUt introduced many of the security fixtures that are now a part of Windows 7 and 8. It also introduced transactional NTFS 6.0 allowing techies to journalize and measure every part of a filesystem's activity. True, it did take, on average, 16 seconds longer to boot and run apps(that feels like an eternity if you are trying to operate MS Office or other business applications).

I have to admit liking Vista when it came out and still having an admiration for its new security features and new filesystem. I think it is more helpful to admire the good points in an OS before taking it as all bad.


With Windows 8, we are seeing more unqualified criticism based on perceived experiences with Vista, Me, 2000 and, of course, XP.
Life is a journey. Vista was a step in a much longer journey that doesn't even end with Win8.

You could not get a workstation with Enterprise Linux OS for $40 and certainly not a copy of OS X Mountain Lion. As MS customers, we are very spoiled indeed. In addition to Windows 8 preview, MS also offers preview editions of Office 2012 and Visual Studio. I don't know any other company who would do this for its customers