Reasons for choosing Windows 8.0?

[NoelC]

1 hour ago, greenhillmaniac said:

And do you know if 8.0 is faster in Explorer performance compared to 7?

Wow, it's been a while since I did that testing...  For what it's worth I waited until 8.1 was out before upgrading from 7; I did not find much in the context of what I needed that was better in 8.0 than 7.  Back then I was actively posting on SSD forums trying to figure out the best setup, and I would remember saying Win 8.0 was faster if it actually was.  Yes, I'm remembering more now...  Win 8.0's Explorer was incrementally slower than that of Win 7, though I don't remember by how much - but it was not as slow as 8.1 became.

That being said, from my ongoing testing it appears Win 8.1, with Windows Updates, picked up a little performance over time as compared to its first releases (for me it enumerates over 20K files/second now), so I can't honestly say how today's Win 8.1 compares to any level of 8.0.  It's possible that 8.0 with all the available patches is also now faster than the originally released 8.0.  Probably some detailed testing is needed.  Unfortunately I no longer have any 8.0 systems here.

For what it's worth, I stopped updating Win 8.1 as of July, though I'm still not sure whether I'll hold to this course.  I may apply security updates, though it's entirely possible Microsoft could destroy the utility of an older OS through security updates.  For now my system is perfectly stable (42 days uptime at the moment) and it performs well, so it's hard to want to allow Microsoft to change it.

-Noel

Edited October 15, 2016 by NoelC

[xpclient]

Personally I prefer 8.1 because it does better job of cleaning WinSxS due to above mentioned /resetbase switch, 8.1 still gets security updates, shows Metro apps on Taskbar, has Internet Explorer 11, PowerShell 5.0, ability to set a Metered connection. It also has DirectX 11.2, Miracasting to supported receiver devices, Lockscreen Slideshow, Network path search via Win+F, native fingerprint registration. If you use Windows To Go, Store apps can be used in 8.1 WTG USB stick. Windows 8.0 has the File-based Backup that creates ZIP files (8.1 removed that) but otherwise everything else is there that I need. I turn off OneDrive via Group Policy in 8.1 since I cannot tolerate it. For Windows Experience Index, I use Winaero's WEI Tool.

[NoelC]

Remembered something today that Windows 8.1's File Explorer does better than Win 7's.

Let's say you want to disable inheritance of file permissions so as to change a particular permission value of a file (I sometimes do this, for example, to disable a .exe from being able to run).

In Win 8 there's a button for that...

...but not in Win 7...

Sure, there IS a way to accomplish the task, through the Change Permissions button, but it's indirect and doesn't make it easy to duplicate the effective permissions that the file already has.

-Noel

[dencorso]

5 hours ago, xpclient said:

Personally I prefer 8.1 because it ...

My take: the only really strong reason to remain at 8.0 is to avoid decommissioning (= retiring) perfectly good and healthy older hardware, which is Jody's original reason. Of course, one can stay on 8.0 for other reasons, all perfectly reasonable, but deciding to keep one's loved/trusty hardware may compel one to stop at 8.0, if one wishes to use the x64 version (the hardware requirements discussed in the quotations below apply to x64 only!).  

On 12/19/2015 at 0:13 AM, dencorso said:

It seems to me that Intel processors that are unable to run 8.1 and 10 lack PREFETCHW, which all multicore AMD processors do include, whereas most multicore AMDs that are unable to run 8.1 and 10 lack CMPXCHG16b, instead. However, at this point, this is little more than just a guess. I know for sure all Athlon XPs cannot run even 8.0, because they lack SSE2, among other things, but not all Athlon 64 X2 and later AMD processors are able to run 8.1 or 10 but all seem to be able to run 8.0...

On 9/9/2016 at 5:06 PM, dencorso said:

It's no guess anymore, but fact. Of course we're talking about processors Intel from Jan 2006 or newer.
Later Addition: It turns out that the 1st Intel processor to support PREFETCHW was Cedar Mill, the 65 nM final revision of the Pentium 4 released on January 5, 2006. And it seems that the 1st AMDs to support CMPXCHG16B were the Bulldozers, from late 2011!!!
Sysinternals' CoreInfo is the right tool to test whether a machine has those requirements or not.

