Windows 8 and Gaming

[Karoht]

I purposely stayed away from Windows Vista and Win7 until I absolutely HAD no choice to upgrade away from Windows XP.
I've yet to run into any issues with Win7 and gaming thus far, which is good.
I was wondering about Win8 though. I have a friend offering it to me for cheap. Dirt cheap. But I'm wondering about gaming and compatibility thus far.
Anyone run into any problems specifically surrounding Win8 in their gaming?

[Iskandar]

If you want my opinion, I wouldn't bother upgrading. Windows 7 is a mature, stable, mostly bug free gaming platform, and is guaranteed compatible with current games and, more over than not, any games released in the next three or more years. Game companies tend to resist making their games non-backward compatible with the last generation of Windows to avoid splitting their potential customer base.

Leaving personal opinions aside, Windows 8 is a brand new OS. If you look at Microsoft's past track record, it takes a bit, and usually a service pack or two, to shake the bugs out of each new release. And if you have any games that go back more than a generation or two, compatibility can become an issue.

Also, and this is more of a personal observation, look at the cycle of Microsoft's OSs. Whenever Microsoft decides to do something new, it usually takes them a generation or two to get it right. Windows 8 is a brand new step, and I suspect it will be a repeat of Windows Vista or, worse, Windows ME.

[Avilan the Grey]

I think in theory there is no issue with what you are asking.

However the design of the UI as such is... HORRRRIBLLEEE!!!!! If you don't haev a touch screen on your computer, don't upgrade. It's that simple.
Personally I hope this operating system goes the way of Windows ME as soon as possible.

[Zen Master]

What I really want to know is - why would I sit close enough to my screen that I can conveniently touch it?

[Avilan the Grey]

What I really want to know is - why would I sit close enough to my screen that I can conveniently touch it?

Because you are using a touchpad? Right? Everyone uses them. Microsoft has decided that you are not using a desktop or laptop. Listen to the overlord.

[Karoht]

1-I sit within arms reach of my monitor. To be honest, it's time to upgrade that anyway. I'll consider an upgrade to a touchscreen. I may run a dual monitor setup in future. Or just use my current monitor as a starting point to build my streaming box.
2-I liked Windows ME. Though I can't remember why I liked it. When I was in college they gave us laptops, all of them had ME on them. I was familiar and comfortable with Win98 and Win2000, ME was fine by my standards. But then again, my standards weren't all that high back then.
3-To counterpoint #2, my laptop was the only one out of the entire class of 60 that never registered a single issue. So maybe I was just lucky.

[Psyren]

Upgrade. Now. DO IT!

My fps in WoW went from 40 max to 90 on Ultra. My friend did the same on his Macbook Pro, and experienced a similar increase. It is ridiculously well-optimized. And if you act now, it's only $40 to upgrade (deal ends in January.) So hurry.

[Karoht]

Upgrade. Now. DO IT!

My fps in WoW went from 40 max to 90 on Ultra. My friend did the same on his Macbook Pro, and experienced a similar increase. It is ridiculously well-optimized. And if you act now, it's only $40 to upgrade (deal ends in January.) So hurry.

Huh. That's... compelling.
If my funds are okay through Christmas, that sounds like a plan.

[lesser_minion]

As long as you make sure that you know where to get graphics drivers for your machine (especially if it's a laptop), there shouldn't be any serious problems. Microsoft have an 'upgrade assistant' that will tell you if you have anything on your machine that's likely to not work.

I've played Skyrim, Sins of a Solar Empire, Sword of the Stars II, Elemental: Fallen Enchantress, and Fallout: New Vegas on Windows 8 without issues. Also, while Microsoft claims that it doesn't work, I managed to get the original Unreal Tournament working as well (just choose the OpenGL renderer when it asks).

More recent games should work without problems, and Steam et al. are all available.

As for "don't upgrade unless you're using a touchscreen, it's that simple", that is, quite frankly, total and utter bollocks. The new UI isn't painful (or even difficult) to use with a mouse, it's just different. It's a little weird to use at first, and then it becomes easy. It's no different than adapting to the controls in a video game.

[Karoht]

I'm getting more and more convincing arguements here.
Okay, I'm setting aside the money. Done deal.

Desktop not laptop BTW. So my drivers will be all okay.

As for my laptop, it was on Vista, it's now on 7. It's RAM is really too low to work with it well, so that upgrade might be in the cards too, especially before I convert that to Win8.

[lesser_minion]

Windows 8 should run better on a low-powered machine than Windows 7 did, so upgrading the RAM first might not be necessary.

Also, while I said it wasn't hard to use, Windows 8 does hide quite a bit of the UI, so you might want to check out a guide or a tutorial. For the most part, however, all of the hidden stuff either appears when you move your mouse to one of the corners of the screen or when you right-click.

[Avilan the Grey]

More recent games should work without problems, and Steam et al. are all available.

As for "don't upgrade unless you're using a touchscreen, it's that simple", that is, quite frankly, total and utter bollocks. The new UI isn't painful (or even difficult) to use with a mouse, it's just different. It's a little weird to use at first, and then it becomes easy. It's no different than adapting to the controls in a video game.

Of course there are ethical problems as well; Microsoft is trying to pull an Apple on us and lock the system down too much (certification, apps, etc etc). Also, please note that Steam is not certified for Win 8 (their choice), they don't agree with Microsoft's new policies.

On top of this the new UI is a matter of opinion of course. Most non-professional reviews I have seen (as in actual normal windows-users) can be summed up as ranging from "Only if I have to" to "Are they TRYING to make us buy Macs???" with most on the latter end of the scale.

Edit: For those interested, it seems the price for Windows 8 is roughly twice as high in Sweden as in the states. For some reason.

[lesser_minion]

Of course there are ethical problems as well; Microsoft is trying to pull an Apple on us and lock the system down too much (certification, apps, etc etc). Also, please note that Steam is not certified for Win 8 (their choice), they don't agree with Microsoft's now policies.

Yes, metro-style apps have to be certified and are only available through the Windows store. And yes, Microsoft have probably been looking at Apple's various app stores with dollar signs in their eyes.

That doesn't mean that there's anything unethical going on. You're completely free not to use windows store apps, and let's face it, if app stores were unethical then why would we even use Steam?


On top of this the new UI is a matter of opinion of course. Most non-professional reviews I have seen (as in actual normal windows-users) can be summed up as ranging from "Only if I have to" to "Are they TRYING to make us buy Macs???" with most on the latter end of the scale.

Have you tried it yourself?

It's different. You should be familiar enough with the internet already to know that that's considered reason enough by some people to scream about how it's ruined forever.

