Solved Bored with Metro already and other thoughts

[jbfoster]

Sorry to hear you are having problems. I did a clean install and so far the only problems has been one of my 16GB flash drives will not work and two programs would not start. I don't remember for sure which two. I think one of them was Xilisoft Video Converter. Other than that all has been good.

In general I wonder why some people are having so many problems. When do the problems start, right from the start of installing Windows 8 or after installing a bunch of software? What about hardware conflicts, how big of problem? Can one brand of motherboard, video card ect. be ok and others give problems?

 

[Mustang]

Also, Acronis would not work until upgraded to the version compatible with 8.

I've got the 2012 version of Acronis which is incompatible, but there is a work around. Create an Acronis Recovery CD, use it to load onto RAM at startup, and you can create/restore Acronis image of Windows 8 OS.

Only thing you can't do is validate the image. I've been able to validate Acronis images of PCs I've reloaded for third parties, using Acronis loaded on Vista or Win7. However, when I tried to validate the Acronis image of Win8 using Acronis loaded onto Win7, it caused BSOD on Win7.

Even so, took a punt and reloaded Acronis image of Win8 without validation to test it, using recovery CD and it worked fine. If it failed I would have needed to do a full re-install.

Cheers M

 

[Coke Robot]

Good post, not much to argue with.

But I disagree about Safe Mode boot. From over a year of using Windows 8, I've literally never had to use Safe Mode. This is considering I've used a Windows 8 To Go drive across several PCs, and a few other PC's I've installed Windows 8 on. Heck, I intentionally had to boot into Safe Mode to see if it was still there! By the way, it is and it's really weird to see Taskbar transparency...

This was done because the boot time of Windows 8 is so fast as it is, pair that with UEFI BIOS, it's almost impossible to get into the advanced boot options. Windows 8 works around that and only presents the advanced boot options WHEN and only WHEN the PC has been booted up several times and the power gets killed or keeps restarting due to some other issue. I think this is a good thing, no more having to see the advanced boot options every time your battery runs out of power.

I also disagree with the mac clone on the Desktop. Far from it. Even still, Windows 7 had the mac clone thing going on. Windows 8 has that, but the Start Screen refutes that. Speaking of the Start Screen and personalizing, there are over 16 different colors and I think 25 different patterns. LOTS of combinations there. Or, if you go with a third party route, you can customize those colors INFINTITELY. Right now on my desktop, I have a picture of a Start Screen background that I once had with the Developer Preview that is black and has some translucent tiles on the top and bottom. Then I have black tiles, along with a blue accent color. Or, I can have red tiles or blue tiles with that black background. The other day, a friend of mine customized her Start Screen to be more teal and has an ocean vibe to it. You can even have images on the Start Screen to be like the slide show feature on the Desktop. Third party options are out there, like there are for start menus, but in all honesty, a good Start Screen replaces any need for a start menu. If you click on the lower left hand corner of the Taskbar to get to Start like always, put your commonly accessed Desktop items on the left hand side of the screen.

By the way the app I mention is Decor8 by StarDock.

I would also suggest getting a touch enabled mouse. I've updated my Microsoft Touch Mouse and now have support for the gestures for Windows 8. I've got real used to using the Charms bar and hot corners, but the touch gesturing really seals the deal!

And lastly, I disagree with your idea on Windows 8 tablets doing poorly. Couldn't be more far off, Windows 8 tablet PCs offer A HUGE, VAST amounts of versatility and flexibility that no neutered smartphone tablet can even touch, no pun intended. Running proper Office software, AutoCAD, and even iTunes to manage your ipad cannot EVER be done on android let alone a giant ipod touch. That, and how greatly different it looks and feels and acts differentiates themselves over the ipad, which again has a stale looking UI that has been around for far too long, and over android tablets, which are usually knockoffs of ipads with UIs and limited capabilities that make you ask, "WHY?!" I also think Microsoft wasn't too late with touch, or too early, considering they've been working with touch since the early 2000s and even earlier in the '90s. Windows 8 is the first time however, touch is literally on over 90% of new PCs built today, so it's not like a 3DTV thing where only a couple manufacturers make them.

Lastly, everyone will pretty much tell you, don't do an upgrade install. Those are usually crapshoots that end up with more weird things going on than you'd like.

