Windows 8 hands on.

[Uncensored2008]

Anyone who has read my other threads knows I'm not a big fan of the pre-release Windows 8. But a couple of events have moved me to a deployment. My wife had an issue on her email, where an apparent spambot was present (turned out not to be the case) AND she was intrigued by Windows 8. So I agreed to update her Vista 32 to Windows 8.

Her machine;

Asus 5120 Motherboard
Intel E8400 Core2
4 GB DDR2
SATA 2 1TB 7200RPM (WD)
Nvidia Geforce GTX 570 1.2GB DDR5

A little bit older, but a competent machine with a good graphics card.

The upgrade:

Windows 8 Pro, Retail 32bit

What should have happened is a straight upgrade, with all applications intact. But that isn't what went down. Instead, it did a migration. The old install was moved to Windows.Old - trashing all the program installs. Mostly this was Office 2010. Oddly enough, both the documents and picture folders were migrated. I'll put Office 2013 on tonight and pray that I can migrate the .OST from Outlook without issue.

Basic result, despite no Office, Windows 8 did surprisingly well at hardware. It loaded Detonator drivers for the GTX, found the Lexmark Genesis USB printer. Did not find the Brother printer on the LAN. Found the Steel Series mouse, but installed generic drivers. Installed SATA 2 and USB 2 drivers. Retained drive mappings to other machines on the network.

Performance.

It's a clean install, though it shouldn't have been. Performance is good. Very rapid boot for a mechanical drive. Still a LOT of drive activity after the initial boot, but the machine seems responsive enough - which Vista was not. I still hate Metro and find application launch to be a pain in the ass, but the applications I've tried run alright. Steam needed to be repaired, but did so without issue. Acrobat runs without issue. I lost Chrome in the update, and will have to reload it. IE 10 is responsive and clean. I easily dumped Bing and switched to Google. Some of the live tiles are actually kind of cool. After browsing photos, one tile became a slide show. After visiting Sharky Extreme, another tile started showing headlines from the site.

I'll post more as I live with supporting it more.

 

[cereal_killer]

I like Windows 8. The new tablets/ultrabooks running windows 8 are awesome. I love how touch is integrated into the OS. I'm also looking forward to checking out Windows Phone 8 when a device drops on Verizon

 

[Uncensored2008]

The touch screen is the focus. The question is how this plays on the desktop, particularly those who don't have touch screens. Metro is not particularly mouse friendly. The next question is with a tablet focus, will Microsoft be able to break into the arena dominated by Android (Linux) and Apple? With 75% of the tablet market belonging to Android, and virtually all of the rest going to iPad, it's tough to see a niche for Microsoft in there.

 

[Uncensored2008]

UPDATE:

So I put Office 2013 on the wife's machine. I did not need to migrate the .OST, as once installed, all mail and contacts appeared in Outlook.

WHAT this means, is that a Windows 8 migration is either not compatible with Microsoft's flagship Office 2010, or the upgrade process is so poorly designed that it can't even migrate an Office install.

My suspicion is that Microsoft is trying to sell office upgrades. I don't know, though. I suspect I could have reinstalled 2010 without issue, but as an MSDN member, I get the software for testing at no additional charge. So may as well give 2013 a run.

I tested performance on the most basic level using Torchlight II. Under Vista 32, the machine held a steady FPS of 84 @ 1920 x 1200 with FSAA at 2X and default anisotropic filtering. After the upgrade, the settings remained the same, which was nice, and I got - wait for it - 84 FPS. This shows that the video card and NVidia drivers have a lot more impact than the operating system does - at least on Torchlight II. I'll run Vantage a little later, maybe on the weekend, for a more comprehensive test.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

UPDATE:

So I put Office 2013 on the wife's machine. I did not need to migrate the .OST, as once installed, all mail and contacts appeared in Outlook.

