I've come to a realization . . . .

[Coke Robot]

I am not a power user, but on the other hand I am more than a common user, somewhere in between. At work, I have W7, at home W8. I have absolutely no problem with either of these systems - of course, there are some things that do not appeal to me (like Reader in metro-style only, which makes switching between documents a bit of hassle), but nothing which would make me consider downgrading to W7. For the record, I spend most of the time (97 %+) on the desktop and am using Start8 - e.g. you can use the Win key not to switch to the last app, but can force it to go to desktop everytime. Simple feature, yet absolutely improves my experience. And no, I do not say that something like this should have been in W8 from the start, as I really do not care about what-ifs.

You can actually, real easily, make Windows 8 that 97% based Desktop OS. Just unpin/uninstall the superfluous apps, change program defaults to Desktop apps, and pin File Explorer locations and other Desktop related items to the Start Screen. Every time you hit the Start key, it will ALWAYS go to Start and back to the Desktop regardless. If you had an app just open and you hit Start, it would go back to that app. But if you were to be in the Desktop all the time, it would just be the Desktop.

Now THAT would be using Windows 8!

 

[BarnabasSackett]

Well, Microsoft has taken the lead here, and either they're going to pay, or it's going to be the new standard.

The problem is that most people don't even know that there are alternatives available and wouldn't know what to do with them if they did know. The whole gist of this thread is that most computer users blindly accept whatever is put in front of them.

 

[al4nw31]

Well, Microsoft has taken the lead here, and either they're going to pay, or it's going to be the new standard.

The problem is that most people don't even know that there are alternatives available and wouldn't know what to do with them if they did know. The whole gist of this thread is that most computer users blindly accept whatever is put in front of them.

I'll tell you right now, here's what went into the thought process of Windows 8 vs Windows 7.
Windows 8:
Gravitation towards Metro apps, not compatible with 7.
FAST boot ups, save ~$100+, no need for a SSD.
Gestures (Yes, they are a benefit, since you can fall back on Desktop mode anyways).

Windows 7:
Cream of the crop OS.
VERY few problems.
Aero looks AMAZING (but Metro is almost as good).
Better driver support.

The main reason why I swapped was the fast boot times.
And legitimately, the people complaining about how there's very poor integration of Desktop and Metro have not used it enough. It is not that hard. The search function is Windows 8 is AMAZING compared to 7. I have NEVER had any issue with anything along those lines.
I agree that Win8 is more geared towards consumers and not enterprise, however.

 

[Ray8]

And legitimately, the people complaining about how there's very poor integration of Desktop and Metro have not used it enough. It is not that hard. The search function is Windows 8 is AMAZING compared to 7. I have NEVER had any issue with anything along those lines.

I agree that Win8 is more geared towards consumers and not enterprise, however.

People who are criticising aspects of Windows 8 are far from casual/infrequent users, or inexperienced computer users. Few who criticise Windows 8 have said that it's difficult to use; however, it simply does not suit everyone's work style, but they have no choice unless they resort to third party solutions.

The search function is different to that of Windows 7, but not that amazing. In fact it needs to be there because many things in the system are effectively hidden (from what was a familiar interface). Someone who has an intimate knowledge of their system and has it well organised, has very infrequent need for the search function.

I do agree with your last sentence, Windows is being dumbed down to satisfy the lowest common denominator.

 

[DooRules]

Yup, people just won't give it a chance. Pretty lame if you ask me.

Got to love the arguement, I like it so you should to, lol.

 

[whs]

FAST boot ups, save ~$100+, no need for a SSD

I wonder how fast this 'fast bootup' from a spinner really is. I don't use spinners any more so I cannot check. Can someonje post the Event 100 data from the Event Viewer. You find it in:

Eventvwr
Applications and Service Logs
Microsoft
Windows
Diagnostics - performance
Operational
Event ID 100

 

[lehnerus2000]

Thanks whs

FAST boot ups, save ~$100+, no need for a SSD

I wonder how fast this 'fast bootup' from a spinner really is. I don't use spinners any more so I cannot check. Can someonje post the Event 100 data from the Event Viewer. You find it in:

Eventvwr
Applications and Service Logs
Microsoft
Windows
Diagnostics - performance
Operational
Event ID 100

Thanks for that info.

I assume the time includes the processes that occur after the Start Screen/Desktop appear?

My W8 VHD has stopped working, but my W7 time on a SATA II HDD is ~52,400ms.

I wouldn't spend ~$100+ to save a few seconds of boot up time (I use Sleep anyway).

 

[whs]

My system boots in 18 seconds from my M4 SSD. That is quite a difference. And it is not only the boot time. All programs are a lot snappier. Try to boot a biggie like Gimp from a spinner. You can go to lunch in the meantime.

Even my Windows 8 running under VMware Player on an external SSD attached via USB boots in 26 seconds. A spinner would take forever. I guess it's all of what you are used to.

 

[al4nw31]

I'm getting bootups from 45 seconds to 70 seconds on a spinning disk, but I have about 500GB out of 2TB of data.
I have a 2TB Caviar Green too, so it isn't optimized for speed at all.
On W7, I was getting ~80-120 second startups, so it cut it almost in half.

 

[whs]

The anount of data should not impact the boot time as long as the OS is on the first partition of the platter. The worst mistake you can make is if you put the OS on the last partition.

For a spinner. your times look good. But I still prefer my OS on the SSD.