 

[Kat]

Upgrade installs CAN be crap-shoots, as I am only too well aware.

But I did an u/g install of the W8 CP over my W7 Ultimate setup
on the other laptop last March/April, just to see how it would go.

It 'pinged' SIW as being incompatible, and I had to uninstall MSE, but that
installation was rock-solid until I set it back to W7 a couple of days ago.

But no, I don't really recommend it, especially for newbies.


EDIT: - This 64-bit RTM is a standalone install, not an upgrade.

 

[symbiont]

Windows 8 is the first time however, touch is literally on over 90% of new PCs built today, so it's not like a 3DTV thing where only a couple manufacturers make them.

What? Am I reading this right and are you trying to say that 90% of the pre-built PC market are machines that include a full Touch screen system? If that's what you mean, this is GROSSLY over stated.

There also aren't "a couple" TV manufacturers making 3DTV models, almost every company that means anything in the TV market is - and sometimes it's barely more expensive than a model without the technology. However, this is a bad analogy, it's not like TV manufacturers are saying "every TV made after 'X' date has 3D whether you want it or not".

The biggest market for touch for the desktop are armchair techies or the Average Joe, for the wow factor. There is essentially zero practical use for someone at a desktop 8-10 hours a day to use touch.

 

[SIW2]

I have windows 7 for three years or so as my main os - never needed to enter safe mode .

But I disagree about Safe Mode boot. From over a year of using Windows 8, I've literally never had to use Safe Mode. This is considering I've used a Windows 8 To Go drive across several PCs, and a few other PC's I've installed Windows 8 on. Heck, I intentionally had to boot into Safe Mode to see if it was still there! By the way, it is and it's really weird to see Taskbar transparency...

Is it ? Maybe if you are using hybrid boot. I don't because I am multibooting. Not sure why, but win8 is the slowest boot of all my o/s.

Not a huge problem - few seconds here or there - who cares.

This was done because the boot time of Windows 8 is so fast as it is

 

[whs]

Regarding your problem under 2), may I suggest that you try toolbars. Works well for me in /8. Toolbars - How to Use in Windows 7 and Vista - Windows 7 Forums

 

[Hopachi]

Maybe if you are using hybrid boot. I don't because I am multibooting. Not sure why, but win8 is the slowest boot of all my o/s.

Not a huge problem - few seconds here or there - who cares.

I have to agree: without hybrid boot, 7 beats 8.
I just saw it om my machine, tested with and without the hybrid settings. You notice the difference right away.
Win7 was on another machine but 8 has UEFI as a bonus.

But what can possibly be going on there?

 

[Kat]

UEFI is anything BUT a bonus.

Quite the contrary.

 

[Coke Robot]

I have windows 7 for three years or so as my main os - never needed to enter safe mode .

But I disagree about Safe Mode boot. From over a year of using Windows 8, I've literally never had to use Safe Mode. This is considering I've used a Windows 8 To Go drive across several PCs, and a few other PC's I've installed Windows 8 on. Heck, I intentionally had to boot into Safe Mode to see if it was still there! By the way, it is and it's really weird to see Taskbar transparency...

Is it ? Maybe if you are using hybrid boot. I don't because I am multibooting. Not sure why, but win8 is the slowest boot of all my o/s.

Not a huge problem - few seconds here or there - who cares.

This was done because the boot time of Windows 8 is so fast as it is

A few seconds sure, it doesn't matter. You really need to use a new Windows 8 PC with UEFI BIOS along with a SSD, where Windows is tightly more integrated with the chipset, like with Secure Boot. You may not care for a few seconds shaven off a boot time, but that few seconds ends up becoming the ENTIRE boot time, from POST to Start. I for one like fast boot times over needing advanced boot options that I probably will only need to resolve malware issues, even then, that's once every blue moon.

 

[Coke Robot]

Maybe if you are using hybrid boot. I don't because I am multibooting. Not sure why, but win8 is the slowest boot of all my o/s.

Not a huge problem - few seconds here or there - who cares.

I have to agree: without hybrid boot, 7 beats 8.
I just saw it om my machine, tested with and without the hybrid settings. You notice the difference right away.
Win7 was on another machine but 8 has UEFI as a bonus.

But what can possibly be going on there?