Not liking the new UI -- even if it's only for being different -- I can understand and sympathise with. But the new UI is a far cry from being horrible or hard to use, and Microsoft certainly haven't assumed that everyone's using a touch screen or tried to force touch screens down anyone's throats.

[Avilan the Grey]

Have you tried it yourself?

It's different. You should be familiar enough with the internet already to know that that's considered reason enough by some people to scream about how it's ruined forever.

Not liking the new UI -- even if it's only for being different -- I can understand and sympathise with. But the new UI is a far cry from being horrible or hard to use, and Microsoft certainly haven't assumed that everyone's using a touch screen or tried to force touch screens down anyone's throats.

I have only played with it for a total of 20 minutes, and spent all 20 minutes frustrated beyond belief. The fact that there is no way of setting the desktop as default at startup, or that the menu button is gone (and instead forces you to use the keyboard, and leaves the desktop when you do) is also highly annoying AND bad interface design.

I have also read a large number of professional reviews, most are lukewarm, some are enthusiastic but these tend to only talk about the performance increase* and not the UI (and often even dislike the UI but still are enthusiastic), and a very few love the whole deal. Most, even the most enthusiastic reviews, point out that the design is only optimized for pads and touchscreens and that from a user interface perspective at best is "as good as Windows 7 when you are used to it" and at worst "annoying" if you use it on a regular old-fashioned computer.

As for the rest... The point is that it is a step in the wrong direction. Especially since Steam and other companies finally are embracing Linux. Also, Microsoft is apparently trying their old tricks and try to push their own cloud saving services etc on people. Not good, and there are already rumbling about abuse of power (that cost them the whole IE lawsuit in the EU).

Also, one could easily imagine that what it all boils down to, really, is that they designed their touchpad FIRST and THEN designed the new Windows to make people buy one. There really is NO other reason why you should try to push people to have a touch-screeen-optimized interface on a laptop.

*Which only really shows on a few very selective games and applications.

[Winter_Wolf]

I'm surprised no one has brought up the rule very solid trend of Windows OSes: every other one just plain SUCKS. ME was a joke, XP was great, Vista SUCKS (I have it on my desktop), Win7 (x64) is great, Win 8 is absolutely never going to happen on anything I own. We'll see about Windows 9. Yes, I'm just flat out dismissing Windows 8, everything I've read and seen about it makes me cringe and fills me with inexplicable anger. If I see any copies of Windows 7 still for sale in a local store I probably should just buy them and keep them in a safe place for the inevitable day when I need a new desktop and I won't even be able to pay extra to get a copy of Windows 7 on it.

I actually hate the Windows 8 UI, I do believe they're moving in the wrong direction, and I think trying to make a unified PC/mobile platform is base stupidity. And yes, they have issued press release stating that a unified platform was a goal.

I should probably start learning Linux.

[lesser_minion]

I have only played with it for a total of 20 minutes, and spent all 20 minutes frustrated beyond belief. The fact that there is no way of setting the desktop as default at startup, or that the menu button is gone (and instead forces you to use the keyboard, and leaves the desktop when you do) is also highly annoying AND bad interface design.

Did you try opening the start menu exactly the same way you'd open it on Windows 7? Move your mouse to the bottom left-hand corner of the screen and click?

Lack of discoverability I'll give you. But claiming that it's "bad interface design" to leave the desktop when you open the start menu? How? You opened the start menu to find and open a program, not to stare at the desktop.

Even the lack of discoverability is forgiveable -- it's just one extra action (moving the mouse to the corner of the screen) that you have to know about, and the results are consistent when you do so.

As for SkyDrive, literally every OS manufacturer bundles their own cloud service and a web browser with the OS. Yet, when Microsoft does it, it's an abuse of power? Really?


I'm surprised no one has brought up the rule very solid trend of Windows OSes: every other one just plain SUCKS.

That hasn't actually been true in a while -- there's a difference between consumer reception and how good a product actually is.

[Psyren]

I don't know about certification and all that, but I installed Steam just fine on my PC. Going to try GoG next.

At any rate, the massive performance boosts I got from upgrading were all I needed to convince me it was the right move. Win 7 is definitely a step up from Vista, but it was also bloated.

[Telok]

I don't know about certification and all that, but I installed Steam just fine on my PC. Going to try GoG next.

Before W8 came out they dropped some info about the Windows app store. At that time they made noises about having only certified applications available there and putting limits on non-certified apps to keep them from messing something up. They have since backed off from some of it, but Valve was upset because it meant that in order for their system to work on W8 they would have to rewrite Steam and all their apps for W8 or the users (you and me) would ahve to install everything by hand.

[Avilan the Grey]

I'm surprised no one has brought up the rule very solid trend of Windows OSes: every other one just plain SUCKS. ME was a joke, XP was great, Vista SUCKS (I have it on my desktop), Win7 (x64) is great, Win 8 is absolutely never going to happen on anything I own. We'll see about Windows 9. Yes, I'm just flat out dismissing Windows 8, everything I've read and seen about it makes me cringe and fills me with inexplicable anger. If I see any copies of Windows 7 still for sale in a local store I probably should just buy them and keep them in a safe place for the inevitable day when I need a new desktop and I won't even be able to pay extra to get a copy of Windows 7 on it.

I actually hate the Windows 8 UI, I do believe they're moving in the wrong direction, and I think trying to make a unified PC/mobile platform is base stupidity. And yes, they have issued press release stating that a unified platform was a goal.

I should probably start learning Linux.

Actually the rule is slightly more complicated.
Windows 95 was bad.
Windows 95 (second ed.) was stable and good.
Windows 98 was bad.
Windows 98 (second ed.) was REALLY stable and good).
Windows ME was HORRIBLE. The only Windows I tried that would BSD during INSTALLATION.
Windows 2000 was REALLY stable and good.
Windows XP was so-so.
Windows XP Service Pack 2 was great.
Windows Vista was so-so (trust me, it wasn't that bad)/
Windows Vista Service Pack 2 was better but still not great.
Windows 7 is REALLY good.

As far as I understand it, btw, you will be able to buy windows 7 for a while, because Microsoft has outright admitted this time that big corporations probably won't upgrade to Windows 8 on their workstations.


Did you try opening the start menu exactly the same way you'd open it on Windows 7? Move your mouse to the bottom left-hand corner of the screen and click?

No, because none of the reviews (by professional reviewers) mentioned that was possible; a typical sign of bad OS design when such a crucial part of the interface is hidden and not discoverable unless you know about it beforehand. In fact, they usually mention the Windows key as the ONLY way to bring the "menu" up.


