Microsoft Tweaking Windows 8 for Upcoming Beta Release

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Microsoft is gathering up the feedback from initial testers and making changes to the beta of Windows 8 due to be released toward the end of February. Get it right guys or you’ll be hearing choruses of Windows 8 is just another Vista sung to the beat of it sucks, it sucks. :D

While some of the changes aren’t very exciting — there’s plenty of minutia when it comes to file copying, for example — other fixes related to the infamous ribbon, which replaces the traditional Windows file menu, are more fundamental.
Click to expand...
 
When the beta hits, its going to become the main OS on my laptop.

I really want to see how Metro translates to the desktop. I've played around in the developer preview, and the apps in there, and was unimpressed. Metro was a headache. I'm hoping that's an issue surrounding W8's lack of apps, and not Metro being a bad idea in the first.

I have no problem staying with W7 for the next several years if W8 is Vista 2.0.
 
You know what the most irritating thing is about Windows 8 Developer Preview? It's way, way too easy to accidentally switch out of a fullscreen application. Just have to accidentally click and drag near the edge of the screen. That behavior should never have made it past internal testing. Pure idiocy.
 
I don't know what's worse, the fact that I just finally got used to the interface of Win7 over XP, or the fact Microsoft is still selling licenses for a hundo-plus
 
sfsuphysics said:
I don't know what's worse, the fact that I just finally got used to the interface of Win7 over XP, or the fact Microsoft is still selling licenses for a hundo-plus
Click to expand...

so horrible the pricing is for sure but really man just getting used to it..Win 7 has been out for almost 3 years now and xp is a freaking dinosaur. 8 will give us the bridge needed for using phone tablet laptop to desktop without all the different interfaces. I for one am happy but would like to see a price drop in the OS.
 
sfsuphysics said:
I don't know what's worse, the fact that I just finally got used to the interface of Win7 over XP, or the fact Microsoft is still selling licenses for a hundo-plus
Click to expand...

How much should we be selling them for? How much is the inflation-adjusted cost?
 
" ...the infamous ribbon, which replaces the traditional Windows file menu..."

Did they replace it with no option for the old menu like they did with office? I find the ribbon to be inefficient especially when trying to find rarely-used features. Maybe I'm nuts but I still prefer words over memorizing icons.

I also find that an interface being similar to mobile devices is pretty idiotic. Mobile interfaces are a compromise forced by a tiny screen. Including a limitation just for the sake of interface consistency doesn't make sense. I would much prefer traditional menus even if using a touchscreen interface.
 
Love windows 7 but it still has too many processes on boot for my laptop. Seems like you need an ssd to to make its usable on boot compared to mac osx.
 
prime2515102 said:
They can sell their OS for $50 because they make up for it with the extra $1000 you pay for the hardware.
Click to expand...

Not that big of a difference, the averaqge mac is about as much as a QUALITY built PC laptop or desktop. I dont count the walmart and BB special POS's and a good custom built costs as much too.
 
Keeping your OSX updated is where the cost is at..

This is going to be a naive post as I know bugger all about OSX, and I doubt anybody is going to keep a computer for 7 years; but the point is just to illustrate the difference business models and the fact that they re-coup their costs in different ways. mac OSX is not necessarily cheaper!

Lets take a look at things from OSX was first released (cheetah, in 2001?) and when XP came out as they were around the same time...

So since 2001, most MAC users would have updated their OSX ~5-7 times, @ $100 a pop or whatever is, that works out at ~$500 - $700.

Since 2001 most people have updated their Windows OS once (at worst, twice if they were suckered into Vista which not many people actively paid to upgrade tO), at $200 or whatever it might be, that works out at ~$200 - $400. seems cheap?

So get ya heads outa your buts
 
prime2515102 said:
They can sell their OS for $50 because they make up for it with the extra $1000 you pay for the hardware.
Click to expand...

MrEs said:
Keeping your OSX updated is where the cost is at..

This is going to be a naive post as I know bugger all about OSX, and I doubt anybody is going to keep a computer for 7 years; but the point is just to illustrate the difference business models and the fact that they re-coup their costs in different ways. mac OSX is not necessarily cheaper!

Lets take a look at things from OSX was first released (cheetah, in 2001?) and when XP came out as they were around the same time...

