|
More items, based on what other's have said.
In a corporate environment, with support for Windows Server 2003 ending this year, servers are being replaced with Windows Server 2012. Yes, the Windows 8 version has found its way into the server world.
It took me a while, even using Windows 8, to find what I wanted in WS 2012, but I did find it, and now, I'm used to it.
|
|
|
|
|
None of what you say about 8 matters to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joan Murt wrote: a lot of respectable [Alien] ians have told me that it was a bad idea doing that
When was the last time somebody here welcomed something new in the computer world ?
I actually like Win8. I went from XP directly to 8 then 8.1. I enjoy the tiles screen, kind of organized quick launch bar. There are of course a couple of PITA changes (the restart, the ... switchoff, etc...) but nothing to go out and yell at how bad it is. Plus it is damn fast and stable. At least as much as XP.
|
|
|
|
|
I use Windows 8.1, Windows 7 and OSX (as well as iOS) on a daily basis.
The problem with Windows 8.1 is that it didn't bring anything new to the table (nothing if use, anyway). Microsoft seemed to assume that the desktop was dead and we'd all much prefer full screen mobile apps instead - after all, there's very few of us desktop users around these days, right?
What I particularly dislike is that on the desktop, you're continually interrupted by the charms bar (especially swiping on a mousepad on laptops) when all you want to do is move your pointer, just because your pointer or finger happens to have hit the wrong place at the wrong time.
Addressing some of the improvements you mentioned, all in all they're pretty trivial and in the case of IE no use at all for those of us who use Chrome or stick to one language.
If you compare this to the upgrade from Mavericks to Yosemite on OSX, there were compelling new features added that made it a pleasure to upgrade.
Windows 8.1 feels to me like half a step backwards, eighteen steps sideways and we're now waiting for Microsoft to stop standing around scratching their heads thinking what menu they can uppercase next.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Windows 8.1 cons:
1. The mouse left-click button is disabled if you have a tablet device attached to your PC. (Point with mouse, click with tablet.)
2. Pro version is required (not home version) to enable disk management functions, such as moving public folders to other hard drives. (In NZ, Pro version is 3 times more costly.) Even after successfully relocating folders, the OS fights to return them to previous locations.
3. Swipe in from right edge is extremely difficult when no touch screen device is attached.
4. Request to allow installation software to alter system only recognises tab key to select [Yes] _ mouse-click AND tablet-POINT are disabled.
The difficult may take time, the impossible a little longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 10707677 wrote: Swipe in from right edge is extremely difficult when no touch screen device is attached.
Try Win + C on the keyboard.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Most of the command-control functions are disabled on the international home version. I discovered this 5 days after my system was delivered with the wrong OS onboard. (I got home version when pro version was specified.)
Six months later, I'm still sifting through the chaos. It's alot of encounter-a-problem, Google-a-solution,[WinK-C]-do-the-fix.
The difficult may take time, the impossible a little longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Once we added a 3rd party START menu, Win 8/8.1 wasn't too bad. I really like the Storage Spaces functionality - we're using a Win 8.1 box as a low-end home server.
|
|
|
|
|
Joan Murt wrote: - Once you know that windows+c shortcut getting into the control panel is a breeze.
I think it's faster by right clicking the start button and selecting the control panel from there.
There is another advantage on Windows 8:
- Some dev tools for Windows Phone.
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson
----
Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
|
|
|
|
|
I think the problem is both windows 8 and windows 8.1 user inteface.
First the elephant in the room(?)
It was either change for change's sake OR it was change to be more like other competing operating systems.... Are you laughing yet Steve Jobs? wherever you are.
People, myself included, resent it for that reason alone.
Mostly, however, as the operating systems have gotten more complex, for the average user, the time it takes to learn a new gui is ridiculously long. Business users are particularly affected by this. and the inevitable mistakes along the way. They don't have the time or patience for the grief.
Being an old dog (I sold the first copy of my application in 1979 and have made a reasonable living with it ever since), while I have learned new tricks moving from OS to OS and platform to platform, I have not asked my customers to do that. AS I have added new features over the years (yes Virginia change is necessary and inevitable), I have done so GRADUALLY. This is, I think, along with the quality of my product, the thing that has allowed me to compete with bigger companies.
