Start8 and ModernMix -- Windows 8's last, best hope for normality

DeaconFrost said:

Night Hawk said:

"Frightmare Alley"

I can't help but smile at comments like this. For the record, I still love Windows 7, and run it on several of my systems. But Windows 8 (with one of the many Start Menu replacements installed) is just a faster and supposedly more secure version of Windows 7. The fact so many people bash Windows 8 is mind-blowing. In many cases, I can easily say it doesn't justify the cost to upgrade, and Windows 7 does work very well, but I don't get why people have to go the extra mile and bash it.

I use Startisback, and there is very little difference between Windows 7 and Windows 8 for me. My boot times are faster (not really important), and according to the various gaming sites I read, game performance is slightly higher with Windows 8. I also enjoy some of the newer features, like the more functional Task Manager. I could care less about the Start Screen, and couldn't tell you the last time I've looked at it. I've uninstalled many of those apps, added in some useful ones, and I'm quite enjoying the two systems it's running on.

It's time for rational thinking to prevail, and for people to realize we have two quality choices for Windows OSes, and that there is nothing to be gained, and no merit behind bickering about the two.

You should notice a faster boot time since MS stripped away half of the features like the Media Center to make the MinWin lighter. That would also expect to be improved after 7 first brought it in once realizing Vista was Windows grown too big. Yet I never bashed Vista!

But as far as usability that will depend on what you need to see in a particular version. MS stripped out things I use regularly on Windows up until 7 and now will no longer see with 3rd part intervention? And it isn't "just the Start screen and Modern" as to why I likely won't be doing much with 8. It simply won't suit as a second OS here despite being newer as 7 would have been to Vista when bringing in a better Windows to start with. Everything works with 7 while 8 lacks!

While running the CP and RP builds it didn't take much to size up the latest. It is to simply bash 8? I wouldn't waste the time since someone will do that for me regardless of what new version comes out as well as how good or bad the latest is or isn't. Someone will always be there to find fault!

Vista proved to be a much more reliable OS then XP ever thought of being but was bashed into the ground as a general practice. So who is to say 8 isn't the right OS for some people? On the other hand it will simply be a harder sell to the majority who now see an OS that looks like it was trashed in favor of Tablet/Phone abandoning the traditional desktop concepts people would be expecting to see.

What that means despite how much you may like 8 the next person will simple be shaking their head and not want to bother! It won't matter what improvements were made at the core level since most never look there to begin with! Only the technically inclined users will pick an OS apart for dissection purposes!

DeaconFrost said:

It's not selling for two reasons. First, the new PC market is down, so overall PC sales are down.

boohbah said:

lets not forget that the economic climate is not brilliant, people dont want to buy new hardware or software when they dont need it unless they can afford it and want it, also businesses are after a long period moving to 7 eventually they will move to 8 or depending on their economics wait a while.

People didn't buy it when MS was "giving it away" ($20 -$40).

If W8 was a big of an improvement over W7, as W7 was over Vista, I think that people would have flocked to it (especially for $20).

I never installed Vista on my PC, but I had to use it on various training courses.
It was OK, but I wouldn't have swapped from XP to it (even if it would have run on my PC).
The W7 betas had no problems running on that PC.

Night Hawk said:

Vista proved to be a much more reliable OS then XP ever thought of being but was bashed into the ground as a general practice.

My XP problems mysteriously vanished as soon as I stopped using IE6.

Indianatone said:

I have Classic Shell on 8 and have put the start button back to the Windows 7 style with a plain desktop. If it was that great why is it not selling?
People don't want it who use it for working.

I agree Indiana. The reason it's not selling isn't because of a bunch of lame excuses, it's because people don't like it.
BTW, I see you've actually TRIED W8 and still don't like it?? Imagine that. You're not alone Indiana. I've seen it, tried it, it's unattractive and works like a tablet.

If M$ said we had to use a mouse for a phone or tablet, the mobile crowd would be screaming in disbelief. But now since it's the other way around, the W8 fans think it's OK.

Someone mentioned "Balance" in an earlier post, well where's the balance in that? All we got was a tablet UI shoved down our throat with no choice in the matter.

All they had to do was offer a built-in choice of desktop or tablet interface, and W8 would've done just fine, and everyone would've been happy. THAT would be "balance".

Seems to me the party who is "defying logic" is Microsoft.

lehnerus2000 said:

DeaconFrost said:

It's not selling for two reasons. First, the new PC market is down, so overall PC sales are down.

boohbah said:

lets not forget that the economic climate is not brilliant, people dont want to buy new hardware or software when they dont need it unless they can afford it and want it, also businesses are after a long period moving to 7 eventually they will move to 8 or depending on their economics wait a while.

People didn't buy it when MS was "giving it away" ($20 -$40).

If W8 was a big of an improvement over W7, as W7 was over Vista, I think that people would have flocked to it (especially for $20).

I never installed Vista on my PC, but I had to use it on various training courses.
It was OK, but I wouldn't have swapped from XP to it (even if it would have run on my PC).
The W7 betas had no problems running on that PC.

Night Hawk said:

Vista proved to be a much more reliable OS then XP ever thought of being but was bashed into the ground as a general practice.

My XP problems mysteriously vanished as soon as I stopped using IE6.

IE 7 came out before Vista's launch while many had already flocked in droves to FireFox or another browser. IE 6 was so full of security holes no one wanted it back then!