WHAT this means, is that a Windows 8 migration is either not compatible with Microsoft's flagship Office 2010, or the upgrade process is so poorly designed that it can't even migrate an Office install.

My suspicion is that Microsoft is trying to sell office upgrades. I don't know, though. I suspect I could have reinstalled 2010 without issue, but as an MSDN member, I get the software for testing at no additional charge. So may as well give 2013 a run.

I tested performance on the most basic level using Torchlight II. Under Vista 32, the machine held a steady FPS of 84 @ 1920 x 1200 with FSAA at 2X and default anisotropic filtering. After the upgrade, the settings remained the same, which was nice, and I got - wait for it - 84 FPS. This shows that the video card and NVidia drivers have a lot more impact than the operating system does - at least on Torchlight II. I'll run Vantage a little later, maybe on the weekend, for a more comprehensive test.

I don't understand why anyone would want Win8 on a desktop.
Touchscreen capability is what the entire GUI is premised on....I have read a good dozen articles/blogs on Win 8 by folks I consider unbiased (not saying you are)...everyone seems to agree - it is solid IF you have a touchscreen device - it sucks if you don't because the mouse interface is not what it was designed for.
I have also read that the fast boot up is a farce because Win8 does not shut down, but puts the computer into hibernate instead....as well as some older laptops won't recover from hibernate forcing users to hold in the power button to reboot.
Just sayin

 

[Uncensored2008]

I don't understand why anyone would want Win8 on a desktop.

And yet my wife just loves it. The smart tiles have captured her commonly used applications without the need to create shortcuts and she says the whole thing feels more natural to her.

Touchscreen capability is what the entire GUI is premised on....I have read a good dozen articles/blogs on Win 8 by folks I consider unbiased (not saying you are)...everyone seems to agree - it is solid IF you have a touchscreen device - it sucks if you don't because the mouse interface is not what it was designed for.

That's been my opinion thus far as well, but she doesn't agree. I'm sticking to Windows 7, I have no plans to migrate.

I have also read that the fast boot up is a farce because Win8 does not shut down, but puts the computer into hibernate instead....as well as some older laptops won't recover from hibernate forcing users to hold in the power button to reboot. Just sayin

Exactly, the only way to really test the boot speed is to pull the power cord.

People get way too caught up in boot times. Vista had a feature called "Super Fetch" which pre-cached common applications at boot time. This slowed the boot down, but vastly improved application launch speed. Microsoft pulled it in Windows 7 to increase boot speed, at the cost of application performance.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I don't understand why anyone would want Win8 on a desktop.

And yet my wife just loves it. The smart tiles have captured her commonly used applications without the need to create shortcuts and she says the whole thing feels more natural to her.

Touchscreen capability is what the entire GUI is premised on....I have read a good dozen articles/blogs on Win 8 by folks I consider unbiased (not saying you are)...everyone seems to agree - it is solid IF you have a touchscreen device - it sucks if you don't because the mouse interface is not what it was designed for.

That's been my opinion thus far as well, but she doesn't agree. I'm sticking to Windows 7, I have no plans to migrate.

I have also read that the fast boot up is a farce because Win8 does not shut down, but puts the computer into hibernate instead....as well as some older laptops won't recover from hibernate forcing users to hold in the power button to reboot. Just sayin

Exactly, the only way to really test the boot speed is to pull the power cord.

People get way too caught up in boot times. Vista had a feature called "Super Fetch" which pre-cached common applications at boot time. This slowed the boot down, but vastly improved application launch speed. Microsoft pulled it in Windows 7 to increase boot speed, at the cost of application performance.

There are several youtube videos where you can makes Win 7 look and act just like Win 8 in about 5 minutes by following 6-7 simple steps....this is Win 7.

 

[Uncensored2008]

There are several youtube videos where you can makes Win 7 look and act just like Win 8 in about 5 minutes by following 6-7 simple steps....this is Win 7.

Last thing I want is for Windows 7 to act like Metro.

