AfterDawn Forums

Windows 8 is for kids, not silly rabbits.

This discussion thread has 22 messages.

#1
2 days on 8 and I am done with it. Seeing how it is now just rolling out the door with some serious performance issues, I don't see fixes coming for at least 6 months. If you loved Windows 95 on a Dell, you're gonna love how this POS reels.

4 some it's just fine
4 others it's great
but it's not for me man
7 is heaven.

--pcdtv--
▼▼ This topic has 21 answers - they are below this advertisement ▼▼
AfterDawn Advertisement
#2
I'd be interested to hear more details about the issues you've had. I definitely have some complaints about it but I've found the performance to actually be quite good. In fact I've been running it from an old POS 5400RPM hard drive connected via USB 2.0 and if anything performance-wise it's been surprisingly impressive.

OTOH my results aren't from anything particularly taxing on the hardware either so that's really just a measure of baseline performance on my system.

Rich Fiscus
@Vurbal on Twitter
AfterDawn Staff Writer
#3
Last night I was thinking that Windows 8 would be OK. This morning I was attempting to transfer about 20 files of about 20GB of data from an internal SSD to an internal HDD. Transfer should have been about 200MB/s. What I got was the progress graphic that just stood there adding minutes to the estimated time of completion. There was no disk activity, there was no maxed out cpu usage. It was just stuck waiting for a time out that never came. I killed the transfer after 6 minutes. 1 file got transferred. I followed up with some testing. Reducing the number of files to 6GB and 4 files I at least got things to transfer. The transfer would start out fast at 200MB/s for the first 25% but then would nosedive down into the 28MB/s range and then occasionally there would be pauses with no activity but eventually would transfer. I have a USB 3.0 flash drive and a 2TB Passport drive. In 7, I was getting 70MB/s write transfers to both from the internal SSD.
In 8, the passport seems about the same, but the flash is down to 28MB/s.

I did some research and found that others had seen the same performance problem in the pre-release with SATA III drives. The answers and suggestions from the MS tech were at best unresolving. I have also seen performance glitches in processing where there is unexplained pauses and hesitations that were not evident in 7.

I was not expecting improvement from Windows 8, I did expect at least the same performance. It feels like I have a tablet o/s on my desktop. I am disappointed with this release for my pc the UI feels like a compromise for the sake of similar appearance between pc, tablet and phone. Case in point. I have 20 applications on my pc. I don't want to totally clutter out the start screen with big tiles for each app. So then you go to all apps and everything and their mother gets dumped onto an extended screen. So if the start screen offers too small a footprint and the all apps is too overwhelming, you can go back to desktop, i.e. the catch all compromise for pc users.
If anything I would rather have the ability to customize the interface to do what I need to do, but, we don't have that luxury. The interface hides open applications that if you fail to close, one at a time, will have you sending an error report to MS. I think that Windows 8 will be fine for the tablet and phone. If it weren't for the performance hit which is a big thing for me. Windows 8 for the pc would be OK, not great, not better, just OK.

The fact that you have received better performance from older hardware is not to be ignored. It shows there will be improvement for some. It just failed miserably for my expectations which is a shame because I love new and different and better. Maybe they take care of the file transfer problem, and we'll get mini motion detectors we can mount on our wide screen displays so we can air finger to our hearts desire.

--pcdtv--
#4
On one hand you could look at that and say it's specific to certain high end hardware, although I'll have to do some research now that you've pointed it out. On the other hand what it suggests to me is a driver issue that's just not acceptable. It's one thing for a new version of Windows to have issues with something like a sound card but if there's one thing I expect to be rock solid in my OS, whether it's brand new or not, is storage drivers.

As to the interface issues all I can say is you've pretty much nailed my thoughts on the whole Start screen as Start menu issue. I'm actually fine with removing the Start menu in principle. While having a central hub for all that functionality is nice I'm increasingly of the opinion there has to be a better interface (or combination of interfaces) that would work better - particularly for my dozens of program shortcuts. On the other hand Microsoft's "solution" of basically abandoning the desktop in favor of the tablet UI is an epic fail IMO.

On the good side the more they decide to take out of the desktop UI the more room there is for third parties to develop something better. Even if that's going to happen, though, it's not an immediate solution which is why I've decided to go with a Start menu replacement for now.

