Microsoft confirms Windows 9 launch accidentally

Ven0m

2014-09-26 09:21

I think it's only about the event on 30th. I hope we'll learn what will be the upgrade paths from XP, 7, and 8(.1). Maybe it won't be that expensive.

#4922927

southamptonfc

2014-09-26 12:12

Windows 8.1 (not 8) has been a total ****ing nightmare for me, it felt rushed, poorly designed and not tested properly. SP1 for 8.1 has fixed a lot of stuff that should've been there from the start but it still smells a bit lemony to me. Part of me wants to get onto 9 as fast as possible but the other part worries that MS have rushed it and will screw it up again.

#4922957

GALTARAUJO

2014-09-26 12:50

I really hope Windows 9, or whatever the name they plan for it, gets released soon so I can think about upgrading from Windows 7. Windows 8, or 8.1, was almost as bad as Windows Vista. It was designed under a stupid concept: people want touchscreen experience on their desktops. It is the most stupid idea MS has had in a long time. It does not make sense from an ergonomic standpoint, and even if it did, I do not want to get my gaming monitor dirty with my fingerprint. I live in Brazil, and things here are even worse. About a year ago, I built a computer for a friend of mine and learned that for some reason beyond understanding, MS does not sell Windows 8 for new computers, only up-grades. Once my friend was not up grading from anything, against our will we had to use an illegal copy. Why MS has done that, after so many years of public campaigns against illegal software, remains a mystery to me to this day. In the end, however, I think there was some divine justice on it: spending real money on such a lousy software should be consider illegal...

#4922973

kakarot

2014-09-26 13:08

Would be nice but i doubt anything new will be launching this year. @GALTARAUJO. It's not hard to do a clean install with an upgrade version and probably takes less effort than a pirated one. I have an 8.0 upgrade key and can clean install 8.1.1 without issue. But won't argue that they made it harder than it has to be

#4923011

Denial

2014-09-26 13:41

While people are entitled to their opinion, windows 8.1 is nothing more than a far more efficient version of Windows 7. Simple as that. Anyone else who says otherwise, they're just hopping on the bandwagon of No start button, windows 8 = fail. There is no forcing of using a touch screen. You never have to see the Start Menu. Apps can be removed and silenced completely. The new start menu is far superior to the old start menu. Instead of having to snake through like in the old start menu, all your programs are right there in open and can accessed in just one tap of the windows key and then click on required program. Two steps is all it takes, no more snaking, opening sub folder after sub-folder, just to get to the control panel or programs. The start menu can be arranged by category, most used, recently installed etc with one click of the mouse. If a program doesn't make itself shown for some rare reason, just start typing, say 'Programs and Features' and before you've gotten to 'Progr' it'll be right there, just hit enter. Its pretty much just an extension of win+r. This new search function can be accessed from anywhere just by hitting win+s for program searches or win+f for personal file. The overall experience is far smoother than that of 7, so much so, that I really don't feel the need to go back and to the point that 8.1 is far better than 7 was to Vista (another perfectly fine OS that dumb people couldn't figure out) Internet Explorer 11 is actually worth using, so much so, that i dont bother with firefox or any other bloatware about. Everything about IE is smoother and snappy just like the OS. I've yet to come across any program compatibility issues. People need to stop being so petty and stupid about change. The old Start menu is obsolete. I hadn't bothered with in windows 7 for quite sometime as it was quicker to have desktop icons or pinned to taskbar.

There is literally no point in arguing anymore. People just repeat the same ****. Every time there is a Windows 8 news post at least one person comes in and goes "change for change sake" or some variant. 90% of the people here don't care about computing outside of what personally effects them. Although this doesn't surprise me because it's not just limited to computing but humanity as a whole. Anyway I'm assuming they'll announce release date of the preview and talk about what they've been up too. One of the things I liked about Sinofsky is how open he was on the buildingwindows blogs. Hopefully Julie Larson will be willing to do the same.