Aero is the efficient and effective user interface I've yet encountered, I have very little that I would change about it.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

There are several youtube videos where you can makes Win 7 look and act just like Win 8 in about 5 minutes by following 6-7 simple steps....this is Win 7.

Last thing I want is for Windows 7 to act like Metro.

Aero is the efficient and effective user interface I've yet encountered, I have very little that I would change about it.

Me either.
My wifes laptop is Win 7 and it's interface is just fine.
Course you know all of my boxes are Linux Mint...but that is another thread.

 

[cereal_killer]

The touch screen is the focus. The question is how this plays on the desktop, particularly those who don't have touch screens. Metro is not particularly mouse friendly. The next question is with a tablet focus, will Microsoft be able to break into the arena dominated by Android (Linux) and Apple? With 75% of the tablet market belonging to Android, and virtually all of the rest going to iPad, it's tough to see a niche for Microsoft in there.

Consumers can be fickle and with MS marketing campaign it could really become relevant in the Tablet/Mobile space. This is strictly opinion of course but I do feel like there is room for another OS and if anyone can do it, it will be Microsoft. We shall see

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The touch screen is the focus. The question is how this plays on the desktop, particularly those who don't have touch screens. Metro is not particularly mouse friendly. The next question is with a tablet focus, will Microsoft be able to break into the arena dominated by Android (Linux) and Apple? With 75% of the tablet market belonging to Android, and virtually all of the rest going to iPad, it's tough to see a niche for Microsoft in there.

Consumers can be fickle and with MS marketing campaign it could really become relevant in the Tablet/Mobile space. This is strictly opinion of course but I do feel like there is room for another OS and if anyone can do it, it will be Microsoft. We shall see

(my emphasis)
Why? I don't want to turn this into an anti-Microsoft thread (which admittedly I sometimes do) But what makes you say think MS is the one to do it?
Outside of their core OS and Office - MS has failed in utterly every other venture they have tried. As in really failed.
They were/are very successful in gaming because they excelled in the online gaming format that only one other device offered at the time. They have also made some brilliant buys and packaging in gaming.
But as for devices...till this point...MS is the last one that "could do it".
If anyone it will be Apple or Android come up with the next big hit.

 

[cereal_killer]

The touch screen is the focus. The question is how this plays on the desktop, particularly those who don't have touch screens. Metro is not particularly mouse friendly. The next question is with a tablet focus, will Microsoft be able to break into the arena dominated by Android (Linux) and Apple? With 75% of the tablet market belonging to Android, and virtually all of the rest going to iPad, it's tough to see a niche for Microsoft in there.

Consumers can be fickle and with MS marketing campaign it could really become relevant in the Tablet/Mobile space. This is strictly opinion of course but I do feel like there is room for another OS and if anyone can do it, it will be Microsoft. We shall see

(my emphasis)
Why? I don't want to turn this into an anti-Microsoft thread (which admittedly I sometimes do) But what makes you say think MS is the one to do it?
Outside of their core OS and Office - MS has failed in utterly every other venture they have tried. As in really failed.
They were/are very successful in gaming because they excelled in the online gaming format that only one other device offered at the time. They have also made some brilliant buys and packaging in gaming.
But as for devices...till this point...MS is the last one that "could do it".
If anyone it will be Apple or Android come up with the next big hit.

They have a ton of cash and they are using it. You can't escape from all the ads. Plus throw in some very nice hardware (Ultrabooks, Surface, Smartphones) and you have a winner. iOS is stagnant and Android is becoming increasingly fragmented. I don't see anything ground breaking coming from either of them and I'm a huge Android guy.

I think Windows 8/Devices will have a slow gradual climb in the various markets and by 2014 it will be a major player in the mobile and tablet space

 

[Uncensored2008]

(my emphasis)
Why? I don't want to turn this into an anti-Microsoft thread (which admittedly I sometimes do) But what makes you say think MS is the one to do it?
Outside of their core OS and Office - MS has failed in utterly every other venture they have tried. As in really failed.

