|
I know there’s this unwritten law that newer software requires more resources but my experience with Windows 8 has always been that’s it’s way faster certainly than Windows 7 was on the same hardware, but it’s my recollection that XP was never really as snappy as 8 is now on any hardware. So I dug up the oldest, crustiest hardware I could get my hands on and did some tests... No one's forcing you to upgrade. But the results are clear: it may be a good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
Yup.
I had the consumer preview of 8 running on a celeron laptop.
It was very fast on that box.
I has Vi-Start on it booting straight to the desktop for sanity's sake however.
If MS had not forced metro on us it would have been a home run as it is, many unsuspecting consumers are coming back to the stores where they bought the fancy new windows 8 machine wanting it off the box to no avail. - This comes from people who work at the local retail outlet here in town that have sold some of the windows 8 pcs.
I don't know what is in the Koolaid up there but MS better give us back our windows 7 desktop with the speed of 8 or their going to be run over by those whom they fear that caused the metro to eek into the pc in the first place.
Apple smart enough to run two os's - one for the hand helds and one for the PCs\
|
|
|
|
|
I personally don't feel Metro is standing in my way... it's just a different "Start Menu".
After that is just a minimalistic UI that I actually prefer over transparencies and smoke.
I'm currently working on both Windows 7 and 8 and I don't feel uncomfortable switching between them.
Cheers!
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
But you can get the old start menu "back" (well, something sufficiently like it) and boot directly into the desktop instead of metro. You can still accidentally get stuck in metro sometimes, but for the most part your OS will make sense again.
|
|
|
|