To 8 or not to 8 ?

[Dropz]

Do i need to upgrade from my windows 7 ultimate to windows 8 pro ?

 

[rgd1101]

Do you have something that only work with windows 8?

 

[pauls3743]

Maybe someone can shoot me down but I didn't think Ultimate to Pro was an upgrade path.

Apart from that. No you don't need to upgrade to Windows 8, it's optional. Personally, I just bought a couple of extra 7 licences so I can rip out 8 and install the best Operating System currently available on any new computers I get with 8 installed.

 

[jacknhut]

I got Win 7 Ultimate and 8 Pro, it's a bit different but once you get used to it you will love it.

 

[abbadon_34]

To 8 or not to 8?

Wait.

 

[pauls3743]

I'm waiting for Microsoft to reinstate the Start button with Start menu and make the "metro" interface optional, so I can disable it, before I move to 8. Apart from that, I can live with the hidden menus but wish they weren't hidden.

 

[The_Prophecy]

I'm waiting for Microsoft to reinstate the Start button with Start menu and make the "metro" interface optional, so I can disable it, before I move to 8. Apart from that, I can live with the hidden menus but wish they weren't hidden.

You're going to be there awhile. Microsoft is not adding the Start button nor are they bringing back the old start menu. I would like them to give desktop users the option to boot directly into the Desktop app, but I can live with it as is, and I reboot my machine way more than most people (at least most that I know). Minimum twice a week, often more. I wish people would get over this. Learn to embrace some change once in awhile.

 

[abbadon_34]

Learn to embrace some change once in awhile.

I embrace _improvement_ not change because i'm bored.

edit: hmm...starting to sound political

 

[cin19]

Free start button software is out there, I try it and work great.

http://windows8startbutton.com/

After you get the start button back, Win8=win7 but if you have touch screen go for the Win8.

 

[robnof]

Do i need to upgrade from my windows 7 ultimate to windows 8 pro ?

Nah. It's a waste of money unless you're building a new rig. Then it becomes an issue of features preference.

 

[The_Prophecy]

I embrace _improvement_ not change because i'm bored.

edit: hmm...starting to sound political

If boredom was the only reason for me upgrading, I wouldn't have bothered. I upgraded because I liked what I saw (if you so desire, insert any pun you want about Metro there) ;-). If I had hated it, I wouldn't have bothered to go through with the upgrade, and would be beating the Anti-Windows 8 drum along with many other people.

I just think it's ridiculous that so many people get so hung up on the fact that the Start button isn't there, and that the Start Menu is now full screen, looks different, and behaves a bit different in accordance with Microsoft's idea of having touch oriented features built in. At it's core, the Start Screen functions the same way as the Start menu. Your programs are all there, you can still search for applications and settings by simply typing on your keyboard (or touchscreen), and they are still organized into sub-groups even though those look a bit different as well.

But it's nothing that we can't adapt to if we give it a little bit of effort.

And regarding that political comment.... where did that come from? Lets keep this on topic. No need to go after me personally.

@ cin19,

In case you weren't aware of them, Classic Shell (http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/) and Start8 (http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/) are also available if someone really wants to bring back the Start button. Start8 is not free though unfortunately.

@ Dropz,

If you are getting a new system, I would go for it. If you are looking to upgrade an existing computer, I would do a bit more research on what Windows 8 offers for new features, what are the pros and cons of using it, and whether those changes from Windows 7 actually matter to you. Do you *need* to upgrade? No. Should you if you find something in the new OS that would benefit you? Sure. We can only help identify the pros and cons as it relates to you. Ultimately, it is your decision to make. What would really help us here is if you told us what you use your computer for now. Knowing that, we can then suggest some reasons to upgrade or not to upgrade.

 

[abbadon_34]

@prophecy

Nothing personal intended, just a funny coincidence I noticed later, not a directly response to you or anyone else

As for interface, it like choices, they intention deprived my of that. In WinXP you could select "Classic" amd eliminate the bubbliness and keep the cascading directories. In Win7 they did everything to prevent the tradition MS interface. The UI was a minor issue until they made it a major one.

As not trying to be personal or go off topic.

 

[pauls3743]

You're going to be there awhile. Microsoft is not adding the Start button nor are they bringing back the old start menu. I would like them to give desktop users the option to boot directly into the Desktop app, but I can live with it as is, and I reboot my machine way more than most people (at least most that I know). Minimum twice a week, often more. I wish people would get over this. Learn to embrace some change once in awhile.

Change isn't always a good thing.

This change was to bite into the tablet/touchscreen market. The cost was that it alienated the mouse and keyboard market (me). I liked the things that were brought in with Windows 7 e.g. taskbar pinning, snap windows. I was looking forward to trying this new "Metro" interface everyone was raving about. I tried it and didn't like it. I found I was having to move my mouse more because of switching between the metro and desktop interfaces (more of a pain in the thumb if I break out my trackball). I was having trouble finding things, e.g. honestly, who puts the off button under settings? There were menus in places without something to highlight them.

