New
#11
No don't plan,windows 7 does everything I want it to do and win 8 UI is a disaster imho but hey that's just me.
No don't plan,windows 7 does everything I want it to do and win 8 UI is a disaster imho but hey that's just me.
I'm not upgrading unless they give the option to not use the metro interface. And still, I'm not even sure I would upgrade. Even if the start menu is gone, I found from using Fedora for a while that I actually like just tapping the mouse on the corners of the screen to get the menus, except the way it's made in Fedora is a hell of a lot better than the way they made it Windows 8. All the menus should be in one place like we're used to with the start menu, but doesn't need to be in an actual start menu.
I think I'll be sticking with Windows 7 for now. Windows 8 looks nice and everything, but I think I'd prefer upgrading to it once it's a bit cheaper
Wow, quite a strong turn out for those in favor of sticking with W7. It has been my intention to upgrade to W7 eventually and I think I'll stick to the plan. :)
I will not be upgrading. I have given all the Previews an extensive workout, and they offer me nothing. I think MS is stupid not to offer a no-Metro "experience" (gack!)
I have worked with it enough to know I could live with it if I had to, but I don't have to. If my next computer comes with it preinstalled, there's always ClassicShell
Bottom line, I'm a desktop user, I write a lot, etc., and Metro is utterly worthless to me. I mean, have you even tried the "apps" (gack!)? Just brain dead.
But fine - if MS feels the need to offer something in the mobile/touchy-feely department, I'm cool with that. But I don't want it. And now, they're even dumbing down the "Desktop Experience", with simple nothing-themes.
Sorry, I'm not going there. I have a feeling that Windows 7 is going to be the next XP in terms of support longevity. At least I hope so. Heck, I happily used Windows 2000 until 2008!
No. I can't stand Metro. Very foolish. Fine for phone or pad, not for a desktop or notebook computer.
Am not going to upgrade, Windows Vista was at best acceptable and tolerable but Windows 7 was a completely different and yet very similar. As metro was introduced I haven't warmed to Windows 8 like I did to Windows 7, it doesn't seem as nice and clear and a bit too cluttered and chunky for my taste.
I hope Microsoft go back a step and embed the default explorer and start menu and an option to enable Metro if you wish. Well my experience with Windows 8 hasn't been good enough to convince me that I need to run off and buy it like I did with XP and Windows 7
Apparently they're going to make it so you can't install a Linux Distro in a dual boot configuration... I guess it's a no-no for me when it comes to Win 8.
Secure boot can be disabled in the BIOS, and any vendor can get a license from Verisign for a small fee (see Red Hat) if you wish to install a distro that can use the added security to the boot process. ARM will probably be a different story, but those are sold as "devices" rather than PCs, so I suppose that's expected.
It's worth noting that Secure Boot is a UEFI feature, and not something Microsoft is actually designing or forcing on anyone (although OEMs shipping Windows machines with UEFI support will be enabling it to begin with, for obvious security reasons). If you want to use the Secure Boot feature, you MUST be booting with a signed (with a trusted public certificate key) bootstrap or kernel. If you don't want to require Secure Boot on your box to boot to any unsigned OS, simply turn it off. If a machine supports UEFI 2.3.1 (and anything with a Windows 8 logo is supposed to, according to the Building Win8 blog), it should support Secure Boot. Any hardware (x86) that doesn't allow it to be disabled is likely to put itself at a disadvantage as people won't purchase it, so I doubt we'll see any OEMs shipping 2.3.1 firmware without a "kill switch" for those people wanting to disable it.
Short answer is No. Will wait as usual till it's SP1 is released and I have read the reviews by Gurus and Lay-users