So all you application developers out there just starting out should learn from Microsft's mistake with Windows8.X - Change needs to be gradual, not like trying to take a drink from a fire hose at full blast.
|
|
|
|
|
I have found Windows 8.1 to be a REALLY stable OS. Over many months of heavy use and I have never had a crash or seen a blue screen. I don't need to reboot, unless there is a system update. They are doing something right.
|
|
|
|
|
Dennis Saeva wrote: I have found Windows 8.1 to be a REALLY stable OS.
Either you are lucky, or I am not...probably the latter. I have 8.1 on a laptop, and my wife has it on an all-in-one. The laptop was built for testing only, but has a bad habit of freezing (about 20% of the time) when starting up. The little 'dancing circles' just stop...I've left it that way for a couple of days, but it never goes any further. Last weekend, I had to rebuild the wife's all-in-one when it started doing the same thing, eventually failing every time...no BSOD, just frozen! 
I have been running Win7 on multiple computers since it came out, and this has never happened. I'll stick with 7 for now.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO... MS screwed up with Win 8 when they assumed everyone would want the dumb metro screen. If I only ever ran it on a 7" tablet then possibly yes, but I run Win on my laptop and desktop and try to do actual work. This means I don't want every app running full screen. The only apps I ever run full screen are those that have code in them so I can see more of it. Nothing else runs full screen, including Chrome. Few website are made for 24" monitors so I would be wasting real estate if I did that. And I have too many windows open to have everything in full screen. That would be just dumb. But then, I blindly assume most users here are roughly the same in that regard.
With that being said, Win 8.1 is the best OS I've ever had. I installed classic shell to give me my start menu back two years ago and I've never looked back. It solved all the problems Win 8 came with. A simple solution. I've installed it on all my win 8 machines (wife, kids, laptop, desktop, etc). I've never had an issue with it, not one. It won't be needed when 10 comes out, but for now, it makes Win 8.1 stand head and shoulders over Win 7. When I have to use someone's Win 7 at work. I always get annoyed because I just prefer Win 8. Of course, it doesn't speak well of an OS when the first thing you have to do after installing it is to install an app to "fix" it to make it better, but c'est la-vie. It works, is fast, up-to-date, and rarely crashes. And the integration with MS on the backend is also very cool because I like everything synchronizing so my info is always where I am. A potential security issue to be sure, but I still like the convenience.
Sorry to be so verbose, we all have issues... 
|
|
|
|
|
The only diff with win 7 on a desk/laptop is missing start menu. Huge mistake in my opinion-but ms wanted to force users to see the metro feature. I install "classic shell" on all my win 8 machines except tablets. Brings the win 7 start menu - everything else seems to be the same as win 7, but a little faster.
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO Windows 8.x start screen is like playing Where's Waldo?
|
|
|
|
|
Old software (from windows 95 days) that wrote files to the Program Files/xxx/subdir
And the user is NOT ALLOWED to get into subdir (unless they were admin, and they were not).
So, the ability to use old software started failing.
The ability to get "in there" and look at it was blocked by a down-graded security setting for explorer.
Not to mention RETRAINING for non-tech users.
My wife took forever to use the start button. She bought a fast new laptop,
and almost threw it at me. She is screaming about not being able to launch her
gmail. She had the "paper notes" from the old computer. And was trying to follow them.
Then I sit down, COMPLETELY NEW to windows 8... OMG, how to I program one of these panels to
go straight to chrome? Ugghhh...
Installed: Classic Shell... Ah... Usable computer.
The Charms bar SUCKS. Windows Key, then start typing, and it finds what I want. Right click, run as administrator. So nice, so easy. Charms bar. Doesnt even find the same stuff... Ugghhh...
Now... That computer will upgrade to Windows 10. But my windows 7 Pro machine will stay here for as long as I can... (Oh, windows 8 was so bad, I bought my first Mac just to play with it).
My wifes next computer will probably be a Mac... She does email, youtube, some browsing...
|
|
|
|
|
People still remember the problems with the initial version of Windows 8.0.
I've had numerous problems with drivers, crashing, programs switching unexpectedly etc etc.
Windows 8.1 is way better now. They fixed most of the unpleasant things, so actually I prefer using Win 8.
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Another thing that hardly anyone mentions which I find extremely helpful is how Windows 8 integrated the Microsoft Account (aka Live account). At work with AD, we don't think about it too much, but at home with my laptop, desktop, tablet and phone (yes, all Windows 8.1), all of my contacts, calendars, email accounts (outlook/live/Hotmail or not), passwords, browsing history and files on OneDrive are all synced up.