Lack of discoverability I'll give you. But claiming that it's "bad interface design" to leave the desktop when you open the start menu? How? You opened the start menu to find and open a program, not to stare at the desktop.

...Because I don't WANT the Windows 1.0 grid! I want a STAR MENU, which is quicker and easier to navigate than to look for a HUGE icon somewhere. Much less work to just move the pointer about 1,5 inches, than across the entire screen.

Edit: I found this homemade idea of what it SHOULD look like, and I agree:
http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/This-Is-What-a-Windows-8-Start-Menu-Should-Look-Like-2.png?1353683131


As for SkyDrive, literally every OS manufacturer bundles their own cloud service and a web browser with the OS. Yet, when Microsoft does it, it's an abuse of power? Really?

Yes. Abusing market position (have virtual monopoly on business OS). Same argument that made them lose the IE lawsuit.


At any rate, the massive performance boosts I got from upgrading were all I needed to convince me it was the right move. Win 7 is definitely a step up from Vista, but it was also bloated.

I don't find it bloated, but my laptop is fairly beefy. What specs are you using? Part of it might just be the removal of the 3d effects in the UI, something you can do manually in Vista / 7.

What I have seen is that you really don't see any performance boosts on newer systems at all. Some games even goes slower.


Before W8 came out they dropped some info about the Windows app store. At that time they made noises about having only certified applications available there and putting limits on non-certified apps to keep them from messing something up. They have since backed off from some of it, but Valve was upset because it meant that in order for their system to work on W8 they would have to rewrite Steam and all their apps for W8 or the users (you and me) would ahve to install everything by hand.

Thank you. And this is where MS WANTS to go. Win 8 is just the first step; if people upgrade in too larger numbers, windows 9 will indeed be this. We need to send a message to them that this is no acceptable, by not upgrading.

[TheSummoner]

Thank you. And this is where MS WANTS to go. Win 8 is just the first step; if people upgrade in too larger numbers, windows 9 will indeed be this. We need to send a message to them that this is no acceptable, by not upgrading.

I know I won't be getting Windows 8. Partly because of that. Partly because of all the touchscreen nonsense. Partly because I do not like that they're adding a built-in store and will be avoiding any version of windows with that in there for as long as I can.

Seriously Microsoft, if I wanted a Mac, I'd buy a Mac. I do not like Macs. Do not make something that behaves like one.

[Ailurus]

Was kind of forced into upgrading, since my previous laptop started breaking, and based on the last month or so using Win8, my experiences are as follows:

1) Game compatibility isn't an issue. The only programs I've had issue with are ones using G4WL, and even those are OK if G4WL is installed manually. To add to lesser_minion's list: Dawn of War II, Civ V, XCOM (both the new and old), DA:O, Mechwarrior Online and more have all worked fine.

Haven't run into any issues with application software either.

2) Performance. Granted, a 5-year hardware upgrade improves performance as well so it isn't a great comparison, but I've got a cold to running programs boot time of sub 30 seconds, and that's with steam, AV software, backup software and some additional monitoring programs needed to connect to the wireless network set to run at boot as well. Haven't had any crashes or lockups either.

3) The UI. It was frustrating for the first day or two, but having used it a bit, I like it. Booting to the metro UI costs me a couple seconds per day - click on desktop. But, on the other hand, it makes it a lot easier to access stuff.
- Things I use all the time stay in the quicklaunch bar just like on Win7. no difference there
- Daily but not all the time applications stay on the metro screen, can get to it with the windows key just like with the start menu, but its a lot easier to organize things on the metro screen than on the start menu. (I've got one group for office, one group for programming tools, one group for sound and image editing)
- Everything else stays either on desktop shortcuts or I just use the search to pull it up, like you can do by searching the start menu in Win7.

Everything the start menu can do, but you end up having a lot more control over where things are situated. (Plus, and this is purely personal, I like the larger icons due to poor vision)

4) The Windows store and the apps. Yeah, I don't like the idea either. But, you don't have to use them. Plus, that's hardly unique to Windows - the Apple app store is tied in to Mountain Lion, iPhones and iPads.



No, because none of the reviews (by professional reviewers) mentioned that was possible; a typical sign of bad OS design when such a crucial part of the interface is hidden and not discoverable unless you know about it beforehand. In fact, they usually mention the Windows key as the ONLY way to bring the "menu" up.

Yeah, well, that's the fault of the reviewers, not the OS. There are at least three ways to pull up the metro screen. Bottom left just like the start menu, windows key just like the start menu, and the big blue "START" button on the charms bar. The only thing that was anywhere close to 'hidden' was the shutdown button, and that's just because they moved it to settings -> power instead of start -> shutdown.

Edit: In conclusion, is it worth upgrading from Win7? Up in the air IMO. I'd need to do performance tests with Win7 and Win8 on the same hardware, but from what I've read I think Win8 wins most of those. But, there's no reason I can see to avoid it.

[Iskandar]

Eh, my point still stands. There isn't a game out there, nor will there be for at least three years, that requires Windows 8. In fact, there are, right now, very few games that require Windows 7.

If you are familiar with the current Windows interface, and you like the current interface, why upgrade?

At any rate, if you do decide to upgrade, I'd seriously consider waiting to install the new OS until sometime AFTER the first service pack. Microsoft has a terrible track record of having some severe security issues when a new OS is released. XP, Vista and 7 had some serious problems until sometime after their respective Service Pack 1 updates. (Actually, just a bit of Google Fu did, in fact, point out that Windows 8 may be following in its predecessors footsteps)

[Joran]

Eh, my point still stands. There isn't a game out there, nor will there be for at least three years, that requires Windows 8. In fact, there are, right now, very few games that require Windows 7.


I said I'd keep using Windows XP until they pry it from my cold dead hands. Oddly enough, XCOM decided to require Vista/Windows 7, while my 5 year old hardware was much better than the recommended specs. Yup, this is the first time ever that I couldn't run a program because of my OS rather than my hardware XD

My wife switched from Vista to Windows 8. Hasn't noticed any problems and the UI took a bit of time to get used to. More importantly, it ran XCOM. $40 is a pretty nice deal, but unfortunately, it doesn't allow downgrade rights.

[Telok]

More importantly, it ran XCOM. $40 is a pretty nice deal, but unfortunately, it doesn't allow downgrade rights.

Reverse compatability has never been a goal of MS. If they can get you to buy new software with an OS upgrade that's good business practice. You're just lucky that nothing you've run has run into new/old OS conflicts.