Rich Fiscus
@Vurbal on Twitter
AfterDawn Staff Writer
#5
you can change usb3 performance if you go to device manager, disk drives then policies, for me windows 8 is fantastic better security better networking and much faster you can add a start menu if you google it. for 25 its a steal ...
#6
A pc needs a desktop.
A desktop needs to be usable.
What I don't like about 7: Icons, icons, and more icons. On the desktop, on taskbar, in the notification area on the taskbar.
What I like about 8: Live tiles!

I would like my tiles to be versatile. I also want them hidden when I don't need them. I realize that for systems sake you have to have some tiles that are integral and must be familiar to the universal user. So instead of charms and a bar the rises from the South to get at things, I would like to see tiles pop from the left or right edge of the screen. The tiles can also be detached from the sides and dragged and placed anywhere on the desktop. You could also assign tiles to function keys that appear on the desktop when needed. Maybe the tiles on the right are always there with specific purpose and maybe the tiles on the left are fully customizable. Depending on what you do on the computer, the tiles could be live. Or they could contain icons, or they could contain lists, or combinations there of. But most of all you could have a neat desktop or a messy one. With a click you could put all the tiles back in their original order. With a click you could close all open applications and shut down. But most of all, I would like things to just work right.

Case in point: Two apps up, right click on the taskbar to show windows side by side. One of the apps goes full screen the other one goes half. They must of broken this to force us to snap apps in uneven proportions.

--pcdtv--
#7
Originally posted by smoggie66:
you can change usb3 performance if you go to device manager, disk drives then policies, for me windows 8 is fantastic better security better networking and much faster you can add a start menu if you google it. for 25 its a steal ...
It's really not a steal to pay extra for what should be a standard feature included in Windows. I certainly wouldn't pay that much money for it, although I will probably end up using either Classic Shell (free) or Start8 ($5) for the job.

Rich Fiscus
@Vurbal on Twitter
AfterDawn Staff Writer
#8
I was referring to windows 8 not the start menu, but ye start 8 is what iam using and find it very good. also if anybody is downloading windows 8 from Microsoft make sure yo choose download as media and it will give you a choice of iso or usb so you can make a instalation disk, ive herd a lot of people who choose to install directly and had problems but cant reinstall it because they don't have the media. I would also advise people to run disk cleanup to remove old windows and save disk space then make a image when you have it running correctly.
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 31 Oct 2012 @ 11:43
#9
Originally posted by smoggie66:
I was referring to windows 8 not the start menu, but ye start 8 is what iam using and find it very good.
Ahh, ok that makes more sense. No doubt I'd call Windows 8 a pretty good value for the price. Or perhaps I'd actually say it's finally a price in line with the modern market in which prices for software like operating systems and productivity suites has been steadily declining for the last decade while Microsoft's prices have gone in the opposite direction.
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 31 Oct 2012 @ 13:02

Rich Fiscus
@Vurbal on Twitter
AfterDawn Staff Writer
#10
very true Microsoft prices are have been far to pricey especialy in the uk but the upgrade offer runs out I think on the 31 January then they will bump it up. anyone who is running xp or vista should jump at the chance. I know people have there own opinions that windows 8 is just for phones and swipe pads and Microsoft is killing desktops which I think is a load of rubbish for 1 they would lose millions if that was the case. windows 8 is the best of both worlds, to be honest my computer has never been more responsive and more colourful it also works great with my nas.
#11
looking at linux zorin.so far its easier to navigate than win8.lol.
#12
Originally posted by smoggie66:
very true Microsoft prices are have been far to pricey especialy in the uk but the upgrade offer runs out I think on the 31 January then they will bump it up. anyone who is running xp or vista should jump at the chance.
I'm not so sure that big price bump is really going to happen, or that it will last if it does. I'm sure Steve Ballmer and Steven Sinofsky believe they can sell enough Windows RT tablets and attract enough Windows Runtime developers to pull it off. They're also betting that people are seeing the current price as a big sale and therefore will see a hike as returning to normal. Personally I think they're wrong pretty much across the board.

