| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kurifodo
I post too much
 Reputation: 23
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 2782
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:47 pm Post subject: Just finished downloading and installing Windows 8 Dev |
 |
|
Meh.
_________________
Anon |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Up2Admin
I'm a spammer
 Reputation: 126
Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 6548
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
At first I thought Windows 8 would be shitty with all the useless UI and content. But I looked into it some more and W8 seems like it might actually be pretty cool.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Channel GannoK
pffrt
 Reputation: 130
Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Posts: 608
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Holy shit, were almost at windows 8 already?!
Instill have fucking XP
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Up2Admin
I'm a spammer
Reputation: 126
Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 6548
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That fag wrote: | Holy shit, were almost at windows 8 already?!
Instill have fucking XP |
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
39.48 KB |
| Viewed: |
6175 Time(s) |
|
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
:^)
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
![]() Reputation: 37
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 1062
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
W7 > W8
W8 looks like for netbooks and tablet PCs just like Chromium (which sucked by the way).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArcaneKnite
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
 Reputation: 2
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 1519
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rozen wrote: | W7 > W8
W8 looks like for netbooks and tablet PCs just like Chromium (which sucked by the way). |
W8 is Win 7 with newer (though useless to some) features and more backend optimization. If you want, you can get rid of the W8 Metro styled start menu and all that and use the old W7 desktop layout. Gonna be like the same as W7 if you want it to, but smoother with more kinks worked out.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Up2Admin
I'm a spammer
Reputation: 126
Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 6548
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ArcaneKnite wrote: | | Rozen wrote: | W7 > W8
W8 looks like for netbooks and tablet PCs just like Chromium (which sucked by the way). |
W8 is Win 7 with newer (though useless to some) features and more backend optimization. If you want, you can get rid of the W8 Metro styled start menu and all that and use the old W7 desktop layout. Gonna be like the same as W7 if you want it to, but smoother with more kinks worked out. |
This.
Seems like they're trying to make it more lightweight for netbooks and tablets as well. In which case, the final product should run smoother than W7.
Hard to say though, considering the amount of features they're trying to fit in.
EDIT: 7 second fast boot. That sounds pretty damn awesome.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gavin
Moderator
![]() Reputation: 114
Joined: 30 Apr 2007
Posts: 1069
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When the actual release is out I will update my current system to the OS, but I don't feel like dev/beta releases.
But none the less keep us updated.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kurifodo
I post too much
Reputation: 23
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 2782
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Also they added many features that are boosts to origional w7 programs like Task manager is very nice i like it and explorer and many other apps/progies that you use often have gotten an upgrade.
What I think they are trying to do at Microsoft is make windows 8 a hybrid and more like Mac with the apps so it appeals to both the mac lover and pc lover alot of simpletons like apps and games and things and they are implementing just that a simple/easy to use ui with games and apps o.o
_________________
Anon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aviar³
Grandmaster Cheater
 Reputation: 50
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 655
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Up2Admin wrote: | | ArcaneKnite wrote: | | Rozen wrote: | W7 > W8
W8 looks like for netbooks and tablet PCs just like Chromium (which sucked by the way). |
W8 is Win 7 with newer (though useless to some) features and more backend optimization. If you want, you can get rid of the W8 Metro styled start menu and all that and use the old W7 desktop layout. Gonna be like the same as W7 if you want it to, but smoother with more kinks worked out. |
This.
Seems like they're trying to make it more lightweight for netbooks and tablets as well. In which case, the final product should run smoother than W7.
Hard to say though, considering the amount of features they're trying to fit in.
EDIT: 7 second fast boot. That sounds pretty damn awesome. |
Welcome to Linux three years ago.
_________________
This is the inception of deception, checking the depth of your perception.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
br0l0ck
Cheater
![]() Reputation: 63
Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 38
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aviar³ wrote: | | Up2Admin wrote: | | ArcaneKnite wrote: | | Rozen wrote: | W7 > W8
W8 looks like for netbooks and tablet PCs just like Chromium (which sucked by the way). |
W8 is Win 7 with newer (though useless to some) features and more backend optimization. If you want, you can get rid of the W8 Metro styled start menu and all that and use the old W7 desktop layout. Gonna be like the same as W7 if you want it to, but smoother with more kinks worked out. |
This.
Seems like they're trying to make it more lightweight for netbooks and tablets as well. In which case, the final product should run smoother than W7.
Hard to say though, considering the amount of features they're trying to fit in.
