window 8

[domenicogrillo]

hi can anybody advice me on window 8, what do you think
is it better than 7 ?
domenico

[super jumbe]

Brilliant mate, if you have touch screen its even better?

[digilox]

Unless you have touch screen ... don't bother. I got it very cheap as an upgrade and I didn't mind spending ?14 .... but no way would I have been happy if I had spent the full whack.

Fortunately the iobit start app brings back your familiar start screen ... if I didn't have that I would probably have uninstalled it !

[gmb45]

Unless you have touch screen ... don't bother. I got it very cheap as an upgrade and I didn't mind spending ?14 .... but no way would I have been happy if I had spent the full whack.

Fortunately the iobit start app brings back your familiar start screen ... if I didn't have that I would probably have uninstalled it !

funny ya say that m8, theres peeps on here say its good and dont have touch screens if ya dont try it ya will never know, can always re-install win 7

[Shady]

as someone else said on here.. if you're going to make win8 look like win7, why bother installing win8 in the first place?

[ifred]

As far as I can see its Windoze 7 with a flashy front end for touch screens, if you don't use or need a touch screen the Apps can drive you nuts- turn them off and its nearly like win7
So don't buy it but if its already install tweak it to how you want it

[03ahmads]

Can't understand why many people hate it, I think it's fantastic, a more leaner quicker version of Win 7 which has been given a face lift to bring it into the modern era with apps etc.

[bow1971]

i tried it but didnt like it thought it was abit awkward to find things so went back to win 7

[Canker_Canison]

Can't understand why many people hate it, I think it's fantastic, a more leaner quicker version of Win 7 which has been given a face lift to bring it into the modern era with apps etc.

Here's a quick IT & history lesson.

What are apps?

Apps, or applications to give them their full name, are programs that run on smart devices. They were called apps through a mix of marketing & a need for differentiating between PC & mobile programs.

So, PC's have 'programs' not apps, even though they are both the same. The front 'App' screen on windows 8 is nothing more than animated shortcuts to programs installed on the PC.

When microshite 'improved' windows 7 they decided to add a second OS layer to handle shortcuts instead of just allowing animated icons on the desktop.

I can only see two reasons for this...

1. It makes window driven devices look more like an Iphone.

2. Most Iphone users can't use a windows PC to save their lives.


This is why most power users don't like windows 8. It's dumbing down technology & making it harder for those that can use a PC to do what they want.

It's a losing business model. When computers had limited processing power & memory, programmers had to remove as much coding as possible from programs. If they didn't do this the programs would occupy too much space & be to processor hungry to run.
Now, with quadcore processors & 4GB of memory being the norm. Programmers are nowhere near as good at programming than their predecessors. They don't write their programs in machine code or assembly language. They use builders & graphic conversion tools. Both are badly coded & add more superfluous code which bulks out programs & makes them less efficient. In short, programmers are getting lazy due to the abundance of processing power & memory.
Microshite are now making it harder for people to use PC's in constructive ways. That makes it harder for kids to stumble into programming. In one or two generations time, if things don't change, the vast majority of the population won't be able to resolve PC issues at home.

How many people under the age of 30 know what DOS is?
Or can actually perform basic tasks in DOS?

Unless Linux makes a come back, the future is a very dark place for developing programmers.
Here's looking at the Raspberry Pi.

[03ahmads]

Here's a quick IT & history lesson.

What are apps?

Apps, or applications to give them their full name, are programs that run on smart devices. They were called apps through a mix of marketing & a need for differentiating between PC & mobile programs.

So, PC's have 'programs' not apps, even though they are both the same. The front 'App' screen on windows 8 is nothing more than animated shortcuts to programs installed on the PC.

When microshite 'improved' windows 7 they decided to add a second OS layer to handle shortcuts instead of just allowing animated icons on the desktop.

I can only see two reasons for this...

1. It makes window driven devices look more like an Iphone.

2. Most Iphone users can't use a windows PC to save their lives.


This is why most power users don't like windows 8. It's dumbing down technology & making it harder for those that can use a PC to do what they want.

It's a losing business model. When computers had limited processing power & memory, programmers had to remove as much coding as possible from programs. If they didn't do this the programs would occupy too much space & be to processor hungry to run.
Now, with quadcore processors & 4GB of memory being the norm. Programmers are nowhere near as good at programming than their predecessors. They don't write their programs in machine code or assembly language. They use builders & graphic conversion tools. Both are badly coded & add more superfluous code which bulks out programs & makes them less efficient. In short, programmers are getting lazy due to the abundance of processing power & memory.
Microshite are now making it harder for people to use PC's in constructive ways. That makes it harder for kids to stumble into programming. In one or two generations time, if things don't change, the vast majority of the population won't be able to resolve PC issues at home.

How many people under the age of 30 know what DOS is?
Or can actually perform basic tasks in DOS?

Unless Linux makes a come back, the future is a very dark place for developing programmers.
Here's looking at the Raspberry Pi.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion. I can see where you're coming from but tbh Windows 8 is not too different from Windows 7 so can't see how it's difficult to use, if anything it should increase productivity with the vast array of new keyboard shortcuts. It's faster to boot & in general a leaner, quicker version of Windows 7, at least on my system it runs better than Windows 7. With regards to the tiled interface, if you don't like it you don't have to use it, just switch to desktop mode. Sure it's a bit of a learning curve but that's the main problem here, most people hate change, but if everything was always the same it would be boring, by introducing the tiled interface & proper touchscreen capability it's simply been bought into the modern era.

[wortho]

hated it for about an hour , till i got my head around the functions, came with my PC ,but wouldn't bother to upgrade at the moment as its near the same, no media center for the version im using which is a draw back, but it seems to flow along while working a bit nicer than windows 7

[Houldey]

Here's a quick IT & history lesson.

What are apps?

Apps, or applications to give them their full name, are programs that run on smart devices. They were called apps through a mix of marketing & a need for differentiating between PC & mobile programs.

So, PC's have 'programs' not apps, even though they are both the same. The front 'App' screen on windows 8 is nothing more than animated shortcuts to programs installed on the PC.

When microshite 'improved' windows 7 they decided to add a second OS layer to handle shortcuts instead of just allowing animated icons on the desktop.

I can only see two reasons for this...

1. It makes window driven devices look more like an Iphone.

2. Most Iphone users can't use a windows PC to save their lives.


This is why most power users don't like windows 8. It's dumbing down technology & making it harder for those that can use a PC to do what they want.

It's a losing business model. When computers had limited processing power & memory, programmers had to remove as much coding as possible from programs. If they didn't do this the programs would occupy too much space & be to processor hungry to run.
Now, with quadcore processors & 4GB of memory being the norm. Programmers are nowhere near as good at programming than their predecessors. They don't write their programs in machine code or assembly language. They use builders & graphic conversion tools. Both are badly coded & add more superfluous code which bulks out programs & makes them less efficient. In short, programmers are getting lazy due to the abundance of processing power & memory.
Microshite are now making it harder for people to use PC's in constructive ways. That makes it harder for kids to stumble into programming. In one or two generations time, if things don't change, the vast majority of the population won't be able to resolve PC issues at home.

How many people under the age of 30 know what DOS is?
Or can actually perform basic tasks in DOS?

Unless Linux makes a come back, the future is a very dark place for developing programmers.
Here's looking at the Raspberry Pi.

Try writing an Enterprise application in machine code/assembly language. It would take 14 million years. Time is money, hence the higher-level languages. Processing power is cheap, coding in machine language is expensive. It's as simple as that. Is the Linux OS written entirely in machine code? No chance.