I actually used to run Windows Server so I could use AD at home years ago, but now with Microsoft Account integration, I feel like I have AD everywhere. And if your significant others are using Microsoft Accounts, then sharing files and calendars becomes easy.
But I still find a lot of people just hate Window 8.1, but so many of these are the kind of people who still believe that they have to use the pop mail account that their ISP provides or they're the kind of folks who share email address w/ their significant others.
|
|
|
|
|
Your solution only works if all devices use the same or similar operating systems. Additionally, you are opening yourself to one of the biggest of privacy invasion gaps.
I'm used to a mixture of operating systems (Windows, Android, *ux, Non-stop). Google provides more of an all-purpose solution. Even then I'm very cautious.
The difficult may take time, the impossible a little longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Google provides more of an all-purpose solution.
So you're saying that you can log onto your Windows 8, Windows 7, Linux and Android, iOS and Windows Phone devices using the same gmail account?
Google does not offer that, and I wouldn't expect them to. Furthermore, what they do offer is not significantly better than Outlook.com, Office.com or Skype. Hangouts would be nice, but they just don't want to offer that in the same way Microsoft offers Office and Skype for Android and iOS.
Quote: Additionally, you are opening yourself to one of the biggest of privacy invasion gaps.
Care to back that up?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't use Google to log into the operating system. Google only maintains my calendar, contacts and any reference documents I consider of minimal security risk. Anything of importance is usually carried on my person in the form of an encrypted memory stick. Social networking, including this forum, is kept to a minimum.
My Windows platform is primarily a word/spreadsheet processing station with graphics/gaming thrown in for recreational purposes. Due to certain performance issues, I don't use Outlook or Skype. For email, I prefer to rely on the email server packages associated with my email accounts and access those using whatever browser is available on the platform I am using. (Business is kept separate from personal.)
The difficult may take time, the impossible a little longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 6-Jan-20 17:05pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Your initial comment was about Active Directory and its portability through a single operating system. Outlook.com and Office.com are just extensions of AD. I get much of the same portability through Google. As to the mention of Outlook vs Outlook.com, Outlook is a POP3 client that works with the POP3 server at Outlook.com. By using the email server packages, I reduce the overheads associated with the email client and better manage my business. If you have multiple email accounts, Outlook is NOT the way to go.
The difficult may take time, the impossible a little longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Outlook.com and Office.com are just extensions of AD
So you need a domain admin and active directory server to run http://outlook.com and http://office.com ?
Quote: Outlook is a POP3 client that works with the POP3 server at Outlook.com
Outlook handles multiple protocols including Exchange, POP3, and IMAP. And I doubt that that Outlook.com is using a POP3 server for its connector considering that when I read, move or delete an item on one device, it is synchronized on other devices.
I use outlook.com on my desktop with Outlook or Windows Live Mail and on my tablet with Windows Mail (although I can use any of those clients on any of my Windows devices). In fact, I can use my other (multiple) email accounts from gmail, AT&T mail, Nokia mail, and Yahoo via Outlook. And I use Outlook.com via the web browser at work so I can access my personal mail w/o using a email client.
Now, I know that I can't access my Outlook.com mail, AT&T mail, Nokia mail nor Yahoo from Gmail unless I want to use POP3, and who would use POP3 mail in this day and age of multiple devices?
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you regarding IMAP vs POP3 that POP3 is somewhat obsolete. The only advantage with POP3 is that you can disconnect from the net and take your latest messages with you. With IMAP, you lose that capability and have to reconnect with the net to get your messages. Outlook.com, Live.com, and Hotmail.com are all the same animal. In server-to-server email transfers, POP3 is the easiest protocol to manage and is generally the preferred protocol; which explains why Gmail uses POP3 to communicate with AT&T, Nokia, Yahoo and a few others. I wouldn't be surprised if your only option linking Outlook.com to AT&T is POP3.
The old Outlook client used to download all of your active email threads, including binaries, onto your workstation and possibly fill up your disk as you tried to negotiate through the tons of garbage you receive on a daily basis. (Heaven help you if the server went down while you were trying to delete 80-90 messages in a single action. You would wind up reloading the messages you just deleted in order to delete them again. This is where IMAP wins.) I'm not 100% certain, but I believe the current Outlook client and others like it use a blend of IMAP and POP3 to manage your email. As a security measure, most of the clients allow you to deny downloading of binaries unless specifically requested.
The difficult may take time, the impossible a little longer.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