I'm guessing Windows 8 isn't totally optimized. It seems that Windows 8's Automatic Maintenance feature is like an expansion on the SuperFetch feature of Windows 7 where it understands what files are most frequently accessed, then uses the defragger tool to optimize the drive as such. I remember coming off the Release Preview, which was the speediest of them all, to the RTM, and the RTM seemed to have sluggish boot times. After several defrags and Automatic Maintenance runs, it's on par and a tad faster to boot up than the Release Preview.

 

[Hopachi]

UEFI is anything BUT a bonus.

Quite the contrary.

How's that?

I wanted to see the difference personally. I'm in favor or UEFI until I see it fail or decrease performance.
I think UEFI increases performance. The BIOS (or UEFI) time is just up to 5 seconds load time so the rest of the boot time is the HDD loading files and THIS is, for the time being, slower then on Win7. Unless hybrid boot takes place.

Just don't know what to tweak more (before buying an SSD, I'd like to improve speed at the max on the HDD I got).

 

[Kat]

I haven't the slightest interest in how fast it boots.

That's irrelevant.

It's the ability for MS or OEMs to lock the BIOS that I oppose.

THAT is unwanted and should be illegal.

And just because it isn't implemented NOW, doesn't mean it won't be.

Win 8 SP1 or Win 9 will see us locked-in just like the Fruit-Gum Co.

And that's precisely why I chose an IBM/Win machine over an Apple
in the first place all those years ago.... I WILL NOT be locked-in.

 

[Hopachi]

Maybe if you are using hybrid boot. I don't because I am multibooting. Not sure why, but win8 is the slowest boot of all my o/s.

Not a huge problem - few seconds here or there - who cares.

I have to agree: without hybrid boot, 7 beats 8.
I just saw it om my machine, tested with and without the hybrid settings. You notice the difference right away.
Win7 was on another machine but 8 has UEFI as a bonus.

But what can possibly be going on there?

I'm guessing Windows 8 isn't totally optimized. It seems that Windows 8's Automatic Maintenance feature is like an expansion on the SuperFetch feature of Windows 7 where it understands what files are most frequently accessed, then uses the defragger tool to optimize the drive as such. I remember coming off the Release Preview, which was the speediest of them all, to the RTM, and the RTM seemed to have sluggish boot times. After several defrags and Automatic Maintenance runs, it's on par and a tad faster to boot up than the Release Preview.

You might be right with something here.
Another thing to mention is that it's a RTM - OEM from HP (I don't consider it clean install) and I already disabled / uninstalled most of the unneeded startup items and programs. Then I defragged once, but it's still way slow.

I installed the 'big' updates and they seem to have improved the performance and audio distortions :thumb: but the boot thing is something I gotta look into myself, for more info.

 

[Hopachi]

I haven't the slightest interest in how fast it boots.

That's irrelevant.

It's the ability for MS or OEMs to lock the BIOS that I oppose.

THAT is unwanted and should be illegal.

And just because it isn't implemented NOW, doesn't mean it won't be.

Win 8 SP1 or Win 9 will see us locked-in just like the Fruit-Gum Co.

And that's precisely why I chose an IBM/Win machine over an Apple
in the first place all those years ago.... I WILL NOT be locked-in.

It's the first UEFI machine in house but I'm not afraid they'll lock me in.
You mean I won't be able to install Ubuntu or something else except Win8?
That's BAD.

The page where you change settings is still called BIOS.
I'm pretty sure some customised BIOS mods will exist soon allowing extra options in the BIOS.
But for now, not needed since I don't have issues.

 

[Mystere]

It's the ability for MS or OEMs to lock the BIOS that I oppose.

THAT is unwanted and should be illegal.

And just because it isn't implemented NOW, doesn't mean it won't be.

Win 8 SP1 or Win 9 will see us locked-in just like the Fruit-Gum Co.

And that's precisely why I chose an IBM/Win machine over an Apple
in the first place all those years ago.... I WILL NOT be locked-in.

And this kind of knee jerk reaction is just silly.

Do you oppose the password feature in the bios? They could lock you out with that as well.

What about password locks on hard drives? You know every hard drive can have their firmware updated to only "activate" the drive if a special command is given by the bios. So you must not ever want to use a hard drive then, since you could get locked out in the future.

