28 replies to this topic

[Chellesei ♔]

As we know, Microsoft has released the consumer preview of its newest OS under development -- Windows 8. Since this OS is not like those previous versions of Windows, some people, including me, think that this OS is going to be something good and refreshing while some others say that they'll be just sticking to Windows 7.

I haven't installed the consumer preview on my computer since I don't want installing previews on it. But, I have seen some videos about its new features and user interface. For me, its tiles-based UI is one of its good points. That way, things such as the weather and mails can be easily checked and some applications can be easily accessed. Uninstalling the programs (on tiles) can be easily done by just simply right clicking the tile and choosing the uninstall option at the bottom. That saves some time.

The 'snap multitasking' can also help me since mostly, I run more than one programs at the same time. Searching and sharing can also be navigated by just clicking the upper right corner of the screen. Another thing that I liked is the Windows Store. At first, when I heard this, I thought "Is Microsoft trying to imitate Apple's Mac App Store? " But... I don't really care about that now. Actually, I'm looking forward to this Windows Store.

These are the system requirements:

Processor: 1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster

RAM: 1 gigabyte (GB) (32-bit) or 2 GB (64-bit)

Hard disk space: 16 GB (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit)

Graphics card: Microsoft DirectX 9 graphics device or higher

To use touch, you need a tablet or monitor that supports multitouch

To access Windows Store and to download and run apps, you need an active Internet connection and a screen resolution of at least 1024 x 768

To snap apps, you need a screen resolution of at least 1366 x 768

Before, I thought that Windows 8 would have higher system requirements than Windows 7.
That's some things I like about Windows 8 so when the stable release comes out, I'll probably switch to it. What about you guys? Have you installed either the developer or consumer preview? Did you like it? Would you stick to the previous Windows versions or upgrade to Windows 8 when it comes out?

Edited by Chellesei ♔, 06 May 2012 - 04:50 PM.

[starscream]

Well if you're not going to use this OS on the tablet or the traditional mouse and keyboard desktop then surely you're supposed to stick witht the old version of the OS. Most of the people who want to try this OS are going to purchase the tablets as the Metro interface is more likely usable for the touch display. You will find it less productive for the desktop or the laptop without any touch device in your side.

That said, Metro is like playing the game of mines where you are suppossed to find the bombs. In case of metro, you uncover the tiles and acess the programs and options. So the tablet loooks more like gaming platform. Very hard to use and hardly any productive for those who wants to do immediate work. On the other hand tablet based users may find this OS usable if we compare some of the mobile users who are using nokia 900 and 800 with metro tiles.

I don't have much expectations from microsoft anymore. I am using linux these days and i am happy with the current progress of it. The apple and windows are more costly to my pocket. Lets see how windows 8 sells on the consumer platform and makes money. I don't see any positive signs in the current months any time soon.

[Ahsaniqbal111]

I am trying to move on to Linux universe but there are a few problems that are restricting me to do so for the time being. It is not that I don't like windows 7 or I have problems troubleshooting with it. I can do almost anything (allowed) I want with it and I can troubleshoot almost every problem. The thing is that I want something different and something more open that would allow me to do anything. Plus I am trying to get into software development stuff and for this I would have to learn how to operate a linux OS as this would help me understand how operating systems and different softwares work. The most important thing is that Linux would be virus free. This would be a huge advantage as I have to deal with USB stick on daily basis that are full of malware.

Windows 8 might be brilliant, (I haven't checked it yet) but I think I won't shift to it as I have a stronger urge to shift to Linux ecosystem.

[calla]

Microsoft use the phrase - Windows reimagined - to highlight their ambitious new operation system.
The Metro style approach provides a totally different view from current application development.
They thing the current UX shows less content but too many chrome controls for navigation, layout, interactions, etc.
They want to provide content before chrome which means content comes first and immerse users in the things they love.
It leaves only the most relevant elements on the screen to minimize distractions

Couple points from their design resources (http://msdn.microsof...s/hh779072.aspx)

• Give content breathing room: intentional space frames the content and allows your eyes to focus on the right thing and remove lines and boxes as a way to group and organize content
• Use Typography: create a sense of structure and hierarchy in your content
• Let content flow from edge to edge: pan only on a single axis to create a sense of stability and to support the selection model
• Create visual alignment: align elements on a grid to create a structured and consistent layout
• Integrate commands into the content
• Leverage the edge
• Provide commands contextually

I can provide more examples later to visualize all this concepts.

[Quatrux]

Windows 8 is the next move to a new paradigm called NUI (Natural user interface). And Microsoft seems to be pushing it quite seriously, their next OS will be NUI based, a computer like Microsoft Surface seems to the the NUI interface computer, which for now isn't a good computer for home users, but it's interface is really innovative .

