What's new with Windows 8?
- darrelljon
- Posts: 551
- Joined: Sun 08 Apr 2007, 11:10
- Contact:
What's new with Windows 8?
Can anyone point me to a comparison between the end-user features of Windows 8, Puppy and XP?
From comments on other sites, and some exposure to Windows 8, the best advice I can give is to steer clear of Windows 8!
I had a friend that brought over his HP laptop and wanted me to find out why he could not install some games he had bought.
I fired it up and saw the tile buttons that allow one to select applications. But one has to find one that says Show all applications to find anything not on those tile buttons.
Also, there is no visible Shutdown to be found.
They hide it behind the Logout button as I later found out.
In the BIOS on that laptop, there is a setting that supposedly inspects any software to be installed and does not allow installation of suspect software.
And of course, we have UEFI to contend with now.
And to make matters worse, MS wants to take away one's ability to boot from a USB storage device as they now are stating that it is a security risk.
So if they had their way, one could not boot any OS from a USB storage device.
I think they are determined to try to force Windows on us with no option to use any other OS.
Also, if they get their way, using linux to repair windows or even recover data from Windows when it will not boot will be gone!
Just my two cents here.
I had a friend that brought over his HP laptop and wanted me to find out why he could not install some games he had bought.
I fired it up and saw the tile buttons that allow one to select applications. But one has to find one that says Show all applications to find anything not on those tile buttons.
Also, there is no visible Shutdown to be found.
They hide it behind the Logout button as I later found out.
In the BIOS on that laptop, there is a setting that supposedly inspects any software to be installed and does not allow installation of suspect software.
And of course, we have UEFI to contend with now.
And to make matters worse, MS wants to take away one's ability to boot from a USB storage device as they now are stating that it is a security risk.
So if they had their way, one could not boot any OS from a USB storage device.
I think they are determined to try to force Windows on us with no option to use any other OS.
Also, if they get their way, using linux to repair windows or even recover data from Windows when it will not boot will be gone!
Just my two cents here.
- darrelljon
- Posts: 551
- Joined: Sun 08 Apr 2007, 11:10
- Contact:
- darrelljon
- Posts: 551
- Joined: Sun 08 Apr 2007, 11:10
- Contact:
I really don't care for Windows 8 either but I don't think that it will be avoidable for that much longer, unless the market dictates otherwise, as in the case with XP. I'm hoping the coming "blue" upgrade will improve things.8-bit wrote:From comments on other sites, and some exposure to Windows 8, the best advice I can give is to steer clear of Windows 8!
I noticed on the comparison page darrelljon provided that no distinction was made between Windows 98 First and Second Edition. If I remember correctly, the first edition shipped with IE 4 and the second with IE 5. On the second edition, you could install up to IE 6. Not sure about the first.
Regards...
Actually, no, later OEM versions of Windows 95 were the first. Both versions of Windows 98 had USB support, although you had to obtain special driver files for both to be able to read thumb drives. I think ME and 2000 were the first for that.starhawk wrote:Win98SE also was the first version of Windows to support USB you did need drivers for everything tho.
Regards...
Actually, I can verify that in that I have in my possession an install CD of Windows 95 that says on the CD face "Windows 95 with USB support".ardvark wrote:Actually, no, later OEM versions of Windows 95 were the first. Both versions of Windows 98 had USB support, although you had to obtain special driver files for both to be able to read thumb drives. I think ME and 2000 were the first for that.starhawk wrote:Win98SE also was the first version of Windows to support USB you did need drivers for everything tho.
Regards...
If MS got their newest idea used though, they would want BIOS's on new PCs to be designed to not allow booting from a USB flash drive or USB hard drive.
They see that ability as a security risk to Windows.
As an example, if one boots Puppy linux from USB or CD/DVD for that matter, they can access the entire contents of a Windows partition without knowing the users Windows password.
They can read from, write to, copy from, or create and modify files on the Windows partition.
But Puppy is a god send when it comes to gaining access to user data that may not survive a repair of a corrupted Windows install that will not boot.