#4923024

southamptonfc

2014-09-26 13:56

While people are entitled to their opinion, windows 8.1 is nothing more than a far more efficient version of Windows 7. Simple as that. Anyone else who says otherwise, they're just hopping on the bandwagon of No start button, windows 8 = fail. There is no forcing of using a touch screen. You never have to see the Start Menu. Apps can be removed and silenced completely. The new start menu is far superior to the old start menu. Instead of having to snake through like in the old start menu, all your programs are right there in open and can accessed in just one tap of the windows key and then click on required program. Two steps is all it takes, no more snaking, opening sub folder after sub-folder, just to get to the control panel or programs. The start menu can be arranged by category, most used, recently installed etc with one click of the mouse. If a program doesn't make itself shown for some rare reason, just start typing, say 'Programs and Features' and before you've gotten to 'Progr' it'll be right there, just hit enter. Its pretty much just an extension of win+r. This new search function can be accessed from anywhere just by hitting win+s for program searches or win+f for personal file. The overall experience is far smoother than that of 7, so much so, that I really don't feel the need to go back and to the point that 8.1 is far better than 7 was to Vista (another perfectly fine OS that dumb people couldn't figure out) Internet Explorer 11 is actually worth using, so much so, that i dont bother with firefox or any other bloatware about. Everything about IE is smoother and snappy just like the OS. I've yet to come across any program compatibility issues. People need to stop being so petty and stupid about change. The old Start menu is obsolete. I hadn't bothered with in windows 7 for quite sometime as it was quicker to have desktop icons or pinned to taskbar. I really hope MS havent allowed the simple minded folk to revert the great changes made in 8.1, just to please a pack of whining muppets who cant adapt to change, change being almost non existent in win 8 as its simply 7 but more efficient in every way.

I have no issues with the UI. I was referring to fundamental technical issues with the OS that have caused issues at home and at work but I'm sure a fanboy like yourself could overlook them too.

#4923027

Denial

2014-09-26 13:58

I have no issues with the UI. I was referring to fundamental technical issues with the OS that have caused issues at home and at work but I'm sure a fanboy like yourself could overlook them too.

Care to go into any specifics? I've literally ran 8 across hundreds of machines between work and home and haven't had any technical issues aside from the removal of F8.

#4923028

CronoGraal

2014-09-26 13:59

Laptop came with 8.1, classicshell actually fixed it for me. I might reformat and finally move on from 7.

#4923036

kakarot

2014-09-26 14:03

Sorry, I like 8 but metro is ****, the start screen is ****, and the metro apps are total ****. None have any place on the desktop. Anyways, derailing this once again as all 8 threads.

#4923054

southamptonfc

2014-09-26 14:27

Care to go into any specifics? I've literally ran 8 across hundreds of machines between work and home and haven't had any technical issues aside from the removal of F8.

Sorry no, just look into the issues fixed in FP1 to see what a botch 8.1 was.

#4923082

GALTARAUJO

2014-09-26 14:58

Windows Vista was a perfectly fine OS that dumb people couldn't figure out? That was nice...

#4923099

kakarot

2014-09-26 15:19

Metro, what metro. Its exactly like 7, but with a full screen start menu and the apps can be completely removed.

Yup and its really nice on a 30" 1600p monitor. Like I've said, not bad smaller touchscreen devices or monitors but unusably overwhelming on high rez large displays.

#4923107

Fender178

2014-09-26 15:29

Someone whoe doesnt like resource hogging bloatware. just try IE on win 8.1 and you'll find it to be far more of a responsive browser. Trust me. After showing a few friends, they've dropped FF and Chrome in favour of a less bloated experience and slow browsing. Damn straight i dont use bing though hahaha. FF will use upwards of 300mbs of ram at all times even while casual browsing, IE at most hits 90, only when watching videos at 1080p or higher, IE will use 300-350mb.

While IE maybe vastly improved. There are features that Chrome and firefox have with their extensions is being able to download videos from YT and noscript.

I really hope Windows 9, or whatever the name they plan for it, gets released soon so I can think about upgrading from Windows 7. Windows 8, or 8.1, was almost as bad as Windows Vista. It was designed under a stupid concept: people want touchscreen experience on their desktops. It is the most stupid idea MS has had in a long time. It does not make sense from an ergonomic standpoint, and even if it did, I do not want to get my gaming monitor dirty with my fingerprint. I live in Brazil, and things here are even worse. About a year ago, I built a computer for a friend of mine and learned that for some reason beyond understanding, MS does not sell Windows 8 for new computers, only up-grades. Once my friend was not up grading from anything, against our will we had to use an illegal copy. Why MS has done that, after so many years of public campaigns against illegal software, remains a mystery to me to this day. In the end, however, I think there was some divine justice on it: spending real money on such a lousy software should be consider illegal...