[Iskandar]

I said I'd keep using Windows XP until they pry it from my cold dead hands. Oddly enough, XCOM decided to require Vista/Windows 7, while my 5 year old hardware was much better than the recommended specs. Yup, this is the first time ever that I couldn't run a program because of my OS rather than my hardware XD

My wife switched from Vista to Windows 8. Hasn't noticed any problems and the UI took a bit of time to get used to. More importantly, it ran XCOM. $40 is a pretty nice deal, but unfortunately, it doesn't allow downgrade rights.

Funny thing, while not officially supported, XCom will run under XP, with a bit of kludging: http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2964408

I'm not bashing Windows 8. I"m really not. I am, however, looking at Microsoft's past track record, and projecting that forward. That are definite trends in almost all of the previous releases, and enough warning signs, that I'll just wait.

I've used, more or less, the same desktop for almost twenty years now. There have been changes over time, but, at its core, my desktop under Windows 7 looks and acts much the same way it did under Windows 95. I've had to strip more and more gaudy useless stuff off of it with each new release (Adjust for Best Performance check box ftw), and Microsoft keeps playing with my Start menu, but overall, I'm comfortable with what I have. It wasn't broken, and I'll be sticking with it for as long as I can.

[Avilan the Grey]

Was kind of forced into upgrading, since my previous laptop started breaking, and based on the last month or so using Win8, my experiences are as follows:

1) Game compatibility isn't an issue. The only programs I've had issue with are ones using G4WL, and even those are OK if G4WL is installed manually. To add to lesser_minion's list: Dawn of War II, Civ V, XCOM (both the new and old), DA:O, Mechwarrior Online and more have all worked fine.

Haven't run into any issues with application software either.

2) Performance. Granted, a 5-year hardware upgrade improves performance as well so it isn't a great comparison, but I've got a cold to running programs boot time of sub 30 seconds, and that's with steam, AV software, backup software and some additional monitoring programs needed to connect to the wireless network set to run at boot as well. Haven't had any crashes or lockups either.

3) The UI. It was frustrating for the first day or two, but having used it a bit, I like it. Booting to the metro UI costs me a couple seconds per day - click on desktop. But, on the other hand, it makes it a lot easier to access stuff.
- Things I use all the time stay in the quicklaunch bar just like on Win7. no difference there
- Daily but not all the time applications stay on the metro screen, can get to it with the windows key just like with the start menu, but its a lot easier to organize things on the metro screen than on the start menu. (I've got one group for office, one group for programming tools, one group for sound and image editing)
- Everything else stays either on desktop shortcuts or I just use the search to pull it up, like you can do by searching the start menu in Win7.

Everything the start menu can do, but you end up having a lot more control over where things are situated. (Plus, and this is purely personal, I like the larger icons due to poor vision)

4) The Windows store and the apps. Yeah, I don't like the idea either. But, you don't have to use them. Plus, that's hardly unique to Windows - the Apple app store is tied in to Mountain Lion, iPhones and iPads.

Yeah, well, that's the fault of the reviewers, not the OS. There are at least three ways to pull up the metro screen. Bottom left just like the start menu, windows key just like the start menu, and the big blue "START" button on the charms bar. The only thing that was anywhere close to 'hidden' was the shutdown button, and that's just because they moved it to settings -> power instead of start -> shutdown.

Edit: In conclusion, is it worth upgrading from Win7? Up in the air IMO. I'd need to do performance tests with Win7 and Win8 on the same hardware, but from what I've read I think Win8 wins most of those. But, there's no reason I can see to avoid it.

1. I figured that. Since Win 8 will almost exclusivly be sold to non-business customers (MS admits this in their predictions) game compability is a MUST.

2. The only real performance boost I have seen is "quicker startup". I never shut down my laptop, only put it in hibernation, so I don't care. And even if I do, those two minutes it takes to start, once a day, is not a problem.

3. I don't agree with you. It is just as easy to organize in the classic start menu. You just well... organize it. Create folders, move folders... Done. I have one folder for "Browsers", one for "Games", one for "Maintenance", one for "Media" etc. (Now, since you have poor vision, I can understand why you like the bigger symbols, of course).
And again, to me the menu is a much quicker way of operating, since I don't have to move my pointer all over the desktop.
(Besides, I LOATHE to have icons on my desktop. I have only three (my user folder, my computer and the trashcan). My 5 most used programs are on the taskbar in the left corner... nothing on the desktop and everything else in the start menu. clutter on my screen makes me freak).

Edit: The search function... I have never used it, on any version of windows. I have never really understood WHY I should use it. It seems like an INCREDIBLY clunky way of doing things.

4. As stated above: I don't use Mac. I will not use Mac. Don't make my Windows computer into a Mac. Please.

And no, none of those 3 options are good enough for me, since all three makes the desktop disappear and you get the Metro screen.

I.
DON'T.
WANT.
METRO.
EVER.

I will not upgrade until they make it possible to AT LEAST set a startup option so that it doesn't boot into Metro. With the start menu gone I guess I would have to clutter my desktop, but I would prefer that.

Again: Making a touch-screen optimized UI and FORCE it on everyone just to encourage them to buy pads is both a really awful marketing strategy AND BAD UI design. It is. To force Metro on a standard computer is like making an UI for Iphone and force people to connect a mouse to it to operate it properly. Hopefully this will got down in history as yet another marketing frackkup by MS together with their last touchpad, the zune and Windows ME.


I said I'd keep using Windows XP until they pry it from my cold dead hands. Oddly enough, XCOM decided to require Vista/Windows 7, while my 5 year old hardware was much better than the recommended specs.

Reverse compatability has never been a goal of MS. If they can get you to buy new software with an OS upgrade that's good business practice. You're just lucky that nothing you've run has run into new/old OS conflicts.

This is why they have to extend the support for Windows XP (It was supposed to end in 2008, but now it is until 2014 and they might even extend it to 2016). A large majority of businesses still uses XP, and won't change until at least SP2 for Windows 7. If ever. And if they change they will go to Win 7, not 8.

[factotum]

I will not upgrade until they make it possible to AT LEAST set a startup option so that it doesn't boot into Metro. With the start menu gone I guess I would have to clutter my desktop, but I would prefer that.


There are third-party apps that will give you something like that on Windows 8--I think Stardock do one.

Speaking personally, my main issue with Windows 8 is that the two user interfaces you get are so vastly different and the switch between them is so jarring. Heck, I've been using GUIs in one form or another since Workbench 1.3 on the Amiga, and I've never seen another one that has such a gear-crashingly obvious change between two incompatible modes of operation (unless you count rebooting in DOS mode from Windows 95!).

[Avilan the Grey]

There are third-party apps that will give you something like that on Windows 8--I think Stardock do one.

