Windows 8.1 is So Silky and Smooth

vbimport

#1

:bow:

:iagree:

:clap:

:bigsmile:


#2

Really I heard other reports would despute those claims…and not from this site…


#3

I really like 8.1 although I do not have most of my programs downloaded to it yet, it seem a bit faster and much easier to navigate, I have to say I like it.


#4

Another endorsement for Windows 8.1.
Using Stardock’s Start8.

Positive so far.


#5

[QUOTE=Nemesys;2706268]Another endorsement for Windows 8.1.
[/QUOTE]

I 2nd that!:bigsmile:
But with Classic StartMenu instead…:slight_smile:


#6

I haven’t noticed much difference to tell the truth. Using Start is Back, so most of the new UI changes don’t mean much to me.


#7

[QUOTE=Kerry56;2706274]I haven’t noticed much difference to tell the truth. Using Start is Back, so most of the new UI changes don’t mean much to me.[/QUOTE]

I couldn’t feel there’s any difference regarding speed between XP, 7, and 8. Windows 3.1 was better for navigation than NCD for MS-DOS. OS/2 was a lot more powerful than Windows 3.1. Windows 98 SE was far more mature than Windows 95. Windows 2000 was stable and fast, no more need for Windows 98 SE except for making booting CD.

Since around the introduction of Windows Vista, people has experimented with various SSD as booting drive made of DDR-SDRAM (not even DDR 2), SLC NAND, MLC NAND, TLC NAND… and some hybrid drives like Apple’s Fusion Drive. Only time I felt need for speed was when I was trying to display hundreds of high-quality image files at once, or PDF files with such images, or when I was encoding video and audio for transmission over messenger or email since I preferred integrated graphics (just like the one built into Haswell G3220 inside this PC) to discrete graphics.

Metro UI was always the first thing that prevented me again and again from switching to 8 for the past two years or so. There have been some incompatibilities especially with some banking and other applications that are only used in South Korea. But I find 8 easier and better than 7. It’s much like the transition from 3.x, OS/2, NT 3.x to 95. User resistance was far more widespread than than now against 8, but it was far worse in East Asia where Bill Gates was clearly regarded the worst enemy to the independence of South Korea and national integrity of China. I am reluctant to go back to 7 not necessarily because 8 is faster than 7, but more because I feel better with the existence of the added “app” marketplace, several new features, and the overall modernity and being the latest.

Updating to 8.1 makes 3200 x 1800 screens look a little better as well. Soon, the market will be flooded (well, not exactly since the initial yield rate will stay extremely low) with 3840 x 2160 panels of all form factors - 12.1-inch from JDI, 23.8-inch from LG Display, 31.5-inch from Sharp, and so on. BTW, I sold all 30-inch 2560 x 1600 (bought in 2007) and 27-inch 2560 x 1440 (bought in 2011 - 2012) monitors already as it’s about time to move to better ones.

The full-packaged Windows 8.1 costs about US$300 in South Korea, a bit cheaper than what I paid for 7.


#8

Windows 8.1 runs excellent for me I left windows 7 behind I don’t use the metro apps and I installed start 8 and I am very happy M$ made some nice changes as far as upgrading the OS from windows 8 which should have been done when MS first released windows 8.

It is very nice to see they offer it retail now too instead of an upgrade or oem $199.00 USD much cheaper than windows 7 ultimate retail.

windows 8/8.1 you either love it or hate it seems to be the verdict so far about 50% love it the other 50% hate it.

I like it and it is my primary OS now but I do have window 7 image backed up so I can install it in a few minutes.:slight_smile:


#9

This is what I find most odd user wanting 8.1 but installing 3rd party software to get W7 start menu? This to me tells alot W8 never fully transitioned users properly and probably won’t in the near term. Why use a W7 start menu if one wants to use W8 to start with?? That is such a ironic usage of the O/S itself.


#10

I don’t use any start menu replacement, as I rarely ever used the start menu in Win7.
There are many reasons why people upgraded to Win8.

Loads of under the hood improvements.
Native support for new hardware, such as Intel native USB3 with UASP support.
Win8 has better memory management, it runs better with less RAM when compared to any previous Windows version from Vista onwards.
‘TRIM on demand’ for SSD users.

Add to that, some people just like Windows 8 better.


#11

[QUOTE=coolcolors;2706473]This is what I find most odd user wanting 8.1 but installing 3rd party software to get W7 start menu? [/QUOTE]

It’s called “customization”…:bigsmile:
Remember the XP era with UXthemepatcher,Stardock’s ObjectDesktop and windowBlinds…???
People like to fiddle with things to make them look and work like they want…:bigsmile:


#12

I always used the Start menu in Windows 9x, XP, 2000, and 7. But I liked Windows 3.1’s Program Manager and MS-DOS’s MDIR.exe (third-party tool most of whose users were Koreans, similar to what NCD did but far more practical) much more.

The way Windows 8 displays shortcuts for “apps” and other things is much like what iOS and Android used. The reason Steve Jobs wanted such an UI was mostly because of very limited display resolution and the low-cost mass availability of multipoint touch screen. It’s unfortunate why Microsoft should have created Metro UI after looking years into both their own Windows and iOS. It’s supposed to be the best of both worlds, but it’s not. Next iterations of Surface and Ativ will somehow make it more useful and really modern.