NB: Care when interpreting CoreInfo's results: in them a "*" means "yes" and a "-" means "no", but all the features it tests are alway listed. So, the excerpt below means "YES Supports CMPXCHG16B and NO Support for PREFETCHW":

...
CX16          *    Supports CMPXCHG16B instruction
...
PREFETCHW     -    Supports PREFETCHW instruction
...

My 2¢ only. Feel free to disagree and/or disregard, simply because YMMV.

[Jody Thornton]

1 hour ago, dencorso said:

My take: the only really strong reason to remain at 8.0 is to avoid decommissioning (= retiring) perfectly good and healthy older hardware, which is Jody's original reason. Of course, one can stay on 8.0 for other reasons, all perfectly reasonable, but deciding to keep one's loved/trusty hardware may compel one to stop at 8.0, if one wishes to use the x64 version (the hardware requirements discussed in the quotations below apply to x64 only!).  

My 2¢ only. Feel free to disagree and/or disregard, simply because YMMV.

Nope I completely think it's valid.  Funny I was just posting on the XP forums, and there are times that I felt that I wasn't able to post my two cents on here.  But for example, I no longer condone running XP, so I express it (and yes the same caveats apply - YMMV and all that) but at some point you should be able to state what's on your mind point blank.  That's what makes us all different.

I am enjoying Windows 8 though Dencorso.  Come 2023, I'm not quite sure what I'll do.  Maybe I'll keep a disconnected Windows box around for my older audio apps, and go Linux for Internet.  But it's nice to have them integrated.

Or one never knows, just like I've had a change of heart on XP (which I used to love) and Windows 8 (which I originally loathed), maybe changes may come around in Windows 10 that may draw me to the OS.  Could that possibly happen?

[NoelC]

>maybe changes may come around in Windows 10 that may draw me to the OS.  Could that possibly happen?

It's a Really Good question.

But, IMO, the answer is no.  Not for technical reasons, though.  I've been all the way down the road with Win 10, and I can tell you it can be turned into a system that's not half bad - one that could possibly even be loved.

But...

Microsoft has made it their mission in life to keep us from keeping (and loving) that tweaked, customized system in working order for very long.  Something breaks every darned time an update comes in.

And THAT makes it a non-starter.

Will Microsoft see the error in their ways and drop back to a model where they put out a Good Operating System every 3 years or so, and re-embrace serious, business computing - which is what made them great?  I honestly don't see how they could do that.  They now have a company full of hipsters and junior programmers who don't know their assembler from a hole in the ground.

Is there a flavor of Win 10 that could become the system of choice after which one throttles back Windows Updates - kind of like what we're doing now with Win 8?  Maybe.  But I'm not sure there's anything at all better about it technically that would make doing so something reasonable.  Better to just keep the older software running in good working order.

-Noel

Edited October 16, 2016 by NoelC

[Jody Thornton]

2 minutes ago, NoelC said:

Microsoft has made it their mission in life to keep us from keeping (and loving) that tweaked, customized system in working order for very long.

And THAT makes it a non-starter.

Will Microsoft see the error in their ways and drop back to a model where they put out a Good Operating System every 3 years or so, and re-embrace serious, business computing - which is what made them great?  I honestly don't see how they could do that.  They now have a company full of hipsters and junior programmers who don't know their assembler from a hole in the ground.

-Noel

That would be my BIGGEST concern.  Now I understand why Microsoft (in addition to most other tech companies) feels that desktop computing is no longer a priority.  I hate it too, but mobility is where it's at, and I don't see it changing.  Young people 40 and under just are NOT voluntarily using PCs.  Anecdotally, all I see are devices.  They only use Windows 7 at work because they have to, and even that's changing slowly.

So, since I know I'm not along with the tide of popularity, I'll stay with a Windows OS release that seems under the radar a bit.

That "a**-emblers" crack was quite clever.

[NoelC]

2 minutes ago, JodyT said:

I hate it too, but mobility is where it's at, and I don't see it changing.  Young people 40 and under just are NOT voluntarily using PCs.

That's what they want us all to think but not everyone - not even all the young folks - are that naïve. 