Speaking personally, my main issue with Windows 8 is that the two user interfaces you get are so vastly different and the switch between them is so jarring. Heck, I've been using GUIs in one form or another since Workbench 1.3 on the Amiga, and I've never seen another one that has such a gear-crashingly obvious change between two incompatible modes of operation (unless you count rebooting in DOS mode from Windows 95!).

Oh I agree. That is yet another major problem. And I suspect that is because they wanted to do away with the destop completely but had to give up that idea at some point, most likely due to market research. That's why there is no connection between Metro and the Desktop.

[lesser_minion]

No, because none of the reviews (by professional reviewers) mentioned that was possible; a typical sign of bad OS design when such a crucial part of the interface is hidden and not discoverable unless you know about it beforehand. In fact, they usually mention the Windows key as the ONLY way to bring the "menu" up.

Which is why, when the first time you start up a windows 8 machine, there is a nice little animation explaining about moving your mouse to the corners of the screen.


...Because I don't WANT the Windows 1.0 grid! I want a STAR MENU, which is quicker and easier to navigate than to look for a HUGE icon somewhere. Much less work to just move the pointer about 1,5 inches, than across the entire screen.

Personally, I just use a sensitive mouse and leave it at that.


Edit: I found this homemade idea of what it SHOULD look like, and I agree:

Perhaps.


Yes. Abusing market position (have virtual monopoly on business OS). Same argument that made them lose the IE lawsuit.

Which merely led to them having to add a choice screen as an update. Guess what Windows 8 does? Among other things, a metric tonne of Microsoft competitors have their apps listed there.


Thank you. And this is where MS WANTS to go. Win 8 is just the first step; if people upgrade in too larger numbers, windows 9 will indeed be this. We need to send a message to them that this is no acceptable, by not upgrading.

Nothing is being forced down your throat. Seriously, feel free not to like the OS. It's different, and it probably didn't need to be different. But trying to claim that Microsoft are trying to force people to buy pads? That is ridiculous. Just because something is optimised for touchscreens, that doesn't mean it's difficult to use with a mouse.

[Avilan the Grey]

Just because something is optimised for touchscreens, that doesn't mean it's difficult to use with a mouse.

Um... It sorta does. At the very least it means it could be made EASIER to operate with a mouse than it already is. Optimizing it for one thing over another, automatically means you have NOT optimized the other.

Basically the PnP function is so good that Windows automatically should be able to adapt itself; if it detects a touchscreen, boot with Metro. If not, automatically boot to Desktop.

[Triaxx]

I have yet to be impressed by a touch-device. I suppose, if you were running a convertible laptop, with the option to touch or mouse it might be acceptable, but it just feels... pointless.

Unfortunately, when I try to use a touch-device, more often than not, I try to scroll through an option and end up selecting something. Or worse, I'm doing something and listening to music and my headphones hit part of the screen and suddenly I'm looking at pictures instead of the browser I was trying to use.

Also I seem to be the only person on earth who liked Windows ME. I guess I had the one in a million hardware combination.

[Avilan the Grey]

Also I seem to be the only person on earth who liked Windows ME. I guess I had the one in a million hardware combination.

As I recall, ME was supposed to be "Windows 2000 for older machines"; it apparently was a mashup in code of Win 98 SE and Windows 2000 professional (hence, too, the indicator in the name for windows 2000 that it was for business only, when it really only existed one version). I think the problem was in the code; I don't remember if it used Win 98 kernel and win 2000 pnp and hardware routines, or if it used win 2000 kernel and win 98 routines. I think it was the former though, because that would make it use less memory and HDD space compared to Win 2000, which was the whole pointn with ME.

Anyway, it just didn't work. Unless you were very lucky.

[KhaineGB]

I haven't tried Win 8 for gaming, and I have no intention of upgrading my gaming desktop to it (Win 7 Ultimate x64).

However, I have played around with Win 8 on a mates laptop. It's fast... very fast. This thing ran like lightning with only 1GB ram and a dual-core celeron processor. However, I really, really, really hate the new "start menu". He loves it though and has decided to buy an upgrade disk for his desktop. I just cannot get my head around it and was actively trying to find ways to make it look like Win 7, or even Win XP!

Certainly seems to be an improvement over Win 7 in terms of performance, but if you want better performance, go download a "lite" ISO off a torrent site and use your legal key to install it. That'll help a lot with performance while you remain legitimate.

[Aotrs Commander]

I said I'd keep using Windows XP until they pry it from my cold dead hands. Oddly enough, XCOM decided to require Vista/Windows 7, while my 5 year old hardware was much better than the recommended specs. Yup, this is the first time ever that I couldn't run a program because of my OS rather than my hardware XD.

Ditto.

I am grudingly looking at upgrading to Win 7 this year, as there are some games coming out that are now starting to be incompatible with XP, and that number is likely to increase (plus I suspect things like Star Citizen and possibly Project Eternity might need Win 7 on their release a couple of years down the line.) But I usually am one or two OS behind MS at the very best of time, because I frankly don't and have never trusted them with new OSes.

(And when I say "upgrading" am I intending making it dual-boot (new HDD for 7 anyway, my current drive is starting to get a bit full anyway), at least in the short to mid-term, so that I don't have to spend literal days re-installing everything.)

[Avilan the Grey]

He loves it though and has decided to buy an upgrade disk for his desktop. I just cannot get my head around it and was actively trying to find ways to make it look like Win 7, or even Win XP!

Don't you have the "download for half price until Jan 31st" offer whereve you live? Over here buying the disk disqualifies you from the rebate, you have to buy it directly from Microsoft.com. Of course that requires a good Internet connection.

[lesser_minion]

Don't you have the "download for half price until Jan 31st" offer whereve you live? Over here buying the disk disqualifies you from the rebate, you have to buy it directly from Microsoft.com. Of course that requires a good Internet connection.

You just buy it from Microsoft and then ask them to send you a disk.

[Psyren]

The disc option does cost a little more IIRC, but it too is discounted under the special.

[Joran]

Ditto.

I am grudingly looking at upgrading to Win 7 this year, as there are some games coming out that are now starting to be incompatible with XP, and that number is likely to increase (plus I suspect things like Star Citizen and possibly Project Eternity might need Win 7 on their release a couple of years down the line.) But I usually am one or two OS behind MS at the very best of time, because I frankly don't and have never trusted them with new OSes.

(And when I say "upgrading" am I intending making it dual-boot (new HDD for 7 anyway, my current drive is starting to get a bit full anyway), at least in the short to mid-term, so that I don't have to spend literal days re-installing everything.)