So since 2001, most MAC users would have updated their OSX ~5-7 times, @ $100 a pop or whatever is, that works out at ~$500 - $700.

Since 2001 most people have updated their Windows OS once (at worst, twice if they were suckered into Vista which not many people actively paid to upgrade tO), at $200 or whatever it might be, that works out at ~$200 - $400. seems cheap?

So get ya heads outa your buts
Click to expand...

You guys make sense! I never thought about that.
 
prime2515102 said:
They can sell their OS for $50 because they make up for it with the extra $1000 you pay for the hardware.
Click to expand...

That still doesn't change the fact that the OS is dirt cheap compared to Microsoft. Also, no activation software or CD to enter. There's also only 1 flavor of OS X, and not the 10 different flavors Windows is getting lately. If you happen to own multiple computers, the price does add up.

HisSvt76 said:
Not that big of a difference, the averaqge mac is about as much as a QUALITY built PC laptop or desktop. I dont count the walmart and BB special POS's and a good custom built costs as much too.
Click to expand...

That's why people are building Hackintosh's? You can build the exact same machine for $1000 less. The quality can't be any different when Intel makes the chipset and CPU. Unless you're talking about laptops, but in that situation to say that Apple makes quality hardware is certainly debatable. Dell goes through flawed Nvidia graphic chips just as Apple does.
 
HisSvt76 said:
It should be priced like the mac OS they average 50 bucks.
Click to expand...

Over what time period? Assuming $50 per upgrade, and starting with "free" because hey, why not?

A quick check of wiki indicates that OS X came out a bit before XP (March 2001). Puma was released six months later ($50). Jaguar came out 11 months after that ($100). Panther came out 13 months after that ($150). Tiger came out 17 months after that ($200). Leopard came out 18 months after that ($250). Snow Leopard came out 22 months after that ($300). Lion came out 23 months after that ($350).

Windows XP came out in August 2001. Vista came out in November, 2006 (63 months). Win7 came out in July, 2009 (32 months). Win8 hasn't come out yet. If you bought Vista home premium upgrade, that was, what, 99 bucks? Same with win7. So that's $200 over roughly the same period of time.

Basically, I think the prices work out to be about the same, they're just on different time scales. We tend to work on a 3 year cycle (with the exception of Vista), and Apple is 1.5-2 years. Prices appear to scale accordingly, but *shrug* I'm not 100% certain.
 
HisSvt76 said:
Not that big of a difference, the averaqge mac is about as much as a QUALITY built PC laptop or desktop. I dont count the walmart and BB special POS's and a good custom built costs as much too.
Click to expand...


I'd say there is a huge difference. The cheapest Apple desktop you can buy that is upgradeable is $2500. My PC that I paid $1200 to build SMOKES that $2500 Apple. And if you can't afford the Mac Pro you're stuck with notebook hardware in a desktop.

Pretty ridiculous to complain about $80-100 for an OS that lasts several years with free service packs and updates. Especially if you're trying to compare costs of a Windows PC to an Apple. :rolleyes:
 
HisSvt76 said:
Not that big of a difference, the averaqge mac is about as much as a QUALITY built PC laptop or desktop. I dont count the walmart and BB special POS's and a good custom built costs as much too.
Click to expand...

I can configure a Thinkpad T420 with the same specs as the MBP 13 for about $900. And a Thinkpad is still one of the highest quality PCs out there today.
 
HisSvt76 said:
Not that big of a difference, the averaqge mac is about as much as a QUALITY built PC laptop or desktop. I dont count the walmart and BB special POS's and a good custom built costs as much too.
Click to expand...

Let's take the 13 inch MBP. 1280 x 800, Core i5, Intel HD 3k. $1000 on the low end.

I can buy many business class Dells, Lenovos, and HPs for 7-8 hundred dollars.

The 15 inch MBP is 1500 on the low end. You could argue that the build quality is less, and to a certain extent, you'd be right. But my Asus cost $500 less than the MBP and absolutely smokes it.

For the price of the 17 inch, I can get an Alienware, Clevo, Sager, etc. for around the same price, and I get way, way more power than I do with the MBP.

