Jump to content

Safe Freeware

Why not become a full member?, it's fast, free and allows you to participate in our forums and add or comment on our free software, leave reviews, access unlimited free downloads and more! - we NEVER share your details with anyone else, that's a promise! ... REGISTER FREE TODAY


Have you LIKED FreewareBB yet?

Why not share FreewareBB with the rest of the world and LIKE US ON FACEBOOK!. You will also automatically be entered into our Euromillions Weekly Draw!.

14
");

Will you be installing Windows 8 when it is released?

windows 8 install released

68 replies to this topic
"); //]]>

Poll: Will you be buying or upgrading to Windows 8 when it is released? (39 member(s) have cast votes)

Will you be buying or upgrading to Windows 8 when it is released?

  1. Yes, definitely, from what I've already seen this looks like the best from MS so far (1 votes [2.56%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.56%

  2. Yes, I would, but it's really only to keep up to date (3 votes [7.69%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 7.69%

  3. Yes, I would if the price was right, otherwise I'd have to think about it (1 votes [2.56%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.56%

  4. No, probably not, I don't see the point in spending money when W7 is relatively new and stable enough (9 votes [23.08%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 23.08%

  5. No, unless I actually had to (17 votes [43.59%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 43.59%

  6. No, I'll keep my existing Windows till the death ! (8 votes [20.51%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 20.51%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 Claw

    Platinum Poster!

  • Advanced Member
  • 620 posts

    Posted 14 March 2012 - 01:15 AM

    Do I detect a little testiness there FutureShock???? But really buddy ,,the truth is, Windows 8 may end up being one of the best versions MS puts out. I really don't know if you like what you see or not,,and it really is not my business whether you do or not . Freedom of choice. Only time will tell how everything pans out. I may even end up with Windows 8 myself but if Win 7 last as long as XP,,I might be dead before I have to upgrade.Lol. Believe me FS, I would never insult my friend over something as petty as an OS. :good:


    #22 FutureShock

      Gold Poster!

    • Advanced Member
    • 79 posts

      Posted 14 March 2012 - 05:46 AM

      No I wasn't being testy I hope. Just trying out my best Cherman aun jue or Russian or something. Actually, I was really trying to say I wholeheartedly agree with you about EIGHT.

      Maybe we should start a hate 8 petition...

      Seriously, it really sounds like a very bad idea this time. Almost seems like MS is trying to cut out freeware contributions with breadline functionality and functions. I saw where one guy said there were certain spots in the software where nothing but certain apps could go. They had nothing in them, but he surmised that they could come at a price after purchasing the final product. At any rate, the ideas in 8 won't work at all almost for desktops and really not very oftenly for notebooks either...

      #23 Claw

        Platinum Poster!

      • Advanced Member
      • 620 posts

        Posted 14 March 2012 - 06:30 AM

        All's cool my friend,I don't think we'd have to start a hate 8 petition,,,I'm sure it may already be in the making. Windows 8 looks,,works and is setup for mobile use. Some people live on their phone,,they can't walk without staring at the phone. Everything including speaking commands into it just to look up something. But sooner or later all that "overkill" will be too much, when you focus too much on one component ,,you take away from another.
        Just look at stereo systems,,radio,then 78s, , then 8 track tapes, then 45 singles ,then 331/3 LPs ,then cassettes,, then CDs (compact disk). Now guess what???? 331/3 LPs or coming back,,turn tables are now being reinstalled on stereos. Microsoft sooner or later will end up back to basics with Windows,,because not everyone "can" or "is " willing to change !!!!
        One day quality will be the only thing users will spend their hard earned pay on,and Microsoft will have to step up if they want to be the ruling OS providers,,or else watch Windows become 2nd place in the race for users and dominance in the world of computer technology.
        Remember ,,MS is not the only one out there,," the sharks are circling",,it's up to Microsoft to" stay out of the water ".!!!!

        #24 BobC

          Advanced Poster!

