"Microsoft's webOS luvvin' partner HP is among the PC manufacturers getting copies of early Windows 8 code, according to reports."
ie. Microsoft says: put this on your machines or else.
Microsoft's webOS luvvin' partner HP is among the PC manufacturers getting copies of early Windows 8 code, according to reports. HP and other Windows PC OEMs are reported to be getting builds of Microsoft's next desktop operating system known as milestone 3 – seriously pre-beta stuff. They're sucking down the code through …
I like the screen shot of the genuine center, where it shows it's running Windows 7 Ultimate with a blocked key.
The language profile is also nice: "When applications and websites offer choice of languages,..."
But, I just can't get my head around the "Your Look" setting. I'm having nasty flashbacks to Clippy... "The picture you choose will appear on your taskbar and represent you throughout Windows" <--Oops, they lost a period there too.
Backup software - check!
Snazzy interface - check!
Software download from online app store - check!
O/S soon to be locked up for good by supplier? Steve is mulling it no doubt and I'm sure Bill is sick of people moaning about malware and virii! All they have to do is both agree to stop being childish about the term "app store" and we're all doomed to a life of walled garden desktops!
Unless we follow the snowy dwelling, feathered bird to a free life?
Thats because it was nothing more than the final release of Vista. It should have been a service pack, so that the punters who bought Vista finally got a working OS. Windows 8 is either a slightly polished 7, or, as another commenter put it a turd. So, its either a polished turd, or a turd.
Thankfully I finally have a working OS after the Vista debacle, and MS didn't get any money from me.
Er........ "Windows 7" (version 6.1) was only a bug fix for Vista (version 6.0), so what version will the so-called "Windows 8" actually be?
To check, go to Windows Explorer, Help, About.
For historians, the first really useable NT system was NT4 (version 4.0)
Then there was Windows 2000 (version 5.0)
Then there was Windows XP (version 5.1)
Windows 3, 3.11, 95, 98 and ME were just GUI front-ends to DOS
NT 3.51 was a better OS than NT4 because it kept the display drivers out of the kernel. The NT4 UI was a port of Windows 95 UI.
Windows 1.0, Windows 2.0 & Windows 386 were shells over DOS, but Windows 3 (on 386) used DOS as the boot loader (the DOS interupts were re-mapped when the processor state was changed)
apart from blatant rip offs of already existing 'stuff' I can't see much to entice users to it.
I had to smile at the bit where it says, 'you pc slows down'.
Can this be true? MS admitting that their OS sucks so much that itself needs a reboot? Te-he....
As for the UI... How is this going to get the corporate buyers interested. The first thing that any half decent company will do will be to disable all access to their application repository. Have they forgotten the pain that their MCSE's etc must go through to learn how to lockdown Windows for a corporate environment. As far as I can see it this is going to be anothe vista at least in the Corporate world.
Grenade. To be shoved up the ... of the MS designers. Don't copy everyone else. Innovate.
We're going to be looking for the usual scenario here. Lack of driver support and the usual comments that it runs really well - until they load all the bloat onto it for the production release. I don't expect to see any serious innovation, they'll just pinch the best ideas for other OS's and then claim it as theirs.
don't fix the root cause of the problem - get around it by wasting another 15gig of space you could really do with (oh and not tell you about it where it is - e.g. really hidden folders etc)!
Sod it. I'll stick with my Ubuntu installation. 3gig install, lightning fast on SSD, lightweight use of system resources and it does not get slower over time (except if I keep adding new stuff), most of the games I barely play work though wine, why do I need to install it as my main OS?
Although Win 8 is still obviously in very early stages of development, why dont MS just concentrate on making their current OS worthwhile???
XP has been around for over 10 years ( i think) and is still used by a high percentage of people, includign most businesses. Reason, its old enough that pretty much all problems have been ironed out! Admitedly after XP a new OS was needed as XP had hit the ceiling in capability, but then to release Visa?