I was also finding that Windows 8 was treating metro and the desktop as seperate sessions e.g. run IE from metro and do certain things, then run IE from the desktop and those previous things were not logged. It's the same login, why treat the two screens as seperate sessions?

All in, I found too much I didn't like about 8 and chose to wait until Microsoft re-implemented the things I missed before I would take it on. Hopefully, SP1 will see it, probably not. I doubt if Windows 9 will see it so I may be looking at Windows 7 for a very long time and moving to linux after that.

 

[jjhuang42]

I played with this for a while at Best Buy. Windows 8 seems to break what ain't broken. Windows 7 is reliable, fast, and time proven. Windows 8 seems to smash two mediocre OS's into a frankenOS. Metro makes tablets more functional, while it's 'desktop' version hobbles PC's.

And there isn't a way to decide which of the two will be the dominant/default - you get Metro. I guess Microsoft is betting that traditional PC's are going the way of the Dodo and betting heavy on tablets, smartphones, etc - explains the Surface.

Frankly, I call Win8 a pass - just like Windows ME, the last frankenOS that MS shoved out the door.

 

[captainblacko]

Windows 8 works well in the HTPC/HDTV market. It makes sense if you think of it from that PoV - Big tiles with easy accessiple apps or a stupidly tiny tool bar....

So back to your original question...there's no point in upgrading if your on a desktop.

 

[The_Prophecy]

Nothing personal intended, just a funny coincidence I noticed later, not a directly response to you or anyone else

Gotcha. It just seemed like it was directed at me given the specific phrasing. Thanks for clearing that up.

Change isn't always a good thing.

This change was to bite into the tablet/touchscreen market. The cost was that it alienated the mouse and keyboard market (me). I liked the things that were brought in with Windows 7 e.g. taskbar pinning, snap windows. I was looking forward to trying this new "Metro" interface everyone was raving about. I tried it and didn't like it. I found I was having to move my mouse more because of switching between the metro and desktop interfaces (more of a pain in the thumb if I break out my trackball). I was having trouble finding things, e.g. honestly, who puts the off button under settings? There were menus in places without something to highlight them.

I was also finding that Windows 8 was treating metro and the desktop as seperate sessions e.g. run IE from metro and do certain things, then run IE from the desktop and those previous things were not logged. It's the same login, why treat the two screens as seperate sessions?

All in, I found too much I didn't like about 8 and chose to wait until Microsoft re-implemented the things I missed before I would take it on. Hopefully, SP1 will see it, probably not. I doubt if Windows 9 will see it so I may be looking at Windows 7 for a very long time and moving to linux after that.

Does it make traditional desktop users' live more interesting? Sure. Mimicking touch gestures with a keyboard and mouse is not the most elegant solution. Microsoft felt that this was the best way to approach how to build in support for tablets and other touchscreen devices, yet keep much of the core functionality that made Windows, Windows. This will change over time. The next version of Windows I have no doubt will make desktop and laptop usability better in that environment. Is it perfect? Definitely not. I don't think going back to the Start button and menu is the answer though.

I do respect that you at least tried Windows 8 and then concluded that you don't like it, because far too many other people just regurgitate crap that they hear from others without actually having tried it themselves.

 

[majestic1805]

I was also finding that Windows 8 was treating metro and the desktop as seperate sessions e.g. run IE from metro and do certain things, then run IE from the desktop and those previous things were not logged. It's the same login, why treat the two screens as seperate sessions?

Metro apps run differently from desktop/classic apps and give them extra protections. This is because metro apps live in the world of microsoft's marketplace and they need to ensure one app is entirely segregated from the rest. This has not been in the case on desktop apps. For example, you can't write a metro app that will read/write with the windows messaging subsystem. All it can really do is see it's own memory footprint and needs to request special permission before doing things like touching the filesystem.

 

[mactronix]

Once again I feel compelled to point out that the vast majority of people who are complaining about W8, I say vast majority as we all know if we are honest that both sides have their share of trolls and mud slinger be it pro or anti for any given subject.

However I digress, the vast majority have way way more chance of having downloaded the free trial versions and used them and disliked them than anyone ever has of actually knowing who has actually tried it or is just regurgitating crap that they hear from others.

As we have touched on before no doubt some people have heard what they have and are casting aspersions based on reports etc, but Microsoft should really have made much much more effort to explain what it actually does and does not do.

For instance, can I actually run 4 different tasks at the same time ?
I have no idea, but I have been told that you can't, apparently any more than 2 and they get suspended/paused and resume where they were when they were minimised at when they are resumed.
If that is true its a royal pain.

Mactronix