Style and fashion simply do not trump reality!

I'm as flexible as anyone.  I've been an early adopter all my life, and I have a tablet and various other handheld tech too.  But I'm here to tell you that I do my real work on my desktop system because it's impossible to get serious, difficult work done at the limits of one's abilities with anything less than a real computer.  No hipster youngling is going to make that go away just by proclaiming that desktop computers aren't cool.  Someone has to do the difficult work.  Not a person alive can make a valid argument that what can be done on a powerful tablet can't be done better on an even more powerful, big screen, multimonitor desktop.

Engineering is essentially stagnating because people want to play with handheld toys.  That won't keep.  We ain't gonna get to a Star Trek future by talking Cortana into bringing up web searches.  SOMEONE has to actually make the next tech.  SOMEONE has to work at or near the limits of human abilities to make new things that are better than ever before.  That's worlds away from distracted driving and tapping out a few things on a tablet at Panera Bread.

-Noel

[jaclaz]

9 hours ago, NoelC said:

 Not a person alive can make a valid argument that what can be done on a powerful tablet can't be done better on an even more powerful, big screen, multimonitor desktop.

Allow me - as often happens - to partially disagree.

You are mixing the form factor and available peripherals with the hardware capabilities (and you are perfectly right about the fact that some work *needs* a big screen, possibly multi-monitor, some "sensible" input device, i.e. keyboard and high precision mouse/pen and that such things are now offered only by a desktop system) but - in theory and given the ridiculous speed and computing power of today's small devices - it would be not too hard to imagine that before or later you could have a smartphone sized device that you simply "dock" onto a desktop setup, including multi-monitor, keyboard, sensible input device, etc.

The main point is the other one you made, it is the "continuum" idea that is flawed, instead of dumbing down the user interface with simplified (limited) options and ridiculously huge buttons (suitable to be "pressed" by big, fat, fingers on a teeny-tiny touchscreen) and keep that same interface when a desktop setup is connected, they should have made two completely different interfaces, one - simplified - for the teeny-tiny touchscreen and one with all the options available, etc. suited to when you have a keyboard, mouse/pen, etc. and large monitor(s) connected, BUT seemingly there is no-one (since the Office Ribbon was pushed upon the unsuspecting user) capable to "invent" a "desktop user interface" better than the good ol' "win9x-like" (or if you prefer Macintosh System 7) one.

And no, both the Mac OsX interface and all the various Linux desktops are either very "win9x-like" or they fail to be as functional as the good ol' way.

Whether this happens because by now we got used to it or because by sheer luck that is the best possible interface is hard to say, still while it makes sense to have a "hamburger" menu on a small screen there is no reason why we should have the same on a large monitor where each sub-menu would be more accessible, and (at least to me) having a full keyboard and a mouse with right click and a wheel on the mouse makes a huge difference in the speed with which I can work on a PC.

BUT then again, what would be the "advantage" of having *everything* on this imagined tablet or smartphone sized computer?

Of course the possibility to consult/have handy all your data anytime, BUT at a much greater risk of losing/damaging the ONLY storage of such data.

So all in all IF they could make up their mind and have an OS interface for "real" machines (desktops and "portables" - I consider todays HUGE 15" "laptops" as something I would NEVER dare to rest on my lap) and another one for tablets/smartphones and sub-notebooks and devise an actually working, foolproof and safe "syncing" method (excluding the stupid Cloud) between them everyone would be happy I believe:

1) kids and hipsters would be happy to play and only consume information on their tablet/smartphone devices
2) "serious" users could have the convenience of their "serious" desktop setup when working AND optionally be able to have their data with them accessible through their tablet/smartphone device.
 

jaclaz

 

[NoelC]

1 hour ago, jaclaz said:

 in theory and given the ridiculous speed and computing power of today's small devices - it would be not too hard to imagine that before or later you could have a smartphone sized device that you simply "dock" onto a desktop setup, including multi-monitor, keyboard, sensible input device, etc.

In theory, maybe, that sounds good.  But that theory has not been matched by reality.  Bigger computers are still more powerful computers.  More reliable computers.  Better computers.  While the small ones are more problem prone to say the least.