EDIT: 7 second fast boot. That sounds pretty damn awesome. |
Welcome to Linux three years ago. |
Does the operating system have that much to do with boot time? I know it would, but the hard drive would matter more right? SSDs can boot windows 7 pretty fucking fast already, are we sure its not microsoft tricking us using a really good ssd booting the system, and that the actual boot time for us with hdds will be shit.
btw i dont know shit and didnt read the article either
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aviar³
Grandmaster Cheater
Reputation: 50
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 655
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Brolock wrote: | | Aviar³ wrote: | | Up2Admin wrote: | | ArcaneKnite wrote: | | Rozen wrote: | W7 > W8
W8 looks like for netbooks and tablet PCs just like Chromium (which sucked by the way). |
W8 is Win 7 with newer (though useless to some) features and more backend optimization. If you want, you can get rid of the W8 Metro styled start menu and all that and use the old W7 desktop layout. Gonna be like the same as W7 if you want it to, but smoother with more kinks worked out. |
This.
Seems like they're trying to make it more lightweight for netbooks and tablets as well. In which case, the final product should run smoother than W7.
Hard to say though, considering the amount of features they're trying to fit in.
EDIT: 7 second fast boot. That sounds pretty damn awesome. |
Welcome to Linux three years ago. |
Does the operating system have that much to do with boot time? I know it would, but the hard drive would matter more right? SSDs can boot windows 7 pretty fucking fast already, are we sure its not microsoft tricking us using a really good ssd booting the system, and that the actual boot time for us with hdds will be shit.
btw i dont know shit and didnt read the article either |
Hm, Im tempted to answer, but Im sure Ill just end up baiting bigger fishes than me. What the hell, its a wild jungle. So, yes, and operating system has a big play in load times. Obviously the practical limits are your hardware, youll never transfer data faster than your hard drive (assuming we are doing I/O to disk and not fetching from RAM), but what you load plays a big part, as well as how you load it. DMA, for example, can speed up the load by allowing the CPU to work on things while a fetch is being carried out. But, to do that, your OS has to actually use it. In the end, the size of the data, the order, the methods use, all thats in the operating system, and all that is an enormous part of just how fast you can load. Ill try to find an article.
Article: http://lwn.net/Articles/299483/
_________________
This is the inception of deception, checking the depth of your perception.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
br0l0ck
Cheater
![]() Reputation: 63
Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 38
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well I guess a major part in which would be more important would be if our software has become the best it can be with our current hardware. as in if they started to develop a windows 9 and we had our current hardware the boot time could not get faster. if 7 seconds isn't the fastest that it can go with the current hardware then ms could be bullshitting us and its not a very important feature.
what im trying to say is, if we had a very very basic os, would it be able to boot in 1 second? if it can then we dont really have hardware limitations yet, the os would just have to become better.
theres a lot of things that go into it all which is why im confused, as to which is the most important factor in deciding if its fast or not. if the most important thing would be the hardware then it wouldn't be that great of a feat, ms could easily drop a ton of money on a ssd that could boot it in less than 7 seconds if possible, and tell everyone thats the fastest boot time theyve ever got
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aviar³
Grandmaster Cheater
Reputation: 50
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 655
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Brolock wrote: | Well I guess a major part in which would be more important would be if our software has become the best it can be with our current hardware. as in if they started to develop a windows 9 and we had our current hardware the boot time could not get faster. if 7 seconds isn't the fastest that it can go with the current hardware then ms could be bullshitting us and its not a very important feature.
what im trying to say is, if we had a very very basic os, would it be able to boot in 1 second? if it can then we dont really have hardware limitations yet, the os would just have to become better.
theres a lot of things that go into it all which is why im confused, as to which is the most important factor in deciding if its fast or not. if the most important thing would be the hardware then it wouldn't be that great of a feat, ms could easily drop a ton of money on a ssd that could boot it in less than 7 seconds if possible, and tell everyone thats the fastest boot time theyve ever got |
Theres an article on booting linux in 1.10 seconds on special hardware (though its only console). Also, you wont get as good of an improvement by dropping tons of cash into hardware, better to drop it into a better operating system, but thats unfeasible (unless you have millions to fund the core Windows Kernel team or something of the sort). Of course, Im not saying you wont get any gain at all by buying an SSD instead of a 5000 RPM HDD, it just wont be as big as having the software tailored for better performance (usually by tailoring it to the particular hardware you use). Also, I think ms boot times for a feature full operating system is not possible on standard consumer grade hardware.
P.S.: A more friendly article/slide show: http://www.slideshare.net/andrewmurraympc/elce-the
_________________
This is the inception of deception, checking the depth of your perception.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
br0l0ck
Cheater
![]() Reputation: 63
Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 38
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| after reading both (and understanding just parts of it) i guess it is a good feature, but to make it faster would not be such a big deal. im sure you could take the existing windows 8 and probably make it faster than microsoft has, but it would not be ideal for the consumer or company. i thought the thing in the first article you linked was cool that they said they hate splash screens which windows always has, so im sure if 8 removed theirs (if not already done) it could also get to 5 seconds(or atleast less than currently). I guess right now hardware isn't as important as the os itself, and im guessing it will be that way for a while.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