There is nothing wrong with change. With 3rd party software you can get the start menu back. As far as Windows 8 being as bad as Vista I agree with you to an extent. Vista was very different than Xp as far as where they put everything goes. And Windows 8 not having the start menu. The reason why people had trouble with Vista is because they were using it on crappy outdated hardware for the most part. And OEM computer makers like Dell,HP etc were building computers with inferior hardware to run Vista using only 1-2gb of RAM when they needed at least 4gb.

#4923168

foxX

2014-09-26 16:32

You're spot-on on most of your claims, except for:

Internet Explorer 11 is actually worth using, so much so, that i dont bother with firefox or any other bloatware about. Everything about IE is smoother and snappy just like the OS. ... just try IE on win 8.1 and you'll find it to be far more of a responsive browser. Trust me. After showing a few friends, they've dropped FF and Chrome in favour of a less bloated experience and slow browsing.

Is there any NoScript for IE 11? How about AdBlock? If not, I don't give a flying **** how much faster you perceive it to be. You're wrong, gtfo. Don't tell me that using my quite limited bandwidth to pull aids, pus and cancer from all over the internet without those essential components is "responsive" :bang:.

#4923175

Aura89

2014-09-26 16:37

While people are entitled to their opinion, . . . People need to stop being so petty and stupid about change. The old Start menu is obsolete. I hadn't bothered with in windows 7 for quite sometime as it was quicker to have desktop icons or pinned to taskbar.

Just because you have an opinion about the lack of a feature that was present before, doesn't mean everyone else should have to follow suite just because you have an opinion. The best and most efficent way to deal with changes, especially extremely large changes like that (considering how many people still use the start button on a daily basis, it's a very large change regardless if you believe it is or not), is to allow for choice, and if Microsoft doesn't want to allow for choice, then they should never make the change. Thankfully, they are allowing for choice. But seriously, what you just said was "Well, i don't need it, and i don't use it, therefore, no one needs it, and no one uses it" .....

classicshell? Thats literally a step back. Learn (as in, open just the once, the rest is simple) and you find that the 8.1 start menu is far better and same goes for the rest of windows explorer.

Again, just because you prefer it, doesn't mean anyone else has to. Though i do have to wonder how you could possibly think that the windows 8 start menu could possibly be good at all. It's efficient to make your customers open up essentially a program to get to other programs, and if you want to use some programs within the program "Start Menu", and use programs on the desktop, it's exceptionally irritating to go between them? That's not efficient or good design. Again, this is an opinion, but i really can't understand the logic there.

#4923233

Fender178

2014-09-26 17:36

You're spot-on on most of your claims, except for: Is there any NoScript for IE 11? How about AdBlock? If not, I don't give a flying **** how much faster you perceive it to be. You're wrong, gtfo. Don't tell me that using my quite limited bandwidth to pull aids, pus and cancer from all over the internet without those essential components is "responsive" :bang:.

Yes IE has adblock plus and thats about it. and Watch your self with comments like that which can lead to an infraction and a possible ban.

#4923258

Fender178

2014-09-26 17:51

An infraction or ban on a website it'll take 2 seconds to get access to again? Such a threat. IE11 sucks whoever uses it is a noob.

I was trying to be nice to the guy so he doesn't get an infraction. I agree that IE11 sucks but there are times out there where using IE is necessary out in the work world.

#4923322

TheDeeGee

2014-09-26 19:30

Thru the years ive used nothing but IE, and continue to do so. Nothing wrong with it at all.

#4923371

sykozis

2014-09-26 20:10

You're spot-on on most of your claims, except for: Is there any NoScript for IE 11? How about AdBlock? If not, I don't give a flying **** how much faster you perceive it to be. You're wrong, gtfo. Don't tell me that using my quite limited bandwidth to pull aids, pus and cancer from all over the internet without those essential components is "responsive" :bang:.

Who needs AdBlock? Use Tracking Protection Lists. They don't bloat the browser and slow webpage loading.

Since when is IE11 necessary?

Some work environments require IE be used.

MAYBE this is a great system for SOME home users, the money is in the business licenses, and I don't know of any business that adapted Windows 8. Not only is there the training, but many in-house applications would have to be completely reworked.

Company I work for has 3 laptops running Windows8.1. For our guys, there was no training needed. We handed them the laptops and they got to work.

#4923376

antonyfrn

2014-09-26 20:22

Windows Vista was a perfectly fine OS that dumb people couldn't figure out? That was nice...

Vista was totally fine. The cluster **** was down to hardware vendors not even attempting drivers till when the beta was closing up. Thing is a beta program what was going on for a year and a half is saw two reps from two big hardware vendors post once.