You've got to be kidding me.

In developer tools, Borland dominated. Microsoft moved in and took 99% of the market. .Net development is virtually universal among professional developers, even for Linux and Mac development. (It just gets ported.)

Nintendo, Sega, and Sony dominated the game arena - the single most profitable part of computing. While only moderately successful with the XBox, the XBox 360 dominates the market, putting Sega out of business, knocking Nintendo into the fringe, and shutting Sony out of the high end market.

Xbox live dominates digital distribution for console games and is starting to threaten even the venerable STEAM. (Which is the real reason Newell slammed Windows 8)

They were/are very successful in gaming because they excelled in the online gaming format that only one other device offered at the time. They have also made some brilliant buys and packaging in gaming.

Not really. PS3 offered online gaming before XBox 360 did, Microsoft just did it a hell of a lot better.

But as for devices...till this point...MS is the last one that "could do it".
If anyone it will be Apple or Android come up with the next big hit.

Apple has utterly failed at gaming, where Microsoft dominates. One of the very smart moves Microsoft made with Windows 8 is the tie in to Xbox Live. A really DUMB move will be if they can't provide games on the Surface RT that live up to the XBox experience. Microsoft thinks getting Angry Birds is a win, it isn't, it's just a "me too' move. They need a killer app (game) that sets the Surface apart from the iPad. I don't think they can touch Android, so they need to take the market from Apple to win this. Embedded Excel and Word were the right move, that helps a LOT.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Consumers can be fickle and with MS marketing campaign it could really become relevant in the Tablet/Mobile space. This is strictly opinion of course but I do feel like there is room for another OS and if anyone can do it, it will be Microsoft. We shall see

(my emphasis)
Why? I don't want to turn this into an anti-Microsoft thread (which admittedly I sometimes do) But what makes you say think MS is the one to do it?
Outside of their core OS and Office - MS has failed in utterly every other venture they have tried. As in really failed.
They were/are very successful in gaming because they excelled in the online gaming format that only one other device offered at the time. They have also made some brilliant buys and packaging in gaming.
But as for devices...till this point...MS is the last one that "could do it".
If anyone it will be Apple or Android come up with the next big hit.

They have a ton of cash and they are using it. You can't escape from all the ads. Plus throw in some very nice hardware (Ultrabooks, Surface, Smartphones) and you have a winner. iOS is stagnant and Android is becoming increasingly fragmented. I don't see anything ground breaking coming from either of them and I'm a huge Android guy.

I think Windows 8/Devices will have a slow gradual climb in the various markets and by 2014 it will be a major player in the mobile and tablet space

Perhaps, but let's hope not....unless you want innovation to stop cold. It is Apple and Android that has created the cool software and interaction. MS has been playing catch up for years, so they finally might have a winner (might) in the touchscreen market where they failed badly before. And don't forget, Win 8 is brand new. There were plenty of people that were saying Zune and Windows phones are going to win the market.
I hope Windows tablets fail, for good reason.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

(my emphasis)
Why? I don't want to turn this into an anti-Microsoft thread (which admittedly I sometimes do) But what makes you say think MS is the one to do it?
Outside of their core OS and Office - MS has failed in utterly every other venture they have tried. As in really failed.

You've got to be kidding me.

In developer tools, Borland dominated. Microsoft moved in and took 99% of the market. .Net development is virtually universal among professional developers, even for Linux and Mac development. (It just gets ported.)

Nintendo, Sega, and Sony dominated the game arena - the single most profitable part of computing. While only moderately successful with the XBox, the XBox 360 dominates the market, putting Sega out of business, knocking Nintendo into the fringe, and shutting Sony out of the high end market.

Xbox live dominates digital distribution for console games and is starting to threaten even the venerable STEAM. (Which is the real reason Newell slammed Windows 8)

They were/are very successful in gaming because they excelled in the online gaming format that only one other device offered at the time. They have also made some brilliant buys and packaging in gaming.