Remember, the move from CLI to GUI was quite shocking too But for most users of the world, who use the computer just to browse the Internet, listen to music, chat and share, NUI is really the next move for them.

I myself though, will still use keyboard and mouse for some time, as I use computer for more than chatting and sharing The future will tell.

[Ahsaniqbal111]

I myself though, will still use keyboard and mouse for some time, as I use computer for more than chatting and sharing The future will tell.

Well, I think I might also like to stick to my keyboard and mouse for a couple of years to come. Unless, there is some great technological breakout resulting in invention of some product which can increase my efficiency of work.
One of the reasons I want to stick to my keyboard is that I just recently got myself used to it. An year back, I couldn't even type at 15 wpm. But now I am typing at about 60 wpm. And for those who can't type at such speeds, believe me its so much fun. What's more important is that it enhances your efficieny, productivity and creativity to a huge extent because you are not afraid of erasing and writing again and again. And you would also love the sound of keys getting hammered at a blazing speed. Its just so much fun.

[yordan]

the sound of keys getting hammered at a blazing speed. Its just so much fun.

keys getting hammered? How brutal! You should ear my keys being softly brushed at an incredible speed.

[Ahsaniqbal111]

keys getting hammered? How brutal! You should ear my keys being softly brushed at an incredible speed.

I guess you have a different typing style than mine. Whenever I try to type smoothly, without trying for speed, I also get the soft sound from my keys but whey I try to attain maximum speed, the keys of my keyboard seem to be shouting at me.

Personally, I like the soft style more than the hammering one for a number of reasons, the most important of which is that it doesn't make your hands tired and you can type for longer periods of time.

@yordan, can you tell me the speed at which you type? This would help me make a comparison, and probably provide an incentive to change my style so that I can attain higher typing speeds: as I have always wanted that.....

[yordan]

@yordan, can you tell me the speed at which you type? This would help me make a comparison, and probably provide an incentive to change my style so that I can attain higher typing speeds: as I have always wanted that.....

The test I just made said "395 CPM", I guess that you should divide by 5 in order to have it in words per minute.

[Ahsaniqbal111]

So your speed is about 80 WPM. which is definitely a lot better than mine (60 WPM)

I guess this confirms that your style is better than mine and if I have to attain higher speeds, I may have to make some changes to my typing style.
Because 60 WPM is not that bad speed, therefore I don't have to make brisk changes. I can go with it slowly, and I hope I achieve that 100 WPM mark some day soon.

[manuleka]

has anyone tried installing this preview? i've yet to do so but have done on VM and it is quite laggy.... compared to other OSes

[Quatrux]

Well, it's a preview version and those usually are much slower than the production versions, but also I can add if it's a newer OS version, so it requires a more powerful hardware?

[manuleka]

Well, it's a preview version and those usually are much slower than the production versions, but also I can add if it's a newer OS version, so it requires a more powerful hardware?

hehe quite true... i presume it would run alot better if it is installed on hard-drive

[yordan]

hehe quite true... i presume it would run alot better if it is installed on hard-drive

If it's a VM, it's on the hard drive! It's supposed to be as fast as the hard drive of your physical machine. The only difference could be if the vm hard drive does not correctly manage the Windows8 disks.
If this is really the case, it will be fixed in the next vmware release, because Windows 8 will the one of the major releases for the professional systems clouded by vmware.

[manuleka]

If it's a VM, it's on the hard drive! It's supposed to be as fast as the hard drive of your physical machine. The only difference could be if the vm hard drive does not correctly manage the Windows8 disks.
If this is really the case, it will be fixed in the next vmware release, because Windows 8 will the one of the major releases for the professional systems clouded by vmware.

so you're saying that running a Guest OS will be no different in performance (including lags) then actually installing it on the drive itself?

I think the opposite, unless the Guest OS access the hard-ware directly - there's no way it will perform as good, but then mind you Windows 8 Preview isn't a fully stable OS yet

Edited by manuleka, 02 July 2012 - 09:59 AM.

[yordan]

so you're saying that running a Guest OS will be no different in performance (including lags) then actually installing it on the drive itself?
I think the opposite

I think that there should be at least a small effect.
Vmware people claim that there is no difference in perfomance between a virtual machine using a given hardware, and the same operating system using the same hardware.
Some colleagues claim the same thing. Else, the whole cloud thing could not work, if too much power would be lost.
And, of course, if the thing is made correctly, this could be true.
Crosoft Windows uses a driver of the native machine in order to access the disk.
The OS inside the virtual machine sends requests to the vmware daemons, which pass the request to the native system drivers. So, at the end, the same drivers are used the same way to access the same devices.
There could be a bug making a need of retry on the SCSI or IDE channel, which would make a loss of performance, but the bug will be solved in the next vmware release.
There could be a very simple test.
Create a 10 gig partition on a native hard drive, and make a disk benchmark test on it.
Then give that partition to a virtual machine and perform the same test.
These two tests should give the same result.
Of course, in order to be valid, the test should not be performed on a partition, but on a full disk, using the same full disk for the native system and for the virtual machine system.
If you see a difference, you are rich : you sell your test to the VM designers and help them solving the problem, and you will receive a lot of of money for that very good job.