Things like power / heat dissipation, sheer size of components (however much RAM or flash you can cram in a little box, you can cram more in a big box), manufacturing tolerances, problems with materials, etc. make it so.  And desktops don't tend to catch fire.

And...  How much compute power is "enough"?  Asked another way, could more be better?  Sure, there may be some jobs where just a modest amount (of course equivalent to yesteryear's top-end power) is "enough".  But there are always jobs that could be done even better with more.  In my experience, most of them.

I have quite a big computer.  With it I have done things many others haven't been able to do.  I see more code at once and can engineer more complex algorithms.  I get builds done quicker.  I do more things simultaneously.  I simply crunch through stuff that others struggle with.  And yet I have always craved even more compute power, because there is always something more I could imagine doing if only the system were quicker or could store more data...

Regarding taking your data with you:  You seem to be making a good case for cloud computing, BUT...  It can also be accomplished by creating private network tunnels through the cloud to YOUR OWN DATA.  Some of us have been doing that for years already.  When I travel I remote into my main desktop system and have all my data AND compute power available to me WITHOUT exposing it to those who would invade my privacy and mine it for their own profit.  This cloud BS is no more than an attempt to wrest control of your data away from you so as to profit from your work.  It's easy to see through that ruse.

No, the strong hype that "mobile is it and desktop computing is out" doesn't actually hold water.  In the information age there are reasons people have to "go to" work in offices, cubicles, etc., and no Surface Pro or iPhone is going to change that.  People need to let go of the flawed idea that their most idle thoughts have value and that talking to something they hold in their hand is good for anything other than distracting them from the guilt of not doing enough real work.

-Noel

Edited October 16, 2016 by NoelC

[jaclaz]

Well, actually my idea was explicitly excluding the (stupid) Cloud.

The Internet (and the Cloud) is good to publish your public data, definitely NOT to hold your private ones. 

Your VPN and remote access is a good idea, only it won't work for the masses and it is - most probably - not as secure as you would like it to be (I mean your setup is probably secure or secure enough, but the masses will manage to put together terrible security holes).

And surely not everyone actually *needs* that kind of computing power you need/use, though MORE is always better.

My most used tools (Excel or other spreadsheet, Word or other word processor, some drawing tools *like* Autocad, a handful of vertical, specific programs) have become MUCH faster than myself  several years ago on almost *any* hardware, and if the good MS guys (AND the good Linux guys) didn't manage to senselessly slow down everything at each release by adding mostly unneeded BLOAT, requiring me to upgrade the hardware to keep pace with the introduced slowness, I would be very happy with the current average computing power, particularly since we managed to get SSD's  .

Still, with all this computing power and progress and plug'n play OS's and what not, if we have to do simple things, like simply synchronize the address book of two (different make/model) handies between them and with a desktop is a nightmare.

This is something I could do in DOS between a PC and a PSION some 25 years ago in less than a minute ...

And I could completely image/backup on optical media (CD) a whole hard disk (500 Mb) in less than one hour ...

Progress is something different, as I see it ...

jaclaz

 

 

[osRe]

Quote

HarryTri>
- Compatibility mode for Oses older than Windows Vista
- No Libraries in the My Computer folder

- If you mean running EXEs in compatibility mode, I do see Win95 and up in Win8.1.

- The 6 Library folders can be removed by deleting or renaming the 6 CLSIDs under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MyComputer\NameSpace\

Quote

xpclient>
For Windows Experience Index, I use Winaero's WEI Tool.

Is there a real use for WEI? Isn't it just a very limited benchmark tool?

 

Edited November 2, 2016 by shae

[NoelC]

1 hour ago, shae said:

Is there a real use for WEI? Isn't it just a very limited benchmark tool?

I'm imagining he's just pointing out that there is an equivalent UI on the newer systems for reading the WEI numbers, not to mention pointing out that winaero.com has a lot of nice stuff available.

In a world where Windows is getting worse (not to mention less overtly tweakable) it makes sense that tweaking information, tools, sites, etc. will become more and more prominent.  Probably the more appropriate word would be "hacking" rather than "tweaking", but "hacking" has taken on negative connotations.

-Noel