Not really. PS3 offered online gaming before XBox 360 did, Microsoft just did it a hell of a lot better.

But as for devices...till this point...MS is the last one that "could do it".
If anyone it will be Apple or Android come up with the next big hit.

Apple has utterly failed at gaming, where Microsoft dominates. One of the very smart moves Microsoft made with Windows 8 is the tie in to Xbox Live. A really DUMB move will be if they can't provide games on the Surface RT that live up to the XBox experience. Microsoft thinks getting Angry Birds is a win, it isn't, it's just a "me too' move. They need a killer app (game) that sets the Surface apart from the iPad. I don't think they can touch Android, so they need to take the market from Apple to win this. Embedded Excel and Word were the right move, that helps a LOT.

I said XBox excelled because of online gaming which only one other device offered at the time - you disagreed, but then your comments explaining why you disagree aligned with what I said originally...
We were talking about consumer devices and products - in that arena, besides gaming, Microsoft failed. They failed phones, music devices, previous tablet offerings and music software.
Apple failed at gaming? Well...that would be saying they really tried, when did they try? Only now is Apple going to enter the console market...and who knows how that will do. Like your point above - Apple will have to go beyond the "me too".
Right now the XBox is woefully behind a much needed upgrade. It is clunky...the interface sucks completely and game makers have to dumb down the games to the ancient hardware. Microsoft is partnering up with all the right players (Netflix, Amazon Prime, ABC etc.etc) - but the interface is soooooooo outdated...if you have an XBox then you know the frustration of trying to search for a video when the device keeps skipping letters you enter or repeating them 4-5 times etc. etc.

This is why I would hope Microsoft does not do well in the tablet market - if they take it over - it will stay the same for years and years to come.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I said XBox excelled because of online gaming which only one other device offered at the time - you disagreed, but then your comments explaining why you disagree aligned with what I said originally...
We were talking about consumer devices and products - in that arena, besides gaming, Microsoft failed. They failed phones, music devices, previous tablet offerings and music software.
Apple failed at gaming? Well...that would be saying they really tried, when did they try? Only now is Apple going to enter the console market...and who knows how that will do. Like your point above - Apple will have to go beyond the "me too".
Right now the XBox is woefully behind a much needed upgrade. It is clunky...the interface sucks completely and game makers have to dumb down the games to the ancient hardware. Microsoft is partnering up with all the right players (Netflix, Amazon Prime, ABC etc.etc) - but the interface is soooooooo outdated...if you have an XBox then you know the frustration of trying to search for a video when the device keeps skipping letters you enter or repeating them 4-5 times etc. etc.

This is why I would hope Microsoft does not do well in the tablet market - if they take it over - it will stay the same for years and years to come.

LOL

Game consoles are on a 5 year cycle. The PS3 and XBox 360 came out at the same time, and both are long in the tooth now.

Apple will fail in the game console market; they think iTV provides them the ability to play in that sandbox. They think wrong.

If Microsoft can pull off the Windows 8 thing, they deserve to dominate the market for a generation. The convergence of all platforms into a single paradigm that a user learns ONCE is a HUGE breakthrough that makes Apple an arcane has-been. I've never been a fan of IOS, and would love to see that shitty interface buried. Yes, I like Android, but on a phone the Windows 8 (Metro/Modern) is substantially better. Either it will succeed or Apple will steal it, like they steal everything else.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I said XBox excelled because of online gaming which only one other device offered at the time - you disagreed, but then your comments explaining why you disagree aligned with what I said originally...
We were talking about consumer devices and products - in that arena, besides gaming, Microsoft failed. They failed phones, music devices, previous tablet offerings and music software.
Apple failed at gaming? Well...that would be saying they really tried, when did they try? Only now is Apple going to enter the console market...and who knows how that will do. Like your point above - Apple will have to go beyond the "me too".
Right now the XBox is woefully behind a much needed upgrade. It is clunky...the interface sucks completely and game makers have to dumb down the games to the ancient hardware. Microsoft is partnering up with all the right players (Netflix, Amazon Prime, ABC etc.etc) - but the interface is soooooooo outdated...if you have an XBox then you know the frustration of trying to search for a video when the device keeps skipping letters you enter or repeating them 4-5 times etc. etc.

