Windows 8 "Release Preview" Released

The thing about Classic Shell is that it is completely customisable and skinnable so you can have what you want in it. It is also completely free. You don't have to pony up to get the full features.

That's another thing right there to consider. When opening up the configuration screen you see two rows of tabs for everything like the Start menu as well as column size all packaged together.

The ViStart's Start8, StartMenu7, and others that will likely come along all have a paid for full version apart from the freebie most run into. The problem of course with the more to come is some will be nothing more then gmic ware for sale.

^ @ Jimbo: I understand that you can use the classic RDP client. I'm just baffled as to the "need" of having metro based versions of these applications. It just seems to be a desire to have the OS running just like tablets and smartphones. For those who like this format, I guess it's an improvement. For those of us, using Windows for over 20 years and are used to the way that our desktops have always worked, this seems like a huge step backwards.

With respect to all of the "classic shell" stuff, I guess I am just confused as to why it's advantageous to spend all of this time and effort to rework Windows 8 to work as we want, when we already have Windows 7 which is more or less working as we want already. Out of principal, I don't see the need to pay Microsoft additional funds for a new product that doesn't remotely work the way that I want it to. I would rather not support the product, have their numbers go down and then they can reconsider the direction they are going with the product. Perhaps if I had found any functionality that really worked a ton better or make me more efficient I would feel differently, but I've yet to find any real solid benefits of Windows 8. Anybody want to fill me in on anything I am missing that is far superior?

pparks1 said:

^ @ Jimbo: I understand that you can use the classic RDP client. I'm just baffled as to the "need" of having metro based versions of these applications. It just seems to be a desire to have the OS running just like tablets and smartphones. For those who like this format, I guess it's an improvement. For those of us, using Windows for over 20 years and are used to the way that our desktops have always worked, this seems like a huge step backwards.

With respect to all of the "classic shell" stuff, I guess I am just confused as to why it's advantageous to spend all of this time and effort to rework Windows 8 to work as we want, when we already have Windows 7 which is more or less working as we want already. Out of principal, I don't see the need to pay Microsoft additional funds for a new product that doesn't remotely work the way that I want it to. I would rather not support the product, have their numbers go down and then they can reconsider the direction they are going with the product. Perhaps if I had found any functionality that really worked a ton better or make me more efficient I would feel differently, but I've yet to find any real solid benefits of Windows 8. Anybody want to fill me in on anything I am missing that is far superior?

No. I doubt if I will upgrade either. I was just offering an alternative solution.

It just seems like the world is spending quite a bit of time trying to make this a usable product. Like I said, if there were 10 massive improvements and just the Metro interface to work around, it might be worth it. But I'm struggling to find those other massive improvements to make the effort worthwhile. Perhaps if I had a Windows based tablet I would feel different, but I don't have one and I don't expect to be getting one anytime soon. My current Android tablet does what I need and it's only useful for a few different things. For everything else I do, I immediately put down the tablet and pick up my laptop or use my desktop. These are just far more functional and efficient devices for me.

I'm perfectly content with skipping a release and don't feel compelled to have to use the latest and "greatest". Just because MS says it's awesome and expects i will love it, doesn't mean that I will.

My problem is that I will probably want to get a new PC in a years time and I guess that will have W8 pre-loaded. I don't see why I should have to pay again to get an OS I can use.

As someone else pointed out, if they are trying to incorporate your desktop with your smartphone and tablet to have a complete Windows experience, they are missing one thing..... sales of the later two. I, like the previous poster have seen the windows phones at the store, but have yet to see or know anyone who has them. I have an Android, i have flashed so many ROMs on it I lost count, total cost was $0 for this. My Nook Color runs CM7 Android and has become a full blown tablet, cost for this was $20 for the SD card. What will MS charge me (cause you know it won't be free) for the ARM based version to run on my phone or my Nook, or is it even going to be available for me to download like that. Then I have to pay to upgrade my PC to have the whole "experience". No thanks didn't like it when I tried it and don't want it on everything I own.

I am more excited to see the Ubuntu phone than I am for this. At least with it I can plug the phone in and have a complete working desktop or carry it as a phone and still have all my files and a full OS right there. I have read it will be avaible for $0 to download and add to any device that is ARM based. With the amount of DEVs that work on this kind of thing, and MS keeping things closed source, i think it will see more light than this MS mistake.

What I am getting at is this idea has already been done and better by the like of Google (android) and Apple. Now the open source community is jumping in. MS once again is late to the party, and they brought some really bad and boring chip dip.

Geeve

*This is my opinion of course