-- EDIT --
forget this, I will contact them and I will become very rich

[manuleka]

I think that there should be at least a small effect. Vmware people claim that there is no difference in perfomance between a virtual machine using a given hardware, and the same operating system using the same hardware. Some colleagues claim the same thing. Else, the whole cloud thing could not work, if too much power would be lost. And, of course, if the thing is made correctly, this could be true. Crosoft Windows uses a driver of the native machine in order to access the disk. The OS inside the virtual machine sends requests to the vmware daemons, which pass the request to the native system drivers. So, at the end, the same drivers are used the same way to access the same devices. There could be a bug making a need of retry on the SCSI or IDE channel, which would make a loss of performance, but the bug will be solved in the next vmware release. There could be a very simple test. Create a 10 gig partition on a native hard drive, and make a disk benchmark test on it. Then give that partition to a virtual machine and perform the same test. These two tests should give the same result. Of course, in order to be valid, the test should not be performed on a partition, but on a full disk, using the same full disk for the native system and for the virtual machine system. If you see a difference, you are rich : you sell your test to the VM designers and help them solving the problem, and you will receive a lot of of money for that very good job. -- EDIT -- forget this, I will contact them and I will become very rich

slowness on Virtual Machines depends on the hardware running the HOST machine... don't tell me that all your VMs runs as smoothly as your HOST OS?

I have installed and played around with variety of OSes on VM... it's not as smooth as running it with a direct install to the hard-drive...

For instance, I'm currently using Windows XP Professional with VMware Workstation 8... i tested LinuxMint 13 on VMware Workstation and i notice its lagging a bit here and there... when i did a fresh install to dual boot with my XP Pro it runs like a breeze and was pretty quick too...

[Quatrux]

Well, separately installed LinuxMint has more resources to the hardware as they are free, when you run it through VMware, you use your hardware resources to run two operating systems, you have less RAM, less processing and etc.

If you run virtual machines on a very powerful hardware with lots of ram and lots of CPU, the difference will be minimal, but as a rule, one operating system will be faster running on one CPU than two operating systems running on a dual core CPU using different threads, but the difference can be quite small and usually is much more useful and having one big server with lots of stuff is much better than having lots of servers for different things as the processing power isn't fully used and the cloud thing for example is good as you can share resources and use the existing hardware resources for lots of services.

So that minimal lost of resources is really useful to fully use one machine for it's capabilities. One machine can run a lot of services and operating systems and calibrate between when, use the existing resources when available and share them.

[manuleka]

Well, separately installed LinuxMint has more resources to the hardware as they are free, when you run it through VMware, you use your hardware resources to run two operating systems, you have less RAM, less processing and etc. If you run virtual machines on a very powerful hardware with lots of ram and lots of CPU, the difference will be minimal, but as a rule, one operating system will be faster running on one CPU than two operating systems running on a dual core CPU using different threads, but the difference can be quite small and usually is much more useful and having one big server with lots of stuff is much better than having lots of servers for different things as the processing power isn't fully used and the cloud thing for example is good as you can share resources and use the existing hardware resources for lots of services. So that minimal lost of resources is really useful to fully use one machine for it's capabilities. One machine can run a lot of services and operating systems and calibrate between when, use the existing resources when available and share them.

exactly... and that's why i said there's a lag problem... yordan seems to think otherwise - that's its a VM issue

[yordan]

exactly... and that's why i said there's a lag problem... yordan seems to think otherwise - that's its a VM issue

We should not mix the problem.
When my Windows host has 2 gigs free, this means that I can give 2 gigs to a virtual machine. As long as there is a lot of memory free, we are testing the cpu performance.
The disks in the PC can be accessed by a single process which exhaust the whole disk bandwidth. This means that you can comfortable work on your native host, or on your VM machine, but not simultaneously on both - except if you have fiberchannel adapters connected to a decent SAN.
So, do not mix cpu-access problems and lack of memory problem.
My friend has a 8-core laptop with 64 gigs memory, on a virtual machine he opens a big Excel file ten times faster than I do on my native XP laptop. Of course this will not make me switch to a bigger laptop, I simply know that if I had far more money, I could work far more efficiently. Simply waiting one hour costs less than finding $1000.00 in order to buy a bigger hardware!