Rich Fiscus
@Vurbal on Twitter
AfterDawn Staff Writer
#13
u2r1 Suspended due non-functional email address
why is windows 8 like xbox
the design is rubbish
i hated it and had several problems
and for a lot of games wont work with it properly

you'll never walk alone
#14
Windows 8 was a very disappointing experience for me.
File transfers between SSD, HDD and Flash were trashed, taking twice as long as in 7. Keep in mind the SSD and HDD are both SATA III 6BG/s and are installed to take advantage of the faster spec. My flash drive is a USB 3.0 Patriot capable of write speeds of 70MB/s.

Microsoft added their own storage and USB 3.0 controllers to the installation.
I think this may account for the speedy bootup times, however, they override my motherboard controllers and my file transfers suffered big time. I suspect that this might be the problem with my file transfer speeds.

Using the Windows 8 interface for my desktop pc was taxing and uncomfortable. The hotspots on a large widescreen monitor were weird to use. Open applications seemed to accumulate hidden off to the upper left hand corner and closing them one at a time became a task.

I have reinstalled 7 and I am slowly getting my applications installed. Windows Update is kind of a bear even with the Service Pack 1. But, my file transfers speeds are back and I am happy.

Windows 8 has caused me to rethink how I use the taskbar and desktop icons. I am going to try and utilize the jump lists off the taskbar icons and see how that works/feels.
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 03 Nov 2012 @ 8:04

--pcdtv--
#15
rking_ad, is your motherboard usb ports, ver 2 or ver 3?
#16
Originally posted by ddp:
rking_ad, is your motherboard usb ports, ver 2 or ver 3?
I have both, but I use the USB 3.0 ports all the time. I know I used the phrase "capable" in my last post, but I really do get 70MB/s writes from the SSD to flash drive. In Windows 8, I could only get 28MB/s writes.
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 03 Nov 2012 @ 20:22

--pcdtv--
#17
get the win8 drivers from the manufacturers, don't use the ms drivers. did you load your motherboard\cards' drivers or just use the drivers from ms?
#18
@ddp -
Thanks for the suggestion. ASUS really isn't doing any updates on my motherboard, let alone for Windows 8. It's an LGA1156 which went by the wayside when the 1155 Sandy Bridge processors came out. I don't expect to see any further updates on mine.

I am already set back up on Windows 7 and without any significant reasons to upgrade to 8.
I do like the Win 7 UI better for the desktop.
]

--pcdtv--
#19
try running atto benckmark tool my usb 3 runs at 23 m\s write and 72 m\s read which is what is stated from manufacture http://www.amazon.co.uk/Transcend-JetFl...8/ref=de_a_smtd
#20
Originally posted by smoggie66:
try running atto benckmark tool my usb 3 runs at 23 m\s write and 72 m\s read which is what is stated from manufacture http://www.amazon.co.uk/Transcend-JetFl...8/ref=de_a_smtd

SSD: Crucial C300 128GB SATA III - 11/18/2010
HDD: WD Caviar Black 1TB SATA III - 11/18/2010
Stick: Patriot Supersonic 32GB USB 3.0 PEF32GSUSB - 4/30/2011
PD: WD My Passport 2TB USB 3.0 - 09/07/2012
OS: Windows 7 Professional SP1 - 11/11/2010
WEI: 7.3

ATTO Benchmark kB/s @ 2048MB
Device Write Read
Stick 74525 128817
SSD 130990 356658
HDD 119359 87127
PD 102902 103716

--pcdtv--
#21
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Does no one listen to intel they warned ibm computer users that it wasn't ready and needed a severely updated system to bring it up to par with windows 7
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 07 Nov 2012 @ 12:23
#22
Originally posted by megadunderhead:
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Does no one listen to intel they warned ibm computer users that it wasn't ready and needed a severely updated system to bring it up to par with windows 7
I didn't need Intel to tell me that. The same could be said for almost new Windows OS that's ever shipped with the possible exception of Windows 98 and 98 Second Ed which were almost entirely the same as Windows 95 OSR2.5. It's probably worse today because of Microsoft's commitment to push a new version out every 3 years to sell Software Assurance volume licenses but it's always been normal and expected, particularly on the driver front. That's why most system administrators wouldn't even think about migrating to a new version until the first service pack is released.

Rich Fiscus
@Vurbal on Twitter
AfterDawn Staff Writer
This discussion thread has been automatically closed, as it hasn't received any new posts during the last 180 days. This means that you can't post replies or new questions to this discussion thread.

If you have something to add to this topic, use this page to post your question or comments to a new discussion thread.