        • Advanced Member
        • 22 posts

          Posted 14 March 2012 - 07:36 AM

          Only if I have to buy a new PC and it comes with Windows 8. I stayed with XP on my Desktop until it crapped out. I was able to buy a new Acer for less than it cost to replace 3 boards and a PS. It came with Win. 7, which does not impress me. I have had the system for about 6 months and it has slowed down, even though I defrag and run cleaners, etc. I run CCleaner, Glary Utilities, Advance System Care, Toolwiz and a few others. I also run Windows Defrag, Ultra Defrag, Defraggler and another (which defreags the "boot partition"). As far as being more secure than XP, I check the hundreds of updates MS puts out every week and 99% are security related. So much for improved security. I am getting ready to disable UAC as it has become a real PITA. I ahve already experienced a few "BSODs" adn one "Black Screen of Death" earlier today. I have also had shutdowns that never shut down (no, it was not doing updates). Looking at the modules (EXEs adn DLLs, etc., most of them have the same name as those in XP. I suspect that Win. 7 is nothing more than XP with some new modules and tweaks to some of the XP modules. I suspect some of the changes were done just for the sake of change. One that "Ts" me off is "Sort of Date". In XP it did not change the sort order. In Win. 7, it always changes oit to "Descending". Navigation around the system is always an adventure. I copied some files to an extenal drive, only to find the external drive contained symbolic links and not the files. The "Help" still stinks and I can find even fewer solutions to problems and questions on the internet.

          I downloaded the Win. 8 Devleoper's edition and burnt it to a DVD. I tried to install it in VirtualBox (on Win. 7) and the installed failed. I also downloaded the latest "Preview" edition and did not have any better luck. I can at least run Linux (both Ubuntu, Mint and a couple of others and had no problems - in fact, I quite often run the Linux distro in VB after booting up Win. 7). If Win. 8 has any similarity to Ubuntu Unity or Gnome 3, it will "suck". I'll probably stay with Ubuntu 10.04 or 10.10. Mint does not impress me at all (at least Mint 12). I have used Cinnamon, XFCE, Gnome/Gnome Classic and only XFCE comes close to what I want. I have Kubuntu on my "to-do list". I have 2 old lap-tops given to me by a son-in-law and my son. One has XP with a Wubi install of Ubuntu 10.10 and the other has a native Ubuntu 10.04 install. I use the XP/Wubi when we travel and I use the lap-top with 10.04 when I want better security.

          #25 Claw

            Platinum Poster!

          • Advanced Member
          • 620 posts

            Posted 14 March 2012 - 08:06 AM

            Het BobC,,I know how you feel. I to think it's change for the sake of change,,that and to get those consumer dollars. Windows 7 really has a pretty good defrag setup, a third party really isn't needed. I use Glary on one of my PCs and I like a lot,,I also use Ccleaner too.
            You can always uninstall all those cleaners and try SlimCleaner,,it's a nice piece of software, also if you must have another defrag,,try Auslogics defrag,this is a very fast defrag it also does file placement for optimization, these are on the PC I'm using now.

            https://freewarebb.com/files/file/11093-slimcleaner/

            https://freewarebb.com/files/file/2123-auslogics-disk-defrag/


            #26 FutureShock

              Gold Poster!

            • Advanced Member
            • 79 posts

              Posted 14 March 2012 - 10:30 AM

              Claw...again good points my friend

              Here's the thing imo. MS is missing the point with desktops. What is a desktop PC? It's a personal sit down hub, just like a terminal at work. What do you want? You want a simple OS that makes it easy for you to connect to the office and use the software and files on that machine. As for you personal junk, you just want a good creative file management system for all that.

              So, for the desktop at work, MS delivers something that looks like XP...maybe a little better architecture and maybe a little more forward thinking with regards to features. I'm not a Mint user, but I have it on VirtualBox. It's PC in a can but sort of what you want at the office. Then when you come home, you have the full blown OS with the option to click on an icon and open your desktop at work right there in front of you. If you don't man a PC at the office, it would be nice to be able to use the same interface to set up your company and any associated networks.

              You also want to be able to file share, and you want serious user friendly office software somewhere on the machine.

              I still think MS should bring back Works...just me. Take Office 2007, dress it up and make it really easy to use...much easier to use. Spend alot of money on the project and include it with every copy of Win. Then go to war for the ultimate office suite. Spend 8 or 10 years developing that while you introduce minor improvements to Office along the way, knowing that users have Works that they can count on for most things anyway.

              Finally and ,most importantly imo. take the OS straight back to DOS. Make it easy to boot into DOS...not that anyone would want to, but it's the principle...sort of a way to remember where you come from thing. Make the OS itself ultimately light and treat its features as programs for the most part by setting them up to use RAM memory only when they are in use. Too many features in our PCs' short term memory banks, even in XP, imo.

              Now introduce your bells and whistles if you want to, but this expense on the features of 8 is too much for what shouldn't in my mind be even mentioned as anything but an optional addition which can be activated over the OS. If they sold it as an option for Win7, they would be much better off, as long as it could be easily turned off...

              #27 Claw

                Platinum Poster!