Vista has its problems, way too many, so then they release 7, the all new singing and dancing OS thats basically Vista with all the cr@p remvoed so its actually usable! I have bene using 7 for a while now and havent had any major issues, so why then go back and create awhole new OS, with all tjhe problems this will bring with compatability and drivers, and the enivitable BSOD, when you could just patch 7 for the next 10 years until that hits teh ceiling with capability
MONEY MONEY MONEY! Keep waving that carrot infront of our faces MS, but one day, hopefully, we'll realise we're not donkeys and give a BIG 2 fingers and just acceptt hat Ubuntu is teh way forward
Just my 20 cense anway
Wow, what a wonderful idea! Instead of actually FIXING the problems which cause Windows to slow down let's add yet another BODGE to the system which just makes it appear like we've fixed it! Pretty much the same mindset in use when they "fixed" the corrupted DLLs that plagued earlier versions by storing backups that would get copied back over the in-use versions when they became corrupted, INSTEAD of actually fixing the things that were causing the DLLs to become corrupted in the first place. Pathetic!
On the subject fo System Reset and your opinion that that's the 'Microsoft Way', how about the OEM's who think it's funny to add 'Just Enough RAM' and fully populate the slots with smaller sticks so your machine starts to crawl once you install 3 apps.
Plus, Microsoft have started selling PC's without all the OEM crap on in the first place 'cause they understand it's a problem.
Whenever I see a Windows PC at a crawl, it's usually got very little to do with Microsoft and more to do with TSR applications installed by Apple, Googe, Dell, HP, Toshiba etc.
Expand the system tray and you'll find plenty of evidence for a machine running slowly and most of it has nothing to do with Microsoft.
Agreed, they're copycats, but disagree slow Windows boxes are much to do with MS.
You do realise that not all software for Linux is FOSS? There is a fair amount of COTS, ie: You have to pay for it - it's available on a disk or from the vendor web site.
There is also a whole load of software for Linux which isn't available from repos, some of it you even have to compile yourself.
You may also want to, bear in mind that MS Windows is the largest platform for free software and FOSS, be there an 'app store' or not.
You morons finally got to me.
Even if you have a Ferrari, if you load the trunk brimming with shit, it will slow it down.
The Lobotomize Me! button is perfect for all computer morons including family members who just don't deserve proper tech support and don't want education. When you have to support 90%+ of the world, yeah, there's a lot of stuff that has to be in there to account for that 90%+.
I love the fact that most posters here are computer literate. Yet, they yap like the worst morons/degenerate teens about Microsoft. Showing to all, their complete lack of understanding of basic business and software rules in the real world.
You remember the peasants in the movies that just mob around the poor bastard being roasted on a stick in the Dark Ages and just cheered wildly without having clues about what's really going on?
That's you, Morons.
> Microsoft's webOS luvvin' partner HP is among the PC manufacturers getting copies of early Windows 8 code, according to reports.
They're not getting copies of the code, they're getting copies of the executables. Releasing code to the 'partners' would be equivalent to communism ..
> According to leaked screen shots on different sites, something called History Vault, which is described to be analogous to Mac OS X's Time Machine for back up.
Haaaa .. and Steve Jobs went forward in time and stole the History Vault from Microsoft.
> There's also a system-reset feature that'll let you reset your machine and retain your data once that inevitable day comes, often very soon, that your Windows PC starts slowing to a crawl.
That should be retain user data, something that's been availabe on Linux machines for decades. User files being stored on a seperate partition under the /home directory. Besides, system-reset sound a lot like the Lenovo One-Button-Restore. I also recall on earlier Windows versions creating a D: drive on a seperate partition and storing Documents-And-Settings there. That we have to wait till 2011 for such 'innovations' merely serves to demonstrate the total stagnation and lack of innovation on the desktop. And finally the 'PC starts slowing to a crawl' feature is only available on the Windows platform, something you never see on the Linux/Mac platform.
They probably aren't getting the code - yet - but MS partners pretty much all get access to the source and have done for about eight years.
The reason that MS haven't had something exactly like Time Machine is because they have been using VSS to provide snapshots but VSS is an elective point in time system. History Vault is just the logical next step for VSS' development.
Just because people put their files onto the system disk, doesn't mean that this is how you should do it. You can't blame MS for people's inability to properly configure their software, both Windows and Linux installers will allow you to create one large C: or / file system and be happy about it.
As for Linux and Mac not slowing down over time, as a user of Win/Lin/Mac, I beg to differ.
Win 3X in standard mode is a GUI for DOS. Standard mode is a VCPI client, otherwise it runs as a DPMI server. Non standard mode have 32 disk access, and later vfat 32 bit file access. Windows 95 could use dos mode disk access, but for the most part it used DOS as a spring board and not just a pretty face for DOS. Each version of Windows trapped more of DOS and emulated LPT, COM, etc. through Windows drivers.
Much more than a GUI. Non-DOS drivers, file and memory management, and virtualized/emulated DOS environment.