Same here. I was hoping to be able to wait until the next Mass Effect which will use the Frostbite engine and thus not be XP compatible. XCOM was the first game that wasn't XP compatible (and I don't view having to fudge with your OS kernel as being compatible) and Dishonored officially doesn't support XP either =P


Reverse compatability has never been a goal of MS. If they can get you to buy new software with an OS upgrade that's good business practice. You're just lucky that nothing you've run has run into new/old OS conflicts.

If you get an OEM version of Windows 8 (usually when you buy a new computer and the manufacturer throws in the OS), they allow downgrade rights (you can use the license for Windows 8 for Windows 7 or even Vista if you wanted). However, the $40 version doesn't include those downgrade rights.

I also got dragged in XP kicking and screaming ;) My current computer is the first computer with XP running on it. My previous ran Windows 2000. I'm a slow adopter of OS.

[Avilan the Grey]

Having used it a bit longer... it's biggest problem is the Metro / Desktop mix. There is really a dominating feeling that you are juggling two entirely different OS and they both overlap in function and you for no reason sometimes have to use one, some time the other and sometimes either for doing common tasks.

HORRIBLE UI DESIGN!!!

Especially Metro seems entirely unnecessary (the apps). Besides, why have apps for pictures and images that cannot map network drives??? Unless you use a Windows 2003 or newer server, of course... but not if you have a NAS or external HDD.
You can't even put shortcuts to documents on a NAS on the Metro start page.

HORRIBLE OS DESIGN!!!

On the computer I tried this on, we ended up uninstalling 99% of all apps, since I use Google, not MS web apps, and the MS media apps not only can't map network devices but also are for some reason linked to XBOX crap I will never use.

Again, HORRIBLE UI DESIGN!!!

Startup speed increased with about 10-20 seconds. No noticeable speed increase IN windows.

[lesser_minion]

Well, your first point is a real flaw of Windows 8. But there is a massive gulf between teething issues and "horrible UI/OS design".

Your second and third points? They don't even have anything to do with what you're trying to prove. Crappy apps that don't make proper use of the OS's features are annoying and not a good advert for the OS, but they aren't even close to "HORRIBLE OS DESIGN!!!". And it is not bad UI design to provide apps that you don't want to use.

As for "no noticeable speed increase", that's a whole different ball game to no speed increase. Windows 8 could be doing things six or seven orders of magnitude faster (obviously, it doesn't, but the point should be obvious) and you wouldn't notice.

[Avilan the Grey]

Well, your first point is a real flaw of Windows 8. But there is a massive gulf between teething issues and "horrible UI/OS design".

Your second and third points? They don't even have anything to do with what you're trying to prove. Crappy apps that don't make proper use of the OS's features are annoying and not a good advert for the OS, but they aren't even close to "HORRIBLE OS DESIGN!!!". And it is not bad UI design to provide apps that you don't want to use.

As for "no noticeable speed increase", that's a whole different ball game to no speed increase. Windows 8 could be doing things six or seven orders of magnitude faster (obviously, it doesn't, but the point should be obvious) and you wouldn't notice.

Um no it isn't. An UI or OS that is designed in a horribly bad way, is by default a terrible UI or OS design... All of it reeks of failing to get rid of the desktop altogether, which is obviously what their original goal was.
There is NO reason to have the Start Screen, as it looks, on top of the classical desktop. NONE.

On top of this, of course, is that for me with a low resolution (1440 x 900) screen), the start screen is just too small to fit all my programs on it. Also, of course... Why not have the option of import the entire start menu as is to the start page, and autogroup and autoname the groups to the same as the folders in the start menu...? And have the option of using much smaller icons, of course.

The worst part, of course not fixable; we have to wait until Windows 9 before a proper melding between the two happens, if at all (my personal guess is that they will once again split in several different OS for different platforms, since it is the only logical way to do things).

[Triaxx]

HA HA HA! Microsoft doing the logical thing? HA!

---

Ahem. Yes. I seriously suspect Windows 9 will do a better job, but like Vista to 7 it will be 8 with polish on all the knobs so that it functions better.

I expect to see a return of the start button, but not as we knew it. Perhaps you click the start button, and get a menu, then you click say Accessories, and the screen is populated by tiles representing folders from accessories. Click again and it tiles the contents of the folder. A balance between fast visual access provided by a touch screen, and the ease of selection via mouse.

[lesser_minion]

Um no it isn't. An UI or OS that is designed in a horribly bad way, is by default a terrible UI or OS design... All of it reeks of failing to get rid of the desktop altogether, which is obviously what their original goal was.

You haven't proven that Windows 8 is either, and circular logic is not going to impress anyone.

Seriously, look at your claim: that Windows 8 is "HORRIBLE OS DESIGN!!!"; and then look at what you're trying to support it with: some crappy apps (nothing to do with the OS), the lack of integration between desktop and metro (a flaw, but not crippling and easily forgiven -- and no, it's not inherent to the system either), and the annoying context switches (something that any gamer is already a veteran at dealing with anyway).

[Flickerdart]

Civilization 5 has a Windows 8 mode that enables touch-based interactions. So that's at least something. Lots of people hated on Civ V because it changed so many things from Civ IV, so in that way it's amusingly like Windows 8.

[Psyren]

On the computer I tried this on, we ended up uninstalling 99% of all apps, since I use Google, not MS web apps, and the MS media apps not only can't map network devices but also are for some reason linked to XBOX crap I will never use.

The XBox (and Surface) integration may not appeal to you, but it's fantastic for those of us who do care about that. I think it was a great move on their part.

[GloatingSwine]

I've had precisely zero problems using Windows 8 on five year old hardware.

But then I'm adaptable to new systems and learn new skills quickly.

Also, Windows 8 task switches about a thousand times better and faster than older windows systems. Hilariously, part of that is that the Desktop is actually a discrete process which can be switched into and out of really easily, and doesn't **** up the render path of whatever else was going on (f'rinstance, on my laptop I occasionally catch the command key whilst gaming, this brings up the start menu in games not clever enough to turn winkey off. In Windows 7 that was either time for a serious wait whilst the system sorts out who is using the graphics card now or an unrecoverable app crash. In Windows 8 the start screen appears instantly and is dismissed just as instantly with absolutely no messing around).

Task selection in Windows 8 is almost as good as Expose on OSX now.

And as for the start menu, let's face it it's been useless for ages now, completely incapable of dealing with large numbers of applications and so the only actually useful bits of it were the MFU list, pinned items, and search. The Windows 8 start screen could do with an MFU list section, but its search powers are great and don't even require a hotkey, you type and it searches.