              • Advanced Member
              • 620 posts

                Posted 14 March 2012 - 04:24 PM

                That's pretty much the way I try to run most things in my life FS: On, when I need it,,,,Off, when I don't.
                Agreed,,make it light, make it easy, make it simple , make it fun,,,,"make it right". Nothing that can't be accomplished by taking a little time , thought, and "effort". Stop rushing to get to the top of the heap,,because it's a long way down to the bottom.

                #28 jayesstee

                  New Poster!

                • Members
                • 8 posts

                  Posted 14 March 2012 - 05:57 PM

                  Hear, hear FutureShock and Claw!

                  Now how do we get Microsoft to listen? Not taking up Win 8 won't achieve anything. Our (enthusiasts) sort of buying power is swamped by the commercial, educational, industrial and the government purchasing numbers.
                  Twenty years ago, there was an IT axiom that said: "Nobody ever got sacked for specifying IBM". Today it's Microsoft.
                  Bring back Digital Research, they tried (and failed) to keep Microsoft honest?

                  #29 FutureShock

                    Gold Poster!

                  • Advanced Member
                  • 79 posts

                    Posted 14 March 2012 - 07:09 PM

                    jayesstee...you are so correct. MS needs to take WIN straight back to DOS (the C:/) and focus on usefulness and functionality through the use of programs.

                    The architecture that is on XP, Vista, and on 7 was handed down (made worse with each change) all the way from '95 and was part of an effort on the part of Microsoft to make WIN the only player in OS software. That may sound evil, but I think of it as more so a little phony. It wasn't going to work out like they envisioned. They wanted all the programmers to have to answer to the new complicated architecture, knowing that their own knowledge of Windows would make them the front runner to accomplish anything major with the OS. It's almost like they wanted to become more like Apple...writing almost all or all of the sottware for Win. That was foolish. The needs for an OS in the corporate world are too broad and diverse for anyone to ever corner the market on writing programs for an OS. Also MS had already promised freedom for the corporate sector with the architecture in 3.1. Ask anyone who remembers what it was like to work with a blank slate like 3.1. Heaven on earth

                    One big problem MS has now is that there are many others that have come along, and they have all emulated to a t the same architecture in Vista, 7, etc. This puts MS in a tough spot. On the one hand they have the lead, but on the other hand, it would be VERY easy for a breakthrough to come out of one or more of these efforts. If so, the developers of that OS will be able to say they already know how to write for 7 and even include functionality for 7 based programs. They could do this and even change the architecture, making the OS lighter and simpler...giving it to the programmers. The programmers could then take it through the roof.

                    The first time I looked at 95, I almost puked. I knew exactly what was going on, but it was VERY difficult to take. This was a huge step backwards for MS that sold itself as a step sideways. Hard to explain about that, but, if you go back to 3.1 you will see the architecture that made Windows great. Fortunately, imo, what we have now, especially with 7 and apparently soon with 8 will be beaten soon by the gamers if nothing else. Why? Free system resources. This is another big problem for MS. I guarantee the gamers will grab MS's original architecture from 3.1 if they don't get back to it and claim it for themselves. THAT would be embarrassing for MS...having to answer to a gamers OS. Seriously, the gamers could sweep MS out of the top spot in software in a heartbeat with an OS that makes its name with the gamers first...

                    There is alot of pressure on MS these days to do things to please everyone. They have done a pretty decent job I think. However, eventually MS will have to get back to its roots in order to survive. It will cause a stir if/when they do, but the programmers will love the change in the overall sense. MS can do this and still define a legit identity while keeping a large niche of the marketshare. Hope they see the light soon...

                    #30 Claw

                      Platinum Poster!

                    • Advanced Member
                    • 620 posts

                      Posted 14 March 2012 - 08:02 PM

                      FS, jayesstee, all valid points,,but in the end,,all useless banter. Windows OS are made for 5% user,,20% corporate backing and 75% profit. Like it or not , Windows 8 and beyond are a reality. Maybe not as easy as XP,or a work horse like 98 or 2k, but a reality all the less.
                      The original question was: " Will you be installing Windows 8 when it is released"???? Well, Marko sure stirred up a hornets nest with this one. Congratulations buddy, you now know "your members" are the best and most passionate at what we do. FutureShock, thanks for a great forum,,jayesstee ,,don't stop jumping in. Marko ,,now you know just how tenacious we can be buddy.
                      My answer to the question,,,,, NO ,unless I actually had to !!!!



                      Back to Polling Place Next Unread Topic ?

                      Similar Topics




                      2 user(s) are reading this topic

                      0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users