• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Why most of us will probably switch to Windows 8.

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
How much better?

"Better" is very subjective. A small amount could be variance between runs, while a large amount is good.
As I recall it was an average of about 425 points, close to a 10% jump for my FX-4100.
I ran the test 5 times on each OS.
I quit using W8 for now because of vid drivers.
I do like some of the changes that were made to W8 like the added features on Windows Explorer over W7, example:

NewToolbar4.jpg

I spent a lot of time tweaking on it to be a desktop environment and liked it when I was done.
But I doubt I will rush to pay for an OS that I have to go tweaking on all over again.
 
Thank you for posting that ssjwizard.

Does http://sourceforge.net/projects/classicshell/files/ also interfere with Windows 8 functions?

Im not sure, Im back on win 7 at the moment. I have used all 3 versions of the Win 8 betas over the last 6-7 months and I just got tired of the incompleteness of it. I finally started liking win 8 when an nVidia driver related problem pushed me past my tolerance level. I expect Ill use win 8 after its been out for a while, but for the moment Im back on 7.
 
OK. Either way, all this is relevant only after RTM version is released three weeks from now. RTM may or may not have whatever is in the Beta versions.


But tell me this, what should I be looking for when testing whether functionality of Windows 8 is affected when using third party Shells?


I have the same question about Windows 8's 16-Bit functionality: Windows 8 Control Panel > (on top right) Small Icons > 16-bit Application Support > Enable
I am trying to find out if anything functional will be disabled when I do that?
 
As I recall it was an average of about 425 points, close to a 10% jump for my FX-4100.
I ran the test 5 times on each OS.

That is the kind of thing I'm saying will drive many enthusiasts to Windows 8. In another year, if you're benching on Windows 7, the competition has a leg up on you.
 
I wish I would have spent some folding time with it but the vid driver issues made me go back to W7.
 
I never say never although I got dragged myself from Vista to 7 despite having issues with 7, and none with Vista and swore I wouldn't use 7.

Now I rt7ed my windows 7 disk and it works very decently. And it installs SO fast. (7 minutes from naked drive to desktop...another 1 hr for driver installs :p)

I will make the switch to 8 I am sure before the ned of the year defintiely. If upgrade is $40 whats retail cost? I do not like using upgrade versions.

Don't like the lack of AERO but I am sure there will be a mod for that via windows blinds or something :)
 
Last edited:
I think the OP is correct and that benchers will most definitely be getting this OS regardless of anything else.


We figured out how to use regular Microsoft Office 95-2003 menus instead of the ribbon menus MS Office 2007-present have so I don't see how Metro will be different but the other poster also has a point about being sick of tweaking things.


A general rule should be that software companies should give us an easy way to enable/disable/customize things. That's what Firefox gave us and forced Internet Explorer to change. Customization is key to making sure nobody comes out of left field and takes over your customers. Microsoft-Adobe-Symantec generally resist customizations but hopefully it will just be a question of time before competing products force them to let us choose how we want to customize their products which we buy.
 
How does Win8 treat DOS apps?

I know DOSBOX works great, but it would be nice to have the ability built in.
 
Looking forward to finding that out after this is set:

Windows 8 Control Panel > (on top right) Small Icons > 16-bit Application Support > Enable
 
On the thread topic though, Gautam did extended Operating System tests a while back which showed Windows Vista performing excellent. In real life however, as most of us have experienced, that was not the case. So benchmarks do not always tell real life usage experiences, by far.


First time buyers, I don't see why anyone would not choose to go with Windows 8? Metro problem will be addressed if it hasn't already been - imho - there is no way we won't figure out how to disable Metro UI.


Paying to upgrade to Windows 8 though, many post they will not do that.
I never poke in this section, but for some reason decided to click on this thread today only to see myself mentioned. :)

As far as the numbers go, my feeling is, usually the older the app is, the older the OS that runs it optimally is.

3DMark01 is best in Win2K (in theory, if it supported today's hardware)
03- XP
05- Vista
06- Vista/7
Vantage- 7/Vista
11 - 7
Whatever comes next- 8

See the trend?

As far as usage goes, I never felt there to be much of a difference between 7 and Vista, other than accessing a decent search function being much more difficult in 7, and faster boots. My opinion, I could very well be wrong, is simply that the general populace did not have proper hardware to run Vista at the time that it released, and did by the time that 7 hit the shelves. Pretty much any system with at least 2 cores and 2 gigs of RAM should feel smooth in Vista. However, that wasn't quite the norm at the time of its release, even in a community like ours. Cut those in half and the experience starts getting a lot worse. I suppose 7 does handle lower-end hardware a bit more gracefully, but having never tried myself, assume that the difference probably isn't too large.

The other opinion I have regarding Vista versus 7 is that Aero was a brand new interface when Vista launched, but was not when 7 launched. People generally don't like change. By the time 7 came along, people were used to looking at it enough that they didn't complain.

