Windows 8 Discussion

[Drunkenvalley]

Does that allow you to still pick W8 when booting without an extra reboot or does it reboot into W8 bootloader?

Dun' know. Haven't tested, since I don't have any reason to boot into Windows 8 if I don't have the router's password and can connect to interwebs. :P

[haxartus]

P.S. There are smartphones - smartphone, not tablet - with 1GB RAM. It's not so far off.

ARM is still too slow for a regular OS with heavy multitasking and virtualization.

[Meleti]

I don't give a damn about gamers here either. You're misunderstanding if you think so.

Name me exactly one reason you should use a mobile device if you're not moving once a frigging minute.

Because you don't need to synchronize files with a file server computer or Dropbox if you just use one device for everything? Because you don't even really need to own the other device if your mobile is good enough for your usage?

ARM is still too slow for a regular OS with heavy multitasking and virtualization.

Processor speed will never increase. Ever. That would be ludicrous. ARM may see its market share decline, too; Intel has announced that it's merging its Atom and Core teams under a single design infrastructure. This isn't because they think their mobile processors are less important now. I'm looking forward to getting my hands on a Haswell tablet.

[DarkXale]

ARM is still too slow for a regular OS with heavy multitasking and virtualization.

Its certainly too slow for performance-based workloads - but for simpler matters such as working with documents, web browsing, watching movies, music, socializing, voice software, syncing with devices, reading documentation and manuals, etc - its sufficient. And really, thats what most computer users do.

Multi tasking in these types of software is about RAM - not processing power. When not actively in use, all of the above software uses pretty much 0% CPU even when visible.

[Drunkenvalley]

Because you don't need to synchronize files with a file server computer or Dropbox if you just use one device for everything? Because you don't even really need to own the other device if your mobile is good enough for your usage?

If your mobile is good enough for usage. It's not.

Or rather, it may be for you. But for the absolute majority of users this will not be enough.

[Meleti]

If your mobile is good enough for usage. It's not.

But it almost certainly will be, and in some cases already is (as long as your needs don't involve CPU/GPU-heavy applications). You're missing the point of the argument here. What exactly is the "absolute majority of users" trying to do? I can guarantee you that they aren't trying to run Arch Linux in a VM.

[Drunkenvalley]

Most mobile devices (though this may change) feature extremely poor interaction devices or monitors.

Touchscreens are cute, but require an extremely long training period to be able to use it naturally without frequent typos or mistakes happening. Keyboards that size are extremely awkward to use and use half-assed solutions.

You've also left out an extremely massive demographic using such devices: Workers. For a substantial amount of time now, tertiary workplaces (services, such as offices, techsupport, etc) have been a pretty damn big bulk of the workforce.

They cannot work on mobile device without someone getting lynched a week later.

[jonny888]

What a truly horrible mish-mash of a UI. Which ever bright spark (and I use that term sarcastically) thought that trying to create a single UI for multiple devices that use totally different types of user input should be shot. Using the tile system is pointless at best, and means it takes longer to find what I'm looking for in the worst case. Coupled with the fact that none of these "apps" (why in Gods name they have to become hipster and stop calling them applications I don't know) seem to have any kind of close button and have to be killed off manually in the task manager, along with the fact that you can't even customise half the things on your PC unless you have access to the internet to log into Windows Live, I'm left thinking........... WTF.

On the plus side, I like the new Task Manager. And that's about it.

[Meleti]

Most mobile devices (though this may change) feature extremely poor interaction devices or monitors.

This isn't a technical limitation.

Touchscreens are cute, but require an extremely long training period to be able to use it naturally without frequent typos or mistakes happening. Keyboards that size are extremely awkward to use and use half-assed solutions.

For serious data input, peripherals such as external keyboards are available and improving quite rapidly as the market catches on. The nice thing is, you don't need to use the keyboard when it's not useful, unlike a traditional desktop or laptop.