[KhaineGB]

Don't you have the "download for half price until Jan 31st" offer whereve you live? Over here buying the disk disqualifies you from the rebate, you have to buy it directly from Microsoft.com. Of course that requires a good Internet connection.

I'm not sure. I shall have to mention it to my mate. :)

[lesser_minion]

but its search powers are great and don't even require a hotkey, you type and it searches.

How did you even find out about this one? It's not like Windows 7 where you can see the text box in the start menu, and none of the tutorials you get mention it.

And before someone comes in with "Lack of discoverability!!! Horrible OS Design!!!", note that there are other ways to find the search feature -- anyone who knows how to bring up the charms bar can do searches just fine.

[Telok]

That reminds me, in the last version of windows I was trying to use there were these internet card games bundled in with the OS. If you deleted them (any method) they just came back, the OS had them archived somewhere and reset them within a couple minutes. Do they have stuff like that in W8? Undeletable applications that are not OS necessary?

[lesser_minion]

That reminds me, in the last version of windows I was trying to use there were these internet card games bundled in with the OS. If you deleted them (any method) they just came back, the OS had them archived somewhere and reset them within a couple minutes. Do they have stuff like that in W8? Undeletable applications that are not OS necessary?

I don't believe so. Although you can't remove one of the communications apps (Mail, Calendar, People, and Messenger) without removing the others, because they're actually all the same app.

[Avilan the Grey]

You haven't proven that Windows 8 is either, and circular logic is not going to impress anyone.

Seriously, look at your claim: that Windows 8 is "HORRIBLE OS DESIGN!!!"; and then look at what you're trying to support it with: some crappy apps (nothing to do with the OS), the lack of integration between desktop and metro (a flaw, but not crippling and easily forgiven -- and no, it's not inherent to the system either), and the annoying context switches (something that any gamer is already a veteran at dealing with anyway).

I don't feel I have to PROVE it, since you have USED it. To me, you demanding I should "prove" it, is as outlandish to me as if you asked me to prove that strawberries tastes like strawberries.

I guess we just have widely different tolerance levels for bad UI design. Seriously. To me this IS unforgivabe, and yes, to me it is close to if I was being forced by Apple to use a mouse to navigate my phone UI.
Basically when I picture how they came up with the idea of the "Exciting new Start Page(tm)" I imagine a bord of designers consistign entirely of Gumbys.

As for the Search function... I should not have to use a search function to find my programs. Seriously. If this is not a huge step backwards (as in pre-Windows 3.1 design(!!!)) in useablity and user-friendliness... I don't know what is. Of course I HAVE to use it, since I can't fit all my programs on the start screen without having to side-scroll it for about two weeks before I find what I am looking for.

On a related note... how come new intalled programs gets an icon on the start screen automatically, but the Upgrade function in Windows can't import the ones I already have in the start menu?


The XBox (and Surface) integration may not appeal to you, but it's fantastic for those of us who do care about that. I think it was a great move on their part.

Oh I am not arguing that, at all. I am just wondering, politely, if it really is a good idea for the Game app to not only assume I HAVE an X-box, but to be entirely optimized FOR X-Box... I am a PC user, and a PC gamer. What... why... how... I don't even.

The same with the Music App. I want it to list my music. Unfortunately it can't, since I have it on a Linux-based NAS. Like millions of people. Also, it by default starts the App in X-Box Music. Not even I-Tunes does this!!!. Both asuming I would want to use it, and that I want to buy my music through it... And not only that, you have to LOOK for your own music. The link for it is not even visible on the start page!!! It is laughably bad UI design!

Now, if you have an X-box, I can see the benefits, maybe (although I have yet to meet an X-box user that actually use their music services).

I ended up uninstalling every single app except Desktop (duh), Photos and the Store (which I just hid). Apps are just not useful to me.

I have now used it extensivly since Friday evening, and the cons are at this point much more numerous than the pros:

Pros:
Starts marginally faster.
Programs starts (very)marginally faster.

Cons:
The start screen in general, and the very idea of it.
The apps are unneccesary without a touchscreen.
The apps are optimized for a pad or HD TV, the text is way too big and the "fields" (be it pictures or anything else) are HUGE, single file and you have to side-scroll through them.
The pushing of the X-box services.
Too many different places to look for settings.
Clumsy system with the sliding in menu from the right for search, settings etc. Obviously optimized only for Touch users.
Clumsy system with the slidign in menu from the left for open windows. Same reason.
Using the built in (windows Defender) anti-virus forces you to have auto-uptates on for all of windows, or you have to manually update the virus definitions.
The hidden power button. Is there really no way of getting it on the Start Screen??? Yes, I usually just hibernate, but I want it there!


Also, a question: is there any way to change Windows Text color? If I change the window borders to "almost black", I cannot read the name of the window. In 7 the text changed color automatically to be readable, AFAIR. In earler windows you could change the color manually.

[Bulldog Psion]

Dang, Windows 8 sounds even more loathsome than Windows 7. And that takes a lot of effort, considering how detestable Windows 7 is.

[KhaineGB]

Dang, Windows 8 sounds even more loathsome than Windows 7. And that takes a lot of effort, considering how detestable Windows 7 is.

...and what's wrong with Windows 7?

Aside from the start menu, I've got mine set up to look like Windows XP.

[Avilan the Grey]

I have the start screen working now, so that it at least is useable as a "start menu" for my most commonly used programs. No apps running except the Desktop app and the store (hidden). I uninstalled the picture app as well. Not needed (as well as installing, then uninsntalling the Google and Skype apps, since well, their Metro versions are far worse than their desktop versions).

One problem with the Metro UI is that it is so new, of course. There are no native Google Calenadar, Faceboook or Youtube apps, for example. (I wouldn't use them, but it would drive me nuts on a 'pad if if there was no native Facebook app, for example).

Now... My wife is interested in this because her computer would probably benefit from a more lightweight OS than 7. The problem is that she is far more conservative with changes than I am (I had to set up her 7 to look as much like XP as possible); she really hates having to learn new stuff to use a computer. I will have to sit down over the holidays and let her testdrive this for a loooong time.

As for games: Origin works, but you had to dig for it in the start menu (and therefore remember where the startmenu is on C:) so you could manually add it to the Start Screen. It is one of those apps that do not show up if you pick "show all apps". I have not started any games from Origin though yet.

Steam works fine. I played Skyrim a lot this weekend and it works fine. No change in performane either way, btw.

My gaming section of the start page is kinda small; One icon for Origin, one icon for Steam and one icon for the Nexus Mod Manager. I realized while I was working with this that all games I currently play are bought using either of these two services so I don't need a ton of icons.