 

[JohnOfE]

Install VM Player
Install SoftPerfect RAM Disk

Create a 4GB ramdisk

Install Windows 8 on VM Player using the Ram Disk to hold the installation of the virtual machine.

Result:
A computer that is contained completely in the RAM that never needs to ever access a HDD or SSD.

You boot time will be reduced to about 4 seconds.

What's the point you may ask?
I tried it, just for S**ts and giggles.
And because running an OS directly in the RAM is amazing.
THE SPEEEED! as Clarkson would cry when driving a super charged such and such.

Don't be a doof and explain to me how it negates the point and all that. I know dear. I don't actually do it in practice. It was an experiment that pleased me greatly.

 

[lehnerus2000]

My system boots in 18 seconds from my M4 SSD. That is quite a difference. And it is not only the boot time.

I was surprised by that number, because I can usually start running programs after ~40s.

An earlier poster seemed to be saying that he'd buy an SSD, because it would speed up his boot time.

All programs are a lot snappier. Try to boot a biggie like Gimp from a spinner. You can go to lunch in the meantime.

Indeed.
Especially installation times.

 

[whs]

I was surprised by that number, because I can usually start running programs after ~40s.

The 18 sec is the number from Event 100 in Event viewer.

 

[whs]

Install VM Player
Install SoftPerfect RAM Disk

Create a 4GB ramdisk
Install Windows 8 on VM Player using the Ram Disk to hold the installation of the virtual machine.

Result:
A computer that is contained completely in the RAM that never needs to ever access a HDD or SSD.

You boot time will be reduced to about 4 seconds.

What's the point you may ask?
I tried it, just for S**ts and giggles.
And because running an OS directly in the RAM is amazing.
THE SPEEEED! as Clarkson would cry when driving a super charged such and such.

Don't be a doof and explain to me how it negates the point and all that. I know dear. I don't actually do it in practice. It was an experiment that pleased me greatly.

This is all nice and dandy except that the VMware Player folder for Windows 8 needs at least 19GB. How are you going to fit that into the 4GB RAMdisk.

 

[Hopachi]

Install VM Player
Install SoftPerfect RAM Disk

Create a 4GB ramdisk

Install Windows 8 on VM Player using the Ram Disk to hold the installation of the virtual machine.

Result:
A computer that is contained completely in the RAM that never needs to ever access a HDD or SSD.

You boot time will be reduced to about 4 seconds.

What's the point you may ask?
I tried it, just for S**ts and giggles.
And because running an OS directly in the RAM is amazing.
THE SPEEEED! as Clarkson would cry when driving a super charged such and such.

Don't be a doof and explain to me how it negates the point and all that. I know dear. I don't actually do it in practice. It was an experiment that pleased me greatly.

Then (a clean) XP boots up in 1 second with that method!

This is all nice and dandy except that the VMware Player folder for Windows 8 needs at least 19GB. How are you going to fit that into the 4GB RAMdisk.

Good one! It doesn't fit that's why I mentioned XP: it fits. Not every one has 32GB ram around here.

 

[whs]

The problem is that it does not work. You could not even fit Zorin into the 4GB RAMdisk - maybe Puppy.

 

[Hopachi]

The problem is that it does not work. You could not even fit Zorin into the 4GB RAMdisk - maybe Puppy.

DSL fits on 30MB ram!
Use some LXDE version like Zorin Lite.

 

[lehnerus2000]

I was surprised by that number, because I can usually start running programs after ~40s.

The 18 sec is the number from Event 100 in Event viewer.

I meant my numbers, not yours.

The problem is that it does not work. You could not even fit Zorin into the 4GB RAMdisk - maybe Puppy.

My XP and Linux Mint 14 MATE (64 bit) installs are ~5.5GB, so a 6GB RAM disc might work for me.

 

[whs]

My Zorin under VMware runs in 7.8GB. When I am back in Germany, I might try that with an 8GB RAMdisk. Plan to upgrade my desktop there to 12GB anyhow. Would be interesting to see how it works.

 

[Wynona]

To those of you who are computer savvy, I admire that. Especially those who understand programming, I think that's great and I wish that I had that ability. But to those of you who call others who are not as adept as you "stupid" and put them down in other ways I would call that a little bit childish. Incidentally, they may be more adept in other areas than you are in computers. But, I would hope they would not call you stupid because you are not knowledgeable as they in their field. And yes, Jimbo, I might be even older that you are.

Thank you, Frank. And quite frankly, (no pun intended) I'm a bit miffed that the "My dad can beat up your dad" mentality here.

I build all my own computers. I can grow a garden. I can paint a house. I can change the oil and spark plugs in my car. I can catch a fish. I am named as author of a technical tome; ad nauseum . . . Does that make me smarter than those who can't? Heck no! It just means I learned how to do it.

Can I follow a blueprint to build a house? Can I wire that house? Am I CEO material? Am I a salesman extraordinaire? Can I drive an 18 wheeler? Can I rebuild a boat engine? Can I rebuild a car engine? Heck no! Does that make me stupid because I can't do those things? I don't think so.

If I look down my long pointy nose at someone who can't build his/her own computer, then I'm the one who should be called stupid.

If I give someone produce from my garden, they'll have a meal or two. If I teach someone how to garden, they'll be able to produce their own food. And no, I won't be able to teach him/her in a day . . . for awhile they'll need support. And if I begrudge someone the support they need after having taught them, I'm the one who's stupid.