This is why I would hope Microsoft does not do well in the tablet market - if they take it over - it will stay the same for years and years to come.

LOL

Game consoles are on a 5 year cycle. The PS3 and XBox 360 came out at the same time, and both are long in the tooth now.

Apple will fail in the game console market; they think iTV provides them the ability to play in that sandbox. They think wrong.

If Microsoft can pull off the Windows 8 thing, they deserve to dominate the market for a generation. The convergence of all platforms into a single paradigm that a user learns ONCE is a HUGE breakthrough that makes Apple an arcane has-been. I've never been a fan of IOS, and would love to see that shitty interface buried. Yes, I like Android, but on a phone the Windows 8 (Metro/Modern) is substantially better. Either it will succeed or Apple will steal it, like they steal everything else.

Well...they all steal from each other.
I agree iOS is pretty lousy, and you bet Apple stole everything from Android in the touch interface.
I also have Android...it just plain works, and works smooth as silk. I have had an Android tablet for about a year and a half now - it crashed once, but that ended up being a problem with the USA Today app.

 

[Bleipriester]

I said XBox excelled because of online gaming which only one other device offered at the time - you disagreed, but then your comments explaining why you disagree aligned with what I said originally...
We were talking about consumer devices and products - in that arena, besides gaming, Microsoft failed. They failed phones, music devices, previous tablet offerings and music software.
Apple failed at gaming? Well...that would be saying they really tried, when did they try? Only now is Apple going to enter the console market...and who knows how that will do. Like your point above - Apple will have to go beyond the "me too".
Right now the XBox is woefully behind a much needed upgrade. It is clunky...the interface sucks completely and game makers have to dumb down the games to the ancient hardware. Microsoft is partnering up with all the right players (Netflix, Amazon Prime, ABC etc.etc) - but the interface is soooooooo outdated...if you have an XBox then you know the frustration of trying to search for a video when the device keeps skipping letters you enter or repeating them 4-5 times etc. etc.

This is why I would hope Microsoft does not do well in the tablet market - if they take it over - it will stay the same for years and years to come.

LOL

Game consoles are on a 5 year cycle. The PS3 and XBox 360 came out at the same time, and both are long in the tooth now.

Apple will fail in the game console market; they think iTV provides them the ability to play in that sandbox. They think wrong.

If Microsoft can pull off the Windows 8 thing, they deserve to dominate the market for a generation. The convergence of all platforms into a single paradigm that a user learns ONCE is a HUGE breakthrough that makes Apple an arcane has-been. I've never been a fan of IOS, and would love to see that shitty interface buried. Yes, I like Android, but on a phone the Windows 8 (Metro/Modern) is substantially better. Either it will succeed or Apple will steal it, like they steal everything else.

I don´t like Metro.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I don´t like Metro.

Have you used it on a phone?

I'm an Android guy and have to admit Metro is a generation ahead. Smart tiles that learn what you use often and adapt to your use style is what the interface should have been doing all along. Apple is busy copying it as we speak.

 

[Bleipriester]

I don´t like Metro.

Have you used it on a phone?

I'm an Android guy and have to admit Metro is a generation ahead. Smart tiles that learn what you use often and adapt to your use style is what the interface should have been doing all along. Apple is busy copying it as we speak.

No, I haven´t. Just on my computer. And it is not an appropriate replacement for the start menu. Nothing against MS, but they enforce Metro upon the users. Only Windows 2012 users can disable it.