I'm building my own tower. Even if I upgrade the CPU to the 2500k, and add in the cost of a decent 24 inch monitor, I still come out ahead of a comparable iMac, and gain upgradability.

If you don't mind paying the Apple tax, great. You get a decent machine in an attractive package. But to say they are the same price is...stretching the truth.
 
I am just excited to see that W8 is getting closer to being released. Can't wait for those low power consumption, ARM and Tegra processor to take advantage of the windows 8 goodness! :D
 
coldtortilla said:
I am just excited to see that W8 is getting closer to being released. Can't wait for those low power consumption, ARM and Tegra processor to take advantage of the windows 8 goodness! :D
Click to expand...

Honest question. Why? Is it just for the battery life savings?

Personally, knowing that legacy programs will be incompatible, I'm not thrilled by the ARM aspect at this point in time. That may change as W8 gets developed, but I don't really see it happening.

I see a bunch of people excited by Windows on ARM, but I don't really "get" the hype.
 
Ashbringer said:
That still doesn't change the fact that the OS is dirt cheap compared to Microsoft. Also, no activation software or CD to enter. There's also only 1 flavor of OS X, and not the 10 different flavors Windows is getting lately. If you happen to own multiple computers, the price does add up.
Click to expand...

Post above yours just disproved that mac upgrades ended up being more than windows. Also you dont buy every windows upgrade just one of the generation.....

Windows should cost more anyway, unlike Apple,Microsoft has to write drivers and code for *tons* of differant combos of hardware and software. Apple writes osx for its hardware and thats it.

Everyone i know with a macbook is 99% time booted into Win7, Hell I have a macbook pro, I got it for coreaudio and the bsd backend to work with code easier, Having shifted to .net +primalscript code usage is nill, now my expensive laptop is connected to my mixer/traktor software. Not even better at using blacktrack to test my wifi, stupid built in wifi adapter sux... and Mac's hate printers apparently the top of the line HP and lexmark printers arent good enough for em.

I just hope the total switch to stupid phone apps on desktop is a fad and goes away. Fairly sure im done upgradding mac ever now. /end rant
 
When phone apps get more complicated they will see better integration I imagine, but right now I agree
 
Tawnos said:
How much should we be selling them for? How much is the inflation-adjusted cost?
Click to expand...

Considering your pal Billy can afford to give away billions of dollars to charity that he made of us I would say the price could be dropped considerably and still turn a profit. Never mind my opinion though because I have zero interest in Win8 anyway. :D
 
Will I be able to copy large data from an internal HDD to an external HDD without Win8 going into sleep mode like Win7 does? :rolleyes:
 
coldtortilla said:
I am just excited to see that W8 is getting closer to being released. Can't wait for those low power consumption, ARM and Tegra processor to take advantage of the windows 8 goodness! :D
Click to expand...

You are one of the few people.

#1 I'm going to avoid it just because of the GUI. No taskbar, and no option to get it back? Ask Ubuntu how well that worked for them.

#2 Lower power consumption is probably for newer laptops. Which is why it consumes less power to begin with.

#3 That ARM support is going to be a nightmare. You can't use X86 programs on ARM, and chances are nobody is going to port them either.

#4 Tablets can't use programs, unless they're from the app store. Even if the tablet is X86.


Yea I'm going to avoid Windows 8, kinda like how everyone avoids herpes.
 
Yobbles said:
Will I be able to copy large data from an internal HDD to an external HDD without Win8 going into sleep mode like Win7 does? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

This is something I noticed with Ubuntu and thought, damn to OS isn't ready for prime time. Then I noticed Windows 7 doing this crap. When did this happen? I can't walk away from my PC without knowing if sleep is going to kick in. I swear this worked perfectly in XP and Vista.
 
I think it is too soon for a new OS. An OS should have at least the same life span as most gaming consoles. At least five years. Next Windows will become the next Ubuntu with a two new OS'es each year.
 
Ashbringer said:
This is something I noticed with Ubuntu and thought, damn to OS isn't ready for prime time. Then I noticed Windows 7 doing this crap. When did this happen? I can't walk away from my PC without knowing if sleep is going to kick in. I swear this worked perfectly in XP and Vista.
Click to expand...

Damn annoying, eh?. Only solution is turn turn off the computer going to sleep before copying large data. Microsoft can make Xbox360 download games from the internet while it is in sleep mode but they can't make Win7 do the same???
 