They see that ability as a security risk to Windows.
As an example, if one boots Puppy linux from USB or CD/DVD for that matter, they can access the entire contents of a Windows partition without knowing the users Windows password.
They can read from, write to, copy from, or create and modify files on the Windows partition.
But Puppy is a god send when it comes to gaining access to user data that may not survive a repair of a corrupted Windows install that will not boot.
-
- Posts: 1885
- Joined: Tue 05 Jun 2012, 12:17
- Location: Wisconsin USA
- darrelljon
- Posts: 551
- Joined: Sun 08 Apr 2007, 11:10
- Contact:
- Moose On The Loose
- Posts: 965
- Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2011, 14:54
I think you at least have to get internet access once to get Win-8 to run on a machine. After that, the OS will work for a while between connections to the Internet. I don't know how long it will work for but it seems to be more than at least an hour or two.ardvark wrote:Do you mean to download games and other software? I don't recall this being a requirement just to use the OS.bark_bark_bark wrote:windows 8 also requires you to have a M$ account to use it.
Regards...
-
- Posts: 1885
- Joined: Tue 05 Jun 2012, 12:17
- Location: Wisconsin USA
http://www.toastytech.com wrote:Touch screens do have their place. Such as small mobile devices, kiosks, and large presentation displays. (But I do get a kick watching news anchors trying to use those, the world gets to see their backsides while they fiddle with the touch controls!)
So, let's take a look at some of the "apps".
I should be able to start a simple calendar "app" and enter a few dates without Microsoft looking over my shoulder, right? Nope!
Every "app" wants you to connect to the internet and log in to Microsoft's "Microsoft Live" internet service.
No Microsoft internet service account? No internet connection? No app!
The only option these screens gives you is to "try again". Your only visible option is to stay stuck in a loop going back and forth between the two screens forever until you give in to the will of Microsoft.
Even ignoring that this is all advertising, it violates all kinds of user interface principals out the yingyang:
The "app" takes up the entire screen.
There is no visible way to close this application.
There is no visible way to cancel or return to the "start" page.
There is no visible way to do ANYTHING else!
In this case the system is not connected to the internet. This is because Windows 8 sends all kinds of information back to Microsoft.
At least ALT+F4 still works.
http://www.toastytech.com wrote:
Underneath the hood Windows 8 is the same Windows NT that powered NT 3.x, NT 4, 2000, XP, Vista, and 7, and can run all standard Win32 programs written for these platforms.
Some people have complained that the desktop windowing theme looks boring and flat, but keep in mind Microsoft needs something to sell you in Windows 9.
Microsoft also removed the Classic theme.
What is old is new again.
One pleasant surprise is that there is still a 32-bit version and it can run 16-bit programs.
With the Windows 1.0 calendar, I don't have to connect to the internet to use it.
....
- darrelljon
- Posts: 551
- Joined: Sun 08 Apr 2007, 11:10
- Contact:
Just used it for a few hours today and its very frustrating.
The default "Start screen" is like using a phone, offering some advantage for a touchscreen but who wants to use a touchscreen when you have a mouse and keyboard?
This also uses the corners of the screen to bring up settings etc.. Again not great for a keyboard and mouse, but it also uses right-click options! So is this designed for touchscreen or mouse?
Anyway, interaction aside, this could be usable if the tiles could be customised to your hearts content but for the priority given to Metro (Microsoft) apps (mostly from a Microsoft app store which requires a Microsoft account) and inability to customise non-metro apps even just resizing them.
Thankfully dropping to desktop is easy - just a click away, I wonder if Microsoft has a usability dept, they insisted on this, once they saw how unusable the start screen is.
At the desktop, there is no start menu (be thankful for open source download Classic Start Menu).
Again, the default programs use the ribbon interface, meaning rather than everything being on one row height, the buttons can be found anywhere.
Getting to settings, is truly a mess.
They have kept many legacy style settings dialog boxes.
Seriously grateful for proper desktops, thinking of switching back to puppy.
Here are the good things about traditional desktop interfaces.