Anything can be used for good or evil. Just because it has that potential doesn't mean you should avoid the benefits.

YOU control the bios on your computer. You are in control of the keys of for secure boot, if you get the computer without secureboot enabled. Thus, so long as you don't buy a computer with secureboot enabled, there's nothing Microsoft (or anyone else) can do to lock you out.

 

[whs]

That reminds me my $1100 Sony Vaio that could not run Linux. They blocked it in the BIOS. I had the hardest time returning it - had to write to their CEO. Here is the whole story: Sony does not care about their customers - Windows 7 Forums

 

[Coke Robot]

I have to agree: without hybrid boot, 7 beats 8.
I just saw it om my machine, tested with and without the hybrid settings. You notice the difference right away.
Win7 was on another machine but 8 has UEFI as a bonus.

But what can possibly be going on there?

I'm guessing Windows 8 isn't totally optimized. It seems that Windows 8's Automatic Maintenance feature is like an expansion on the SuperFetch feature of Windows 7 where it understands what files are most frequently accessed, then uses the defragger tool to optimize the drive as such. I remember coming off the Release Preview, which was the speediest of them all, to the RTM, and the RTM seemed to have sluggish boot times. After several defrags and Automatic Maintenance runs, it's on par and a tad faster to boot up than the Release Preview.

You might be right with something here.
Another thing to mention is that it's a RTM - OEM from HP (I don't consider it clean install) and I already disabled / uninstalled most of the unneeded startup items and programs. Then I defragged once, but it's still way slow.

I installed the 'big' updates and they seem to have improved the performance and audio distortions :thumb: but the boot thing is something I gotta look into myself, for more info.

Yeah, that was part of my issue too, I accidentally deleted the Startup folder and when I restored it, I had like 11 things running at startup. But even still, it was just a tad longer than the RP. I didn't get how people were saying it's way faster as I had boot times more akin to Windows 7 with KIS 2012. But like a month ago I think, it started to get better. It's now at the point of RP boot times, even WITH Kaspersky Internet Security 2013 installed. I find that to be impressive! It's weird, it took several defrags even when it was analyzed at 0% fragmentation, and several Automatic Maintenance runs it's at a good point. I feel it's more likely that, since I had limited hard drive space when I installed the RTM, so I'm guessing system files were probably just more physically in the middle of the disk and scattered about. I even installed Ultimate Defrag 4 to get things sorted out, that probably helped as well, to get the hibernate file and page file moved to the faster part of the hard drive. And when I say several defrags and such, I mean like, a lot. It was more like every day or two of defragging, along with daily AM runs.

 

[Coke Robot]

I wouldn't much enjoy BIOS lockout, thinking about it. I had to run the Trinity Rescue Live CD to get access into a user account because the info I was provided was worthless unless if you had the network server available. I ran it and found a user account that just open with it. If I couldn't had been able to run the CD, I most likely would still be trying to get user account login information.

But it turned out that the hard drive is like 20 gigs and has 70 MB free, so no defragging! On a side note, I really didn't know that if even your video card can't run Aero, you can still use the sleep function in Windows 7. Also, IBM ThinkPads are built with balls!

 

[Mystere]

That reminds me my $1100 Sony Vaio that could not run Linux. They blocked it in the BIOS. I had the hardest time returning it - had to write to their CEO. Here is the whole story: Sony does not care about their customers - Windows 7 Forums

Interesting story. It's funny, but I have a very similar laptop. I think mine is a year older, it's a VPCF115FM. Same basic design and hardware. I have had no trouble running Linux on mine, not sure why your has problems.

But, be that as it may, the problem is that the Linux kernel devs have not included a driver for the hardware in this device, not that Sony has done anything wrong. Linux is the fault here (as it so often is with newer hardware. If Linux didn't support your video card would you blame the video card vendor?)

Regarding the refund, I got the feeling from your story that you'd had the machine for a while. You might have been able to justify a refund if you had just bought it, but if it had been months then that's a totally different story.

If it was me, I would have just sold it on EBay or Craigslist, taken the couple hundred dollar hit and chalked it up to a learning experience. Not all hardware is Linux compatible, and if you're concerned, next time bring a disk with you and boot it at the shop. Or if you order it online check it right away and send it back if it fails.