That steaming pile of dog poo that makes the system slow down as it gets bigger.
That shit hole where every app you install sticks piles of crap.
That POS that is a single Point of failure for the whole kaboodle.
Yeah, I don't think much of Windows. I gave up when Vists,"Let the Wow Begin" hit the streets.
Unless they can give me a mode that says to the OS, 'I'm the boss around here. The don't get in the way at all. Keep all that 'Are you sure you want to do thiis' crap to yourself. Unless they do that, I'm staying well clear of any Windows OS.
You're either a Troll, or someone who has no idea about Windows, but:
The Registry no more makes the system slow down than scattering conf files all over the root filesystem. In fact the registry is a fully journalled relational database, stores in a very few files (which are all mirrored and on separate disk geometry), which means it's a much better candidate for cacheing than a whole load of conf files.
Conf files are good for some things, the registry is good for others. Personally I like having a single go-to point for my settings. I like being able to change a remote registry, without having to logon via a command line and navigate a filesystem. I like the ACLs, which enable me to allow certain users access to individual settings which others don't - you can't do that with a conf file, it's either everything or nothing, for each file. I like being able to backup the who system settings with a VSS writer, into a single file. I also like being able to write a .reg file in a text editor that can be distributed to other systems to modify their registry.
"Are Microsoft going to resolve the embarrassing little problem of Windows 7 being version 6.1?"
Are you really of the mindset that versioning an OS internally to not break every preexisting app under the sun is a terrible "embarrassment" ? That's a little shallow I think. Applications don't watch TV or see billboards to gain an understand of what marketing has decided to call their operating system.
I believe the total number of people embarrassed by this dynamic, including Dave Cutler, now stands at ONE. Enjoy your fame, donut.
How much does it cost a Windows user to keep a machine's OS up to date without replacing the hardware?
OSX - about $30 per update, comes out every 1.5-2 yrs. hardware is $600 and up and easily $1000+. Old PPC hardware?
Linux = free, frequency depends on distribution. hardware is cheap, say $300 and up.
Windows - hardware is also cheap, but a non-OEM unencumbered license is $250+ in the pro line (not OEM, not Upgrade, just 1 "free to use" license).
Frequency - used to be 2-4 yrs, with significant enhancements. Now, if Win 8 follows right on the heels of Win 7, do you really expect to have $250's worth of stable OS enhancement? Not by judging the recent track record.
XP = > Vista, long time, little stability, but lots of change.
Vista => Win 7, short time, good stability, little change.
Win 7 => Win 8, short time? stability? enhancements?
One more reason why XP was one of MS's better efforts - I used it for a number of years.
I do not have high hopes for this OS. Windows 7 is most agreeable if you have reasonably modern hardware. Windows XP has become the OS standard.
I am getting sick and tired of your releases. I am firmly of the opinion that if you released really good, well-tested, feature-rich and intuitive software every 5 or so years, that your customers would upgrade as a matter of course. It would tie nicely with the hardware upgrade.
It would give people a chance to get fully used to all that your software can do. It would give you a chance to test your software very thoroughly and possibly allow you to come up with ideas that haven't been copied from Apple or Google.
If you need an example of how this has worked, just look at SQL Server 2005 or Windows XP.
BTW, have you decided what big cat you will be naming Windows 8 after?
Now, I realise that car analogies rarely work, but:
My car is ten years old, it has less horsepower now than when new. I could take the engine apart and rebuild it, check and clean each sparkplug, the rods, pistons, bearings, etc. etc. but I don't know how, I don't have enough time to learn and I don't really care. If only my car had a big 'reset' button.
You have to remember that for 99% of computer users, they have no interest in what goes on under the hood, they just don't care and nor should they. They will install anything that they need at the time, regardless of who wrote or distributed it and let their system gather crufy. They will however, be bothered that their machines slow down, the usual method of dealing with this is to buy another computer. With a 'Reset OS' button, they can get their computer back to 'as new' with no technical knowledge, they save a bucketload of cash and everyone is happy.
For as long as backwards-compatibility is a strategic driver for "development", Windows will be a rag-bag of insecure, poorly-written crap... end of.
The way that Microsoft keeps re-processing old versions of their OS to turn out a "new" version every so often reminds me of the way that, in the film of the same name, Soylent Green was the food made out of re-processed dead people to feed the living ones... probably more so because both processes have the same inevitable long-term outcome...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019