A general rule should be that software companies should give us an easy way to enable/disable/customize things.
The search functionality in 7, everything about Office 2007 and now Metro in 8 are all great of examples of MS giving their customers headaches by not doing this. I think in a couple of years, it's likely that everyone will get used to Metro and not mind it as much as they do now, but there's no need to have thrust upon us against our will. Office 2007 was such an example for me. I don't mind it at all now, but it was a huge headache when it came out, and since I only used it at work, it's not like I had a choice or much ability to customize anything.
 
I liked Vista never had an issue with it. I think most of the "complaints" about it being slow was the original pirated version of it was a time cracked BETA release which had driver diagnostics enabled which did cause a performance hit the actual retail copy was quite good.

Oh and nVidia not being able to make drivers for the 8800s on Vista hurt it too.

I cant tell the difference between an original windows 7 laptop and a vista laptop of the same era. Both are way better than XP :)
 
LOL I know, I shouldn't say that. I do work on PCs and I cringe when I have to work on an XP box.

My old boss I build cheap boxes for, and he always wants XP. I said.. I can load up a VM for you.. maybe dual boot linux (I tried giving him a windows 7 PC with linux and XP in VMs and told him he could alt+tab between the two.. nope he wants XP

then again his main work box is running HPUX 11 (I really hate having to work on that) so XP is still kinda new to him :)
 
I can say this, if it benches well enough to justify the cost I'll get it for that but it still may not go in my main box. Heck I use XP to bench but won't put it on a PC I have to use as I really can't stand using it anymore. If a PC in my house can't handle vista/7 then it gets Ubuntu/Mint on it.
 
People generally don't like change. By the time 7 came along, people were used to looking at it enough that they didn't complain.


The search functionality in 7, everything about Office 2007 and now Metro in 8 are all great of examples of MS giving their customers headaches by not doing this. I think in a couple of years, it's likely that everyone will get used to Metro and not mind it as much as they do now, but there's no need to have thrust upon us against our will. Office 2007 was such an example for me. I don't mind it at all now, but it was a huge headache when it came out, and since I only used it at work, it's not like I had a choice or much ability to customize anything.


Yeah well put.

I just wanted to say something additional on this topic. It's really not about hating change for some of us as much as it is about instantaneous computing. If anything can be done even a fraction of a second faster, we 'd like to make it be done faster. I stayed with old Office software primarily because over the years - I custom created Excel and Word icons so that I know exactly where they are and ALL the ones I use are exactly where i want them to be.


Because they are right there in front of me, by the time a modern Microsoft Office user processed a thought about the grace with which modern Office Ribbons open, with the speed of laser light of a Gaming Mouse, I can SINGLE click and do several Excel or Word operations:


 

Attachments

  • Excel-Office.jpg
    Excel-Office.jpg
    128.2 KB · Views: 68
Last edited:
Ugh toolbar user.

I have to remove 2-3 toolbars from my kids PC every month because they install anything...

You image reminds me of that.

16:9 becomes the norm. less vertical real estate, more vertical space being taken up? no sense. Move it to the side. Thats where I put the task bar..

Just looked at your icon bar.. DAMN you are such a sarariman.

**Humour-- ever heard of ctrl+z**

EDIT: I get using the mouse but seriously how many times in MS word do you use the mouse. Or do you just say Forget it and use the same keyboard controls you have since 98? That has not changed. So WTF does the ribbon do except eat up vertical real estate?

Oh and make it easier for nubs.

If you do not know KB shortcuts you can not put on your resume that you know MS office. You can put on there that you can "figure it out" not the same thing. Some people know that 2+2=4 some need a calculator, not the same thing. LOL seriously its not like its changed over the last 20 years much. Less so than actual language.


EDIT: you know what... thats okay. if you can do advanced functions with the click of mouse instead of thinking about it thats a good thing right? thats an advanced society kind of thing.
 
Last edited:
Those are Excel 2003 and Word 2003. They're just custom icons so everything is done with a single click without even opening the menus. The point is that yes no one else would use it - but individual users can make custom things like that - so they work several orders of magnitude faster than when using default settings.

It's really hard to explain just how instantaneous things can be for custom users. Literally flying across the screen, making things happen.


Opening ribbons increases the time required for me.
 
EDIT: you know what... thats okay. if you can do advanced functions with the click of mouse instead of thinking about it thats a good thing right? thats an advanced society kind of thing.

I'm used to having this conversation. I had a guy once talk about how it used to be in the "Roman Times" and how we're so "spoiled" we want "everything" faster and now. Like that's unreasonable since the very existence of computing is to make things faster. Software developers should do whatever they want to do. Metro. Ribbons. Anything they want. As long as they give us the option to customize.


To answer your question, my mind knows the screen coordinates of every icon so bam bam bam: Three operations are done in a fraction of a second.
People think it's not a big deal but to me it's like having a conversation with someone from the mid 1990s about dial-up and how dial-up is not that bad. Anything that can make things faster even a fraction of a second should be an option.
 
Back