Jump to content

Windows 8 - Deeper Impressions


JorgeA

Recommended Posts

It's a good thing that people who defended things like hectic start menu (it's just a search away), mandatory driver signing (it's vendors' fault that make buggy drivers), bloat (WinSxS folder too big? What's the problem, hdd space is cheap), the ribbon (you should get on with the times), forced obsolence (VS doesn't compile for older OS? You should "upgrade"), mandatory activation (it's their OS, not yours, you've just been granted a licence to use it) etc. etc. can now taste what it felt like for us all along. :whistle:

+1 on that. I want to say "serves them right" for being MS apologists over the years, but I'd rather they kept speaking up this time...

--JorgeA

Link to comment
Share on other sites


However, I discovered that overriding the default registry value:

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon]

"Shell"=explorer.exe

with

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon]

"Shell"="explorer.exe /select,explorer.exe"

does in fact automatically skip past Metro UI (under most circumstances).

Asok,

It looks like I may be one of those cases that doesn't fall under "most."

When I tried your registry change, next time I restarted Win8 CP all I got was a black page. Clicking on the Escape key or the Windows key didn't make any visible difference. Hitting Ctrl-Alt-Del did enable me to bring up the Task Manager, from where I went back into Regedit, put the key back the way it was, and then rebooted to recover the previous behavior.

I didn't disable the lock screen as you suggested, as I had already configured Win8 not to show it at bootup so that was not an issue for me. I'll go back in and do what you said, if you think it'll help.

Thanks again for the idea -- we need to get something like this to work.

--JorgeA

Edited by JorgeA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check this out: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=21860053#post21860053

Is there any basis for the idea that Windows 9 might be a "cloud-based" OS?

If it is, then whatever chances Win8 might have with me will be completely gone with Win9. Ain't no way in h*ll I'm relying on a remote server to run my computer, let alone to store my documents. Internet service goes down often enough to render the cloud model too risky for serious work. At least today I can keep working when my Internet isn't. Not to mention that my documents are safely tucked away in my obscure corner of the universe, rather than as part of a big juicy target in some cloud service.

--JorgeA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any basis for the idea that Windows 9 might be a "cloud-based" OS?

I don't think there is any more chance of this happening than thin clients being universally adapted in the workplace, for exactly the reasons that you gave for not wanting it. There is a place for it, and for any option, but not widespread, IMO.

Cheers and Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any basis for the idea that Windows 9 might be a "cloud-based" OS?

They're already pushing for cloud stuff with the skydrive crap in Win8 :puke:

Ain't no way in h*ll I'm relying on a remote server to run my computer, let alone to store my documents. Internet service goes down often enough to render the cloud model too risky for serious work. At least today I can keep working when my Internet isn't. Not to mention that my documents are safely tucked away in my obscure corner of the universe, rather than as part of a big juicy target in some cloud service.

Most businesses think exactly like you. MS is also desperately pushing for its azure cloud services. Too bad nobody uses it. And it goes down on leap days too. Last I checked it was significantly more expensive than most of their competitors (including Amazon which is quite popular for cloud storage, cloud hosting and cloud computing power). Low usage caps on internet usage in Canada also makes cloud-based stuff seem like a much worse option.

I don't think there is any more chance of this happening than thin clients being universally adapted in the workplace

+1 to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone else heard that loud bang?

Seems Silverlight got taken out back and shot.

I find it very hard to get to the core of this article, it's so vaguely worded. The applications will still work, but they do seem to hint that people who know Silverlight will have to transition to WinRT.

Some say XNA is alive and kicking, others say XNA is not supported...

It's a very weird realization to start reading an article and be less informed by the time you've reached the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone else heard that loud bang?

Seems Silverlight got taken out back and shot.

belgianguy,

I think you're right about Silverlight being phased out. This is the key passage IMO:

XAML and C#/VB.NET development in Windows 8 can be viewed as a direct evolution from today’s Silverlight. All of your managed programming skills are transferrable to building applications for Windows 8, and in many cases, much of your code will be transferrable as well.

It seems to suggest developers should start thinking in post-Silverlight terms.

--JorgeA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most businesses think exactly like you. MS is also desperately pushing for its azure cloud services. Too bad nobody uses it. And it goes down on leap days too.

CoffeeFiend,

Unbelievable!

I did like the bit in the article about the root cause being a "faulty software bug" (as opposed to a properly working software bug? ;) ).

--JorgeA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems Silverlight got taken out back and shot.

Not that anyone will really notice. Besides, it's been shot dead before. It was already fairly well known there won't be a silverlight 6, and that silverlight won't work on Metro IE (they're "embracing HTML 5" instead). Just like usual, they've pushed ridiculously hard for something that never saw much adoption, only to kill it moments later.

The repeated cycles of this is very well known by developers. You waste so much time learning the new stuff, porting your apps to it, then they kill it off, and you start the cycle yet again. After seeing happen it enough times you being to doubt all their new offerings. I for one, won't be wasting my time with this Metro garbage.

The applications will still work

For one more version, probably in some "compatibility mode". They don't want to directly tell you "you're developing for an already dead platform", but now you know that it's no longer an option in the long-term.

they do seem to hint that people who know Silverlight will have to transition to WinRT

Yep. They expect everybody to stop using WPF and Silverlight (not that either is exactly popular), and to use WinRT (Metro) instead. I'll definitely skip on that.

Some say XNA is alive and kicking, others say XNA is not supported

That's definitely not clear. But I won't be surprised at all the day they decide it's no longer supported, no matter how soon that happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus. It looks like some sort of crippled mixtureof MacOS and Windows 3.x. No way in hell I am potentially buying something that would force me to use such interface even if the whole thing was ten times as fast as Win7. And I was so stunned by that old article where they said how W8 can be ran (not used of course) on some ridiculously old hardware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way in hell I am potentially buying something that would force me to use such interface even if the whole thing was ten times as fast as Win7A

Exactly. There's a handful of people obsessing over how fast it boots when I reboot like once a month. That might save me all of 2 minutes per year! Or indeed, how it would run better on a ten year old computer which I'd never want to use for anything in the first place. As if those are main concerns, especially when Win7 already works great on 5+ year old hardware.

If you take away the new task manager and explorer then there's basically no new worthwhile features left. A pair of minor features doesn't justify the price tag (I mean, SP2 for XP brought us more functionality for free), especially when it comes with that Metro trash which MS won't let you disable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong, I like useless ehnancements. I am all up for improved efficiency. Of course five seconds shorter booting time means nothing, but it gives you the impression the engineers over there did something very good for a change.

But there are always those buts. This time frigging huge ones. I'm not buying into this at that cost, sorry (if the new UI was not there I probably wouldn't wait a single second to feed them my money, despite being extremely happy with Win7)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...