As far as Windows 7 that has proved itself time and again that it was a major improvement period over any other version as far as the desktop is concerned. Vista was in fact better made then XP ever thought of being with MS lagging well behind in getting the fixes out for the old version until 7 was almost ready to launch with SP3.

Vista while grown in size and still not quite enough however was able to recover the desktop due to improved crash control when a program locked while XP typically saw a forced hard boot. The 32bit Vista however sadly lacked in backward compatibility on many while 7 was often to be able to run old XP apps and drivers alike without the need for the "run as admin" or compatibility mode options.

One of the main reasons for that was 7 bringing back in Fat support since the flash drives, external HDs with exFat, digital cameras, cell phones with cameras and memory cards all saw Fat as default while Vista needed an app to be able to read any Fat volume. MS realized they had made a mistake nuking Fat support out of Vista soon enough!

There is one thing 8 would be better over if you had only two choices however when going to buy a notebook criteria 1982-83 and 2013 30yrs. later. I don't think anyone would choose not to get an 8 notebook if there had been nothing in between the 8 notebook you are confronted with on a retail shelf presently and ...



That had a small lcd screen as well as the latest MS intent on reducing the actual size of their new 8 tablets! New Windows 8 hardware specs hint at 7-inch tablets and a Microsoft Reader | ZDNet

Now for those that say they don't mind sitting in front of a small screen when someone is discussing prefering 7 on a desktop they might to try looking at an even smaller 4" viewable! That's where you had to "type in commands" in order to program a small app manually! just to see it run on a large scientific calculator sized display back then.

Gee that was self contained with it's own "ticker tape" printer. You could also swap out or slide off the microcassette tape drive to add a tiny rom or ram module there as well as attached a longer on the left side back in those days! So yes running 8 would be a step forward by giant leaps.

Compared to 7 on other hand? 8 makes the novie feel like they are trying to learn how to run that classic museum piece in the photo there! Plus MS decides to strip out things like WMP codecs and Media Center to lighten things up and sell the new stripped down OS with what? A tablet touch and swipe gui on the desktop editions?

While anyone can say the economy is now only slowly recovering and people are holding onto the do re' me being uncertain about things MS pulls a fast one and people are supposed to jump and say "this is so much better then..." then what?

Towards the time Vista should have originally been released if it had been on schedule not delayed XP saw new life with the 2005 x64 Pro for the first 64bit Desktop version plus the XP MCEdition as well as WMP 10 bringing in video and dvd play capabilities. MS has now stripped those out so you end up with less then XP had to offer 8yrs. ago!

Take a giant leap... Backwards and love it? 7 was progress while 8 is something else! Anyone can make it run but you now have to gather up all that 3rd party stuff like ModernMix as well as some form of Start menu>All Programs app you add onto 8. The low price was simply the end result of MS chipping away at the desktop OS and you get what you pay for when seeing a low $20-$40 introductory offer.

Now some people were still on the job at MS since 8 brings in a new look for the task manager where it now looks more like some benchmarking program and the new Lock screen that pulls up like a window(s) shade. Certain development teams still work on the desktop platform to come up with new things while someone at Tablet took over the Desktop gui dept. apparently.

Gary said:

boohbah said:

i would have stayed with 7 on the old laptop i had, however it died.

8 was pre installed on my new laptop, i gave it a chance and i like it, seems silly and expensive to buy a new laptop and then buy 7 without giving 8 a chance, i have used 7 for a number of years and i'm enjoying the freshness of a new OS.

personally i dont care what your opinions of 8 are you are entitled to them, as am i.
it is getting boring reading endless threads and posts about how crap windows 8 is when that is subjective.
the reason i posted is to address the balance. im sure people dont give two hoots as to my opinion and im not trying to force it upon them or convince them to like it because i do
all i would say to anyone who has not tried it yet is give it a chance, form your own opinions based on your own experience
dont let people persuade you otherwise.

I understand, as I posted earlier sometimes I wish I had gotten the $39.00 upgrade when it was available. I never said it was crap I said it was fugly meaning that I do not care for the Metro look. From what I have seen Windows Blue is supposed to make it look better. I did use Windows 8 for awhile and I just saw nothing in it that I liked. I know it is silly to purchase Windows 7 on an OEM that came with Win 8 but people are doing it. I , at this point in my life would not. Good luck with it.:)

i was generalizing about the endless posts and threads slamming 8, not just on this forum, on the internet in general.
its become really boring.
given that 8 is based on the 7 structure then i dont see how folks can have too much of a problem with usage,
i understand they may dislike the look and feel of it but i dont think it warrants the hate that is going around.
reminds me of die hard XP users.

vvcmarttech said:

If users would adapt to change and learn the win key short cuts they would see Win 8 is easier and faster to manage. Win 8 will survive if the business community can find a place for it in its offices. You can remove tablet, touch screen features as I said before. I don't find much merit into the gamer or Facebook user argument that it sucks because your having a hard time learning to navigate it.

Why should we? If we don't like it, we don't buy it. If you don't like Haggis you don't buy it. The market is speaking. The 8 crowd come out with lame excuses about we should do this we should do that. This is a free market if we don't like it we are not buying into it. Windows 7 fits my needs perfectly. Windows 8 which I have a copy of does not. I don't like it simple as that. You like it fine, good for you but telling me I should waste good money and time doing this that and the other to do the same as I already can do in a superior environment does not cut the mustard.

of Course the desire to make an OS look the same as it used to be isn't new as Here