Ashbringer said:
You are one of the few people.

#1 I'm going to avoid it just because of the GUI. No taskbar, and no option to get it back? Ask Ubuntu how well that worked for them.
Click to expand...

I don't think this criticism is correct. I read they are making the GUI optional with an easy way to switch GUI modes.
 
Yobbles said:
Damn annoying, eh?. Only solution is turn turn off the computer going to sleep before copying large data. Microsoft can make Xbox360 download games from the internet while it is in sleep mode but they can't make Win7 do the same???
Click to expand...

Because Windows power management is, to put it bluntly, dumber than beating yourself up with a bag of hammers.

Their damn network power management is the absolute worst. It's great for small-transfer bursty traffic. Browsing, e-mail, etc. For sustained connections, the default settings are dumb as fuck.

When your app is depending on a continuous connection to your SQL server, it's a Really Dumb Idea to turn off the NIC in IN THE MIDDLE OF ACTIVE TRANSFER just to save a couple cents of power a year.

Some of our clients have had the weirdest, most obscene behavior with MSSQL-based apps due to WPM. But you turn off the WPM crap, and everything's fine. Ridiculous.
 
I think MS would combat piracy, if they dropped the price down like OSX has, and make it simple to upgrade.

I think they would be more profitable if they did that. Kinda like Steam sales. People go crazy for them and buy up.
 
prime2515102 said:
" ...the infamous ribbon, which replaces the traditional Windows file menu..."

Did they replace it with no option for the old menu like they did with office? I find the ribbon to be inefficient especially when trying to find rarely-used features. Maybe I'm nuts but I still prefer words over memorizing icons.

I also find that an interface being similar to mobile devices is pretty idiotic. Mobile interfaces are a compromise forced by a tiny screen. Including a limitation just for the sake of interface consistency doesn't make sense. I would much prefer traditional menus even if using a touchscreen interface.
Click to expand...

I'm right there with ya bro. Ribbons are horribly inefficient.
 
I've never seen a MacOS X release retail for more than $129, unless you bought family packs.

The last few have been $30.

Now, if you need Leopard for a PowerPC based Mac, you're quite well fucked. USED copies are going for over $200 on eBait. People are advertising one-time installs for $50 a pop on Craigslist.

Leopard (10.5) for PPC is the perfect storm. Nothing new runs on Tiger anymore (10.4), 10.5 is the last version for the PPC based Mac's, and if you didn't buy the upgrade for your older Mac when it came out, you are truly truly screwed right now.

I know. I'm in that position on my old PowerBook G4 with Tiger.

I've lost over 20 bids on eBay so far for Leopard, and every one of them have been won at over $150. Most in the $180 to $200 range.


Tawnos said:
Over what time period? Assuming $50 per upgrade, and starting with "free" because hey, why not?

A quick check of wiki indicates that OS X came out a bit before XP (March 2001). Puma was released six months later ($50). Jaguar came out 11 months after that ($100). Panther came out 13 months after that ($150). Tiger came out 17 months after that ($200). Leopard came out 18 months after that ($250). Snow Leopard came out 22 months after that ($300). Lion came out 23 months after that ($350).

Windows XP came out in August 2001. Vista came out in November, 2006 (63 months). Win7 came out in July, 2009 (32 months). Win8 hasn't come out yet. If you bought Vista home premium upgrade, that was, what, 99 bucks? Same with win7. So that's $200 over roughly the same period of time.

Basically, I think the prices work out to be about the same, they're just on different time scales. We tend to work on a 3 year cycle (with the exception of Vista), and Apple is 1.5-2 years. Prices appear to scale accordingly, but *shrug* I'm not 100% certain.
Click to expand...
 
lathode said:
I'd say there is a huge difference. The cheapest Apple desktop you can buy that is upgradeable is $2500. My PC that I paid $1200 to build SMOKES that $2500 Apple. And if you can't afford the Mac Pro you're stuck with notebook hardware in a desktop.

Pretty ridiculous to complain about $80-100 for an OS that lasts several years with free service packs and updates. Especially if you're trying to compare costs of a Windows PC to an Apple. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Holy mis-understood Horseshit, Batman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top