Menus are in a list, not two columns or more.
Buttons are in a single row, not a ribbon.
tabs are used for new content windows, not more buttons.
Theming it seems to require a Microsoft account.
Windows 3.1 had clearer tiles and better display of multitasking.
It feels like the attempt at the end of the window paradigm, and the start of something worse.
Jakob Nielsen gets it right.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=jakob ... +windows+8
The default "Start screen" is like using a phone, offering some advantage for a touchscreen but who wants to use a touchscreen when you have a mouse and keyboard?
This also uses the corners of the screen to bring up settings etc.. Again not great for a keyboard and mouse, but it also uses right-click options! So is this designed for touchscreen or mouse?
Anyway, interaction aside, this could be usable if the tiles could be customised to your hearts content but for the priority given to Metro (Microsoft) apps (mostly from a Microsoft app store which requires a Microsoft account) and inability to customise non-metro apps even just resizing them.
Thankfully dropping to desktop is easy - just a click away, I wonder if Microsoft has a usability dept, they insisted on this, once they saw how unusable the start screen is.
At the desktop, there is no start menu (be thankful for open source download Classic Start Menu).
Again, the default programs use the ribbon interface, meaning rather than everything being on one row height, the buttons can be found anywhere.
Getting to settings, is truly a mess.
They have kept many legacy style settings dialog boxes.
Seriously grateful for proper desktops, thinking of switching back to puppy.
Here are the good things about traditional desktop interfaces.
Menus are in a list, not two columns or more.
Buttons are in a single row, not a ribbon.
tabs are used for new content windows, not more buttons.
Theming it seems to require a Microsoft account.
Windows 3.1 had clearer tiles and better display of multitasking.
It feels like the attempt at the end of the window paradigm, and the start of something worse.
Jakob Nielsen gets it right.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=jakob ... +windows+8
Hi...darrelljon wrote:I hope not, that sounds ridiculous. Can I download apps from any website and run them on Windows 8?
It depends on if the program is compatible with Windows 8. I have found a couple so far that aren't.
Regards...
Last edited by ardvark on Sun 28 Jul 2013, 04:47, edited 1 time in total.
I think this has to do more with Microsoft's offerings rather than 3rd party software you would download or purchase on a CD. Thank you for showing this, though. I know you need to have a Microsoft account to download games and other software from Microsoft, I went through this with a customer.bark_bark_bark wrote:http://www.toastytech.com wrote:Touch screens do have their place. Such as small mobile devices, kiosks, and large presentation displays. (But I do get a kick watching news anchors trying to use those, the world gets to see their backsides while they fiddle with the touch controls!)
So, let's take a look at some of the "apps".
I should be able to start a simple calendar "app" and enter a few dates without Microsoft looking over my shoulder, right? Nope!
Every "app" wants you to connect to the internet and log in to Microsoft's "Microsoft Live" internet service.
No Microsoft internet service account? No internet connection? No app!
The only option these screens gives you is to "try again". Your only visible option is to stay stuck in a loop going back and forth between the two screens forever until you give in to the will of Microsoft.
Even ignoring that this is all advertising, it violates all kinds of user interface principals out the yingyang:
The "app" takes up the entire screen.
There is no visible way to close this application.
There is no visible way to cancel or return to the "start" page.
There is no visible way to do ANYTHING else!
In this case the system is not connected to the internet. This is because Windows 8 sends all kinds of information back to Microsoft.
At least ALT+F4 still works.
http://www.toastytech.com wrote:
Underneath the hood Windows 8 is the same Windows NT that powered NT 3.x, NT 4, 2000, XP, Vista, and 7, and can run all standard Win32 programs written for these platforms.
Some people have complained that the desktop windowing theme looks boring and flat, but keep in mind Microsoft needs something to sell you in Windows 9.
Microsoft also removed the Classic theme.
What is old is new again.
One pleasant surprise is that there is still a 32-bit version and it can run 16-bit programs.
With the Windows 1.0 calendar, I don't have to connect to the internet to use it.
Regards...