You've also left out an extremely massive demographic using such devices: Workers. For a substantial amount of time now, tertiary workplaces (services, such as offices, techsupport, etc) have been a pretty damn big bulk of the workforce.

Some jobs have legitimate uses for tablets already. Airlines have started handing them out to pilots, sports teams use them as playbooks, and iPads are practically ubiquitous amongst lawyers and corporate executives. They don't really replace a PC at this point, I'll agree, (although some guy who invented the PC dissents) but it's not too hard to imagine tablet docking stations that provide most of the functionality you're missing. And, of course, there's always just using a laptop for professional use and a tablet for personal use.

[Drunkenvalley]

You know, it just kinda hit me that we're honestly arguing over nothing.

I mean, even if mobile devices became "the one and only" where applicable, that still leaves a very massive demographic that simply and outright requires stationary machines or servers.

And in the first place, the market is genuinely catering to gamers on many levels, so the idea of "us" being "unimportant" is a silly prospect in the first place.

[Cyanotical]

as someone who has a tablet, i don't think they are ever going to replace a desktop, at least not for a very long time (decades), they make great replacements for books, manuals, etc and you can get away with only using a tablet if all you do is browse the web and get email, but they have serious limitations, VM hosting is a good example of what you cant do on a tablet, however, they do make fairly good VDI recievers

personally i use my ipad to supliment my desktop when im away from it, it's much better then my laptop at being portable and granting easy access to the web or whatever else i have on it, but there is a reason i still have a laptop, because for all the cool things that a tablet can do, they cant do any of the cool things a laptop or computer can do

however, what really pisses me off about my ipad is that its made by apple, while the ipad is the best tablet out there, it's held back by the crap coding of it's OS and the fact that apple keeps a tight leash on what you can and cant do with it, and of the 14 computers in my home network, my ipad is the only one that doesn't interface with the others, even my android tablet can at least see my NAS and Printer

this is why im looking forward to W8, if i can run everything with it, then i can have full compatibility among my devices and not have to worry about whether something is stuck on my ipad or my computer and how to transfer between without using itunes

[Wries]

You know, it just kinda hit me that we're honestly arguing over nothing.

I mean, even if mobile devices became "the one and only" where applicable, that still leaves a very massive demographic that simply and outright requires stationary machines or servers.

And in the first place, the market is genuinely catering to gamers on many levels, so the idea of "us" being "unimportant" is a silly prospect in the first place.

My thoughts as well. The shit we've bought really is catered towards gamers. Asus ROG, SLI/crossfire, overclocking features everywhere, the damn fugly "cool" looking cases you wouldn't see at work. EA despite being filled with hate still releasing games for windows. There's a market here but I can't speak for whether or not it's going very well. They seem to always be releasing new hardware for us, though.

Though your Spinpoint F3 in sig, with the capacity of 1GB, is catered towards gamers in 1992 I guess

[Simca]

People shouldn't be mad about Metro for Windows 8.

They should be mad about the future - they said at BUILD that they're looking to have Metro fully replace the default UI in future Windows (so like Windows 9 or 10). This is a test run. Give them feedback and tell them how much you want the Desktop UI to stay for Windows 9.

Don't shit on Windows 8.

[Mantús]

"The latest version of Windows 7 was demonstrated running with about 404 MB of RAM used for 32 processes. Windows 8 in its current, unfinished state is doing the same with about 281 MB and 29 processes."
- Windows 8 Even More Resource Efficient Than Windows 7

- Windows 8 Has a Slightly Friendlier Blue Screen of Death

[FearGX]

I think Windows 8 is a little early... Windows 7 is a great OS and works perfectly fine, why do we need another OS? I know they want money but windows 7 works great, What defining features does Windows 8 offer? Although I do like the Xbox 360 integration for PC users, allowing PC to play on Xbox live, especially if they allow keyboard and mouse usage.