...and what's wrong with Windows 7?

Indeed. It is definitely the best MS OS to date, miles ahead of XP and a clear improvement over Vista.

[lesser_minion]

Just for those who weren't aware, you can zoom the start menu (with Ctrl + Scroll Wheel).

I'd mention the all apps list as well, but that really was designed by a pot-smoking monkey.

[Bulldog Psion]

...and what's wrong with Windows 7?

Aside from the start menu, I've got mine set up to look like Windows XP.

Other than an Explorer window that hangs for about 2 minutes before loading, a total lack of any kind of normal search function, and no ability to show folder size, it's decent enough, I guess. Though I still prefer XP, as more flexible and functional than Windows 7, which is definitely a step in "one-button design" direction of the Mac.

The lack of a normal search function bugs me the most. :smallannoyed:

[Avilan the Grey]

Other than an Explorer window that hangs for about 2 minutes before loading, a total lack of any kind of normal search function, and no ability to show folder size, it's decent enough, I guess. Though I still prefer XP, as more flexible and functional than Windows 7, which is definitely a step in "one-button design" direction of the Mac.

The lack of a normal search function bugs me the most. :smallannoyed:

I haven't noticed that... What do you mean with "folder size"? I usually right click and pick "properties" and you get all the info you need. Also no hanging anywhere.

[lesser_minion]

The explorer hanging thing was a bug in Vista RTM. It never appeared in Windows 7, and anyone still running an RTM version of Vista deserves everything they get.

As for "normal search function", define 'normal'.

[KhaineGB]

Other than an Explorer window that hangs for about 2 minutes before loading, a total lack of any kind of normal search function, and no ability to show folder size, it's decent enough, I guess. Though I still prefer XP, as more flexible and functional than Windows 7, which is definitely a step in "one-button design" direction of the Mac.

The lack of a normal search function bugs me the most. :smallannoyed:

Had no issues with explorer.

Perfectly functioning search feature when you open the start menu... right at the bottom. Works better than the one in XP ever did for me.

[tyckspoon]

Had no issues with explorer.

Perfectly functioning search feature when you open the start menu... right at the bottom. Works better than the one in XP ever did for me.

Start Menu Search bar will search indexed folders (the ones where the OS keeps track of what's in them for quicksearching.) If you want a full search, open an Explorer window to the 'Computer' location and use the search bar there, which will comb through pretty much everything on your computer indexed or not. I'm not sure what else you need for a 'normal' search, and I don't believe I've found anything yet from the Win XP Search function that these two tools don't do.

[Avilan the Grey]

Start Menu Search bar will search indexed folders (the ones where the OS keeps track of what's in them for quicksearching.) If you want a full search, open an Explorer window to the 'Computer' location and use the search bar there, which will comb through pretty much everything on your computer indexed or not. I'm not sure what else you need for a 'normal' search, and I don't believe I've found anything yet from the Win XP Search function that these two tools don't do.

In fact you always have that search bar in any window you open, to start searching in that location and subfolders.

[Avilan the Grey]

Things you do for your wife.
Despite my rants above and my strong dislike for the UI mixup etc etc I have now Windows 8 on my laptop so that she can play around with it and learn it before installing it on her own. :smallsigh::smallfrown:

As long as Firefox and Skyrim works, I guess I shouldn't complain too much :smallbiggrin:

Edit: In case someone is interested:

Avast! 7 free antivirus works VERY well on Win 8.
Online Armor 6 claims to be compatible but I had to uninstall it. Didn't work at all.

I am now running the free Zonealarm antivirus / firewall combo that works without a hitch.

Also, Windows Defender is upgraded to a full antivirus in Win 8, and is apparently not awful, but I had minor issues with it (like having to have automatic updates set to fully automatic (so it installs everything without asking) for the virus definitions to autupdate, since they come through Windows Update.

[Bulldog Psion]

Had no issues with explorer.

Perfectly functioning search feature when you open the start menu... right at the bottom. Works better than the one in XP ever did for me.

Yeah, it's great if you don't mind it searching for every letter as you type it, if you don't mind waiting for it to finish searching before you touch anything else, and if you don't mind being totally unable to search by file size like you could in XP :smallmad:. Or any of the other ways you could search. It's appallingly "one button, one note" design.

In short, it sucks. And yes, I know where to find it, thanks. :smallbiggrin:

[Avilan the Grey]

Yeah, it's great if you don't mind it searching for every letter as you type it, if you don't mind waiting for it to finish searching before you touch anything else, and if you don't mind being totally unable to search by file size like you could in XP :smallmad:. Or any of the other ways you could search. It's appallingly "one button, one note" design.

In short, it sucks. And yes, I know where to find it, thanks. :smallbiggrin:

Out of interest one might ask why the search function is so important to you..? :smallsmile:

I consider any time I have to search for a file a failure of my organization skills.

[Domochevsky]

...and if you don't mind being totally unable to search by file size like you could in XP ...

"size: <20kb" (show me everything that's smaller than 20 kilobytes.) :smallwink:

[Alaris]

Well, I'll toss my 2 cents into the fray.

I've been a Vista user for the past 5 or so years. Yeah, I know, not the optimal gaming OS. I had my fair share of issues with it, but ultimately, it did run the games I needed it to run, even if it had to be on lower settings, and had to find the occasional, 3rd party fixes.

But... my Vista Laptop finally died this weekend. Alas, she was not long for this world, having her backlight and screen itself finally flicker out for the last time on Saturday.

So... with Christmas funds coming up, and some money stowed a way, I was able to obtain a new gaming laptop. >.> Alas, I was too late to get a good one with Windows 7... so I had to buy one with the dreaded WINDOWS 8 on it. >.> [F*cking Xbox-like interface].

However... to my shock an awe, I was able to use it with relative ease. After finding a 3rd party program to put my Start Menu back (THE WAY GOD INTENDED WINDOWS TO BE!), I was in for business. I installed Steam, and started putting the games I wanted to play on this new computer.

And... so far, I've been able to run the following games with NO ISSUE AT ALL:

-Mount and Blade: Warband + Napoleonic Wars
-Star Trek Online
-TES: Skyrim
-Diablo 3
-Starcraft 2
-Torchlight 2

While I've only tested it for around 2 days, off-and-on, I would say that Windows 8 is certainly an upgrade from Vista. And I have yet to run into any issues that I can blame on the OS.

I never had a shot at Windows 7, so I can't say how it would compare. But I can say... aside from the Tablet-like interface (which you can minimize, and go with a standard Desktop), I like it.