#13

[QUOTE=roadworker;2706506]It’s called “customization”…:bigsmile:
Remember the XP era with UXthemepatcher,Stardock’s ObjectDesktop and windowBlinds…???
People like to fiddle with things to make them look and work like they want…:bigsmile:[/QUOTE]

But one forgets those came with a working start menu already this is about why if it was so good Metro UI why use or make a start menu again. It’s like they like the future but can’t let go of the past…


#14

[QUOTE=Dee;2706476]I don’t use any start menu replacement, as I rarely ever used the start menu in Win7.
There are many reasons why people upgraded to Win8.

Loads of under the hood improvements.
Native support for new hardware, such as Intel native USB3 with UASP support.
Win8 has better memory management, it runs better with less RAM when compared to any previous Windows version from Vista onwards.
‘TRIM on demand’ for SSD users.

Add to that, some people just like Windows 8 better.[/QUOTE]

That is good but I don’t use USB3 or SSD and memory well I don’t have any hits with my current Windows 7 O/S itself. And I run this O/S just perfectly fine on laptops from 2007 - breathing new life into them.


#15

I am patiently waiting for the 9 and half version. :wink:
(With a Kim Basinger free Wallpaper preloaded. That would be silky and smooth).


#16

[QUOTE=coolcolors;2706568]But one forgets those came with a working start menu already this is about why if it was so good Metro UI why use or make a start menu again.[/QUOTE]

Most of the arguments against win 8 are only about the metro ui and the missing start menu,which can be easily fixed… :slight_smile:
But what about the improved system tools and for example,Hyper-V instead of Virtual PCto run virtual OS?
I stand by my point of view…While windows 7 is great,for 39.99 € you can’t get any better windows professional OS than win 8 with free mediacenter and free upgrade to 8.1 :smiley:

[QUOTE=coolcolors;2706568]It’s like they like the future but can’t let go of the past…[/QUOTE]

Sometimes there needs to be a bridge between the past and the future…otherwise there will be a canyon that can’t be crossed over.:wink:


#17

[QUOTE=roadworker;2706659]Most of the arguments against win 8 are only about the metro ui and the missing start menu,which can be easily fixed… :slight_smile:
But what about the improved system tools and for example,Hyper-V instead of Virtual PCto run virtual OS?
I stand by my point of view…While windows 7 is great,for 39.99 € you can’t get any better windows professional OS than win 8 with free mediacenter and free upgrade to 8.1 :D[/QUOTE]

No you missed the point most didn’t want a UI but wanted a option of what UI interface to install not what M$ wanted that is what wasn’t listened to. Those improved tools and from my guess most general users only email/surf the internet or watch video or Skype and most likely will never use or need those features. So to my point all those fancy eye candies will never really be utilized by the masses. Windows 7 isn’t great it was a God send that it should’ve been a O/S that XP should’ve been in the first place. Some forget Windows 7 does and can run a Media center as well so the argument for mediacenter is a mute point. And if that is all that is so great then that’s a very poor showing for lack of a innovative O/S design.

[QUOTE=roadworker;2706659]Sometimes there needs to be a bridge between the past and the future…otherwise there will be a canyon that can’t be crossed over.;)[/QUOTE]
It provide little to much improvements productivity that I need and use. This isn’t a bridge it was a broken bridge to begin with without any teaching users of the new changes or how to navigate it or how to customize it. It was M$ set and that was it-that to me is lack of innovation from the start.


#18

[QUOTE=coolcolors;2706679]…So to my point all those fancy eye candies will never really be utilized by the masses.[/QUOTE]

Wasn’t the biggest - more likely the only - reason for hating Windows 8 it’s designed specifically for the mass rather than the computerist-nerd-enthusiast-specialist minority? Make up your mind.

Are you implying that you prefer an OS that is designed to suit hardware environment of about 10 to 15 years ago? Or, for that matter, which exactly is right and proper and great? Not too soon, but not too late? Not too much, but not too little? Not too fast, but not too slow?


#19

[QUOTE=Kenshin;2706730]Wasn’t the biggest - more likely the only - reason for hating Windows 8 it’s designed specifically for the mass rather than the computerist-nerd-enthusiast-specialist minority? Make up your mind.[/QUOTE]

Again points missed…it isn’t for the mass more like trying to be Apple and not winning at that game. It’s not made for computer enthusiast it was to make more money for the bottom line. And where did I say I was hating of Windows 8…if you forget if it wasn’t for Windows becoming a GUI you and everyone on here would be using MS-DOS prompt for all your work. This is the line someone uses calling others haters when they know little to why others are saying what they are saying.

[QUOTE=Kenshin;2706730]Are you implying that you prefer an OS that is designed to suit hardware environment of about 10 to 15 years ago? Or, for that matter, which exactly is right and proper and great? Not too soon, but not too late? Not too much, but not too little? Not too fast, but not too slow?[/QUOTE]

This is the very exact arguments used when one doesn’t have a reasonable reply back with no real meaning discussion to give a repy to.


#20

[QUOTE=coolcolors;2706756]Again points missed…it isn’t for the mass more like trying to be Apple and not winning at that game. It’s not made for computer enthusiast it was to make more money for the bottom line. And where did I say I was hating of Windows 8…if you forget if it wasn’t for Windows becoming a GUI you and everyone on here would be using MS-DOS prompt for all your work. This is the line someone uses calling others haters when they know little to why others are saying what they are saying.

This is the very exact arguments used when one doesn’t have a reasonable reply back with no real meaning discussion to give a repy to.[/QUOTE]

None of what I said in the previous post had anything to do with argument or discussion, and surely there was no Windows 8 thread on MyCE ever discussing anything, but just meant to encourage you to make up your mind.

You just don’t know what to hate.