[haxartus]

Processor speed will never increase. Ever. That would be ludicrous. ARM may see its market share decline, too; Intel has announced that it's merging its Atom and Core teams under a single design infrastructure. This isn't because they think their mobile processors are less important now. I'm looking forward to getting my hands on a Haswell tablet.

The desktops will always be much faster. You need power efficiency for a tablet. If a Haswell tablet is powerful and efficient, the desktop Haswells will be x5 times faster.

[DarkXale]

The desktops will always be much faster. You need power efficiency for a tablet. If a Haswell tablet is powerful and efficient, the desktop Haswells will be x5 times faster.

The point really is that they're trying to do both. Previously Atoms were power efficient, but had terrible performance no matter how you sliced it. Other chips were strong, but not power efficient. With both on a single team, the idea is to research 'strict power efficiency' on the more basic level - for the essentials, with the more power demanding components effectively being 'on a toggle'.

I briefly read something about the upcoming processors basically being 'adaptable'. The same processor would be capable of serving in a netbook/tablet and laptop. In the netbook, it operates on the stricter power configurations it requires. In the laptop - it clocks up, draining more power but in turn putting out far more power. This idea itself isn't new, the scaling just isn't there.

That idea can also translate into potential docking solutions. Imagine a Netbook or Tablet processor, when connected to a dock - clocking that 17W threshold to 65W - the same as a current Desktop dual-core processor. And all that changed was that the netbook got access to a more robust power supply... and maybe a little extra cooling as well.

[mafao]

"The latest version of Windows 7 was demonstrated running with about 404 MB of RAM used for 32 processes. Windows 8 in its current, unfinished state is doing the same with about 281 MB and 29 processes."
- Windows 8 Even More Resource Efficient Than Windows 7

- Windows 8 Has a Slightly Friendlier Blue Screen of Death

I don't really get why people really care about that... Modern computers have 4+ gigs of RAM. I want that memory to be used optimally and to full extent, that is the reason I bought it in the first place! For example, it is common for Unix (e.g. OS X) to preallocate RAM for future tasks, so that programs can be launched very fast. I have almost no free RAM on my Mac, but I have 15+ applications open at all times, with 30+ Chrome browser tabs and I can switches between the different programs almost instantly. If windows 8 can perform on a similar level, people should be happy about it, no matter how much RAM is reported as being taken by the system.

So far, the preview of the Windows 8 has horrible usability for desktops and is an UI mess. If MS will force this form of UI onto desktop users, I predict significant increase of Mac and Linux users who would want a "real" desktop OS.

[haxartus]

So far, the preview of the Windows 8 has horrible usability for desktops and is an UI mess. If MS will force this form of UI onto desktop users, I predict significant increase of Mac and Linux users who would want a "real" desktop OS.

Or they will just stick to Windows 7.

[jreg]

I don't really get why people really care about that... Modern computers have 4+ gigs of RAM. I want that memory to be used optimally and to full extent, that is the reason I bought it in the first place! For example, it is common for Unix (e.g. OS X) to preallocate RAM for future tasks, so that programs can be launched very fast. I have almost no free RAM on my Mac, but I have 15+ applications open at all times, with 30+ Chrome browser tabs and I can switches between the different programs almost instantly. If windows 8 can perform on a similar level, people should be happy about it, no matter how much RAM is reported as being taken by the system.

So far, the preview of the Windows 8 has horrible usability for desktops and is an UI mess. If MS will force this form of UI onto desktop users, I predict significant increase of Mac and Linux users who would want a "real" desktop OS.

Indexing. The more RAM you have, the more that can be allocated by Windows for exactly what you are saying.

Also, you do know Windows 7 will still exist right? Microsoft doesn't practice ritualistic mass operating system genocide with each new OS - not right away anyway.

Plus, Linux has been gaining ground for years. The improved X Windows and subsequently, the usability has made Linux more friendly than ever before.