Is Windows 8 an improvement over Windows 7 - Update

Do you regard Windows 8 as an improvement over Windows 7?

  • Yes Windows 8 is better than Windows 7

    Votes: 5 18.5%
  • No Windows 8 is not better than Windows 7

    Votes: 22 81.5%

  • Total voters
    27

tech explorer

New Member
I've checked the other related threads, but I still feel the need for this to get further discussion on this matter and to be able to tell at a quick glance which OS is preferred, hence the the poll.
 

AlienMenace

Well-Known Member
I'm still sticking to Windows 7 and don't plan on upgrading.
I have friends that have Windows 7 and they ask me if they should upgrade to 8. I tell them no, windows 7 is going to be like XP and stay around a long time. But, since I was coming from XP x64 to a new OS. I decided to try out the Release Preview version and liked it, so I bought 8 pro instead. It is the full version (OEM)(System Builders). Amazon had it for 125.00 instead of Newegg's 139.99. So, I got it from Amazon.

The Metro UI is a learning curve, and no more start button. But that has a work around. I have Start 8 from Stardock, I didn't know about "Classic Shell" till a week after I got Start 8. So when my system boots, it boots up in the desktop format instead of the Metro. I do jack around in the metro side some. There are certain Apps. I like. But mostly I stay in the Desktop.

I think that 8 is a good OS, to me at least it is. To others, well that is there opinion. And if the person is any kind of a computer person they can work around problems with any new OS systems.

And I never buy anything in less I try it out, I was a beta tester for Windows 7 x64 Ultimate and I tried the Windows 8 Pro x64. 8 willed out.
And I think some of the problems with 8 not selling good is the "Critics" and what they wrote about it, and that is my opinion also.
 

MyCattMaxx

Active Member
There are a couple of issues I have with W8.
It should have an option on install so you can set up Metro or Desktop environment, you have to mess around to get it like a normal desktop.

The biggest issue is the "Kill Switch" that is built in and Microshaft or a good hacker can use it to kill the OS.

I'll stick to W7.
 

claptonman

New Member
Eh, you can't really say if it is an improvement or not if you haven't used it for an extended period of time. I've had it on my desktop for about 3 months, and I can say, hands down, it's better. It's faster, mounting .ISOs is native, and Metro is actually not the devil incarnate like everyone makes it out to be.

Here's a screenshot of my start screen. All my main programs are right there for me to click. If I want some other programs, I press start and start typing, just like I did on Windows 7.

Now, I'm not saying to go out and buy a new copy for $100, but if you can get it cheap enough, I say go for it.
 

DMGrier

VIP Member
I think the only thing I don't like is the two user interfaces, some applications will run in one and not the other. Not to mention IE 10 Metro won't handle everything the IE 10 Desktop will. I think Metro is nice but what Microsoft should have done is kind of like what can be done in Linux where when you log into your desktop you choose the desktop. Kind of like if I was running Ubuntu Unity and I installed the cinnamon desktop when I log in I could choose which one, plus this would give MS great feed back on which desktop users truly prefer by measuring the time spent in each session.
 

johnb35

Administrator
Staff member
Eh, you can't really say if it is an improvement or not if you haven't used it for an extended period of time. I've had it on my desktop for about 3 months, and I can say, hands down, it's better. It's faster, mounting .ISOs is native, and Metro is actually not the devil incarnate like everyone makes it out to be.

Here's a screenshot of my start screen. All my main programs are right there for me to click. If I want some other programs, I press start and start typing, just like I did on Windows 7.

Now, I'm not saying to go out and buy a new copy for $100, but if you can get it cheap enough, I say go for it.

Whats the sense in having wallpaper if all the icons take up the space with all the boxes around the icons? Microsoft didn't think that through.
 

DMGrier

VIP Member
Whats the sense in having wallpaper if all the icons take up the space with all the boxes around the icons? Microsoft didn't think that through.

Tell me if I am wrong but by default you can't use anything other then the stock wallpapers in Metro without using a mod. So in a sense MS did think it through, give you less options to customize so there for you cannot mess up the operating system.
 

claptonman

New Member
I think the only thing I don't like is the two user interfaces, some applications will run in one and not the other. Not to mention IE 10 Metro won't handle everything the IE 10 Desktop will. I think Metro is nice but what Microsoft should have done is kind of like what can be done in Linux where when you log into your desktop you choose the desktop. Kind of like if I was running Ubuntu Unity and I installed the cinnamon desktop when I log in I could choose which one, plus this would give MS great feed back on which desktop users truly prefer by measuring the time spent in each session.
I never use any of the apps that take up the screen. This is not a requirement in any of the programs.
Whats the sense in having wallpaper if all the icons take up the space with all the boxes around the icons? Microsoft didn't think that through.
Yeah, I do wish it was like OS X where they're just the icon, but oh well.
Tell me if I am wrong but by default you can't use anything other then the stock wallpapers in Metro without using a mod. So in a sense MS did think it through, give you less options to customize so there for you cannot mess up the operating system.
Yeah, you can only have the stock wallpapers. I use win8startcustomizer and it works just fine.
 

Okedokey

Well-Known Member
I think it has sold less than Vista.

Windows Blue will be the Windows 7 as Windows Vista is to WIndows 8.

LOL
 

dark_angel

Member
I use it on my ultrabook and I thought it would be pathetic before I started using it. Once I had used it for a few weeks I mast say I like it.

I do believe the way it is it is made for tablets/touchscreen. They need to make the desktop version slightly different.

1) Get rid of the start menu
(I don't mind it as it is only one click to go to desktop from boot and then you don't need to use it unless you want you) but a lot of opinions from people they don't like it.

2) Move away from trying to make everything tired into your live account.

I love the changes to windows explorer and access to everything their.

I have never used the start menu so don't have anything to miss.

Other than that it is mostly the same as windows 7 to me.
 

DMGrier

VIP Member
I think it has sold less than Vista.

Windows Blue will be the Windows 7 as Windows Vista is to WIndows 8.

LOL

Yeah but Windows Vista had horrible performance where as Windows 8 does not. Windows Blue is not going to be the thing that will fix it, it will offer more customization, improved Kernel and some bug fixes but I doubt it will fix anything. People want to be able to run one desktop and preferably a traditional one. Metro is great where it is, and that is on RT devices but not for a desktop.

Yeah and your right Vista has out sold Windows 8, Apple Mac sales have been up though.
 

AlienMenace

Well-Known Member
Yeah but Windows Vista had horrible performance where as Windows 8 does not. Windows Blue is not going to be the thing that will fix it, it will offer more customization, improved Kernel and some bug fixes but I doubt it will fix anything. People want to be able to run one desktop and preferably a traditional one. Metro is great where it is, and that is on RT devices but not for a desktop.

Yeah and your right Vista has out sold Windows 8, Apple Mac sales have been up though.
Yea, but look where it was coming from, people want to upgrade from xp. From 2001 to 2007 for xp. Then when Vista popped up and in most cases was a "DUD". They created Windows 7. And then Windows 8 popped out a couple of yrs later behind a great OS, no wonder it is having troubles selling.
 

spirit

Moderator
Staff member
I've got 8. I quite like it. Not had any blue screens or major crashes. It's fast and you get used to the interface after a while.

I don't really see how 'it's a pain in the butt'. A 'pain in the butt' for what exactly? Installing? Setting up? Using?

It's mother's day in the UK today, and for mother's day I built my mum a new PC. I gave it to her today with Windows 8 Pro installed on it, and even though she is a long-time XP user and a computer 'n00b', she's getting along fine with 8 so far. :)
 

JakeMize

New Member
It's basically an entire new interface. If you're good with computers you can easily work around with it, but it can be a pain in the butt. There's a program called Start Menu 8 by IObit, which brings back the start button and skips metro intro at beginning.

I've had only one major issue with Windows 8 and that was USB recognition. 2.0 USB's were recognized as 3.0 and caused a memory dump anytime I inserted a USB device. (I.E. Printer and Mouse) Troubleshooting said my "older" devices weren't compatible with 3.0 and updating drivers for the USB ports didn't work.

So far I've spent 200 bucks to DOWNGRADE back to windows 7. Windows 8 interface is for touch devices and shouldn't of been made compatible with desktops and laptops. There are little quirks like the Internet Explorer found in Applications isn't the same as the Internet explorer on the Desktop. And there are some driver issues.

I'm sure these little problems will all be fixed when a service pack comes out and companies update drivers. But it's a rather interesting interface and I imagine it's quite awesome on a touch screen.
 
Last edited:

The_Other_One

VIP Member
Yes and no isn't enough to cover the changes with Windows 8.

As a whole, I hate Windows 8. The UI is terrible. It's poorly optimized with many metro applications running very slow on my Acer tablet (IE video playback, but MPC runs great). The desktop portion is bad too... While I do like some of the improvements, it's way too difficult to use on a touch based device. I've also had some issues with "shortcuts". Some of the flicks/swipes/etc don't pick up correctly. Oh, and of course when in the desktop mode, the on-screen keyboard never shows up on it's own (it must be called). There are also a TON of updates from it's release pretty much negating the whole "smaller footprint than Windows 7".

Oh and features... No start menu, no media center(paid extra) with a very odd hierarchy of versions, no built-in DVD/BD-ROM playback(plus or minus for some people)...

On the plus side, it is generally faster than previous versions. Basic usability is improved and PCs feel quite snappy. File manipulations are much improved with a drastic change to cut/copy/paste. Boot times are also astounding!

As a primary OS, I still have Windows 7 on my main computers. Actually the /ONLY/ PC I have running 8 is my tablet, and even that I've considered switching...
 
Top