Windows 7 Yes,I have installed Windows 8 on my netbook. But it has wiped out my Windows 7 completely. What sho

[NaiyaShamiso]

Well I have got both Windows XP and Windows 7 netbooks.And both versions of Windows run very well on my netbooks.I have even had Windows 7 Ultimate on one of my netbooks in the past. And that ran well without any problems.

XP is designed to run on a 233 Mhz Pentium 3, with 64 MB or RAM and a rez of 800x600. That is not really a great selling point for your netbooks, considering that most low end desktops run two or three times that much.

My netbooks are running the same as a full sized desktop computers is and working just as well. Another reason I buy netbooks is that they have 32 bit Windows 7. But the 2GB ram laptops come with 64 bit Windows which is slower than 32 bit.

No, no they are not. Running on a what, Atom Processor? Not even close to the power that a low to mid range full sized computer has now. Netbooks are a crap idea and should have never been put out in the first place. It was an idea that was great when they where first developed. Back in the day when only people that fully understood the technology and it's benifits and downfalls where the ones using it. Then some old timers get nestalgic and decided to bring them back and they where not as good as promissed, but you have to understand that they are not ment to be anything but simple stuff. E-mail, document writing and reading, all while mobile. That is really all they are cut out to do. After XP any 64 Bit Windows will run any 32 bit process that will run on that OS just the same as a 32 Bit OS. The reason to go 64 Bit is to increase the resources that the OS will identify. From 4 GB of RAM to 128 GB, from 32 cores to 256 cores, yada yada yada. This is going to be a minditory in the time to come. Some time in the next 2 years, 64 bit will be almost manditory to do anything as simple as watch youtube videos. Flash is getting really huge and is a resource hog. It is and will happen.

I suppose I could buy a full sized laptop.It would come with 64 bit windows 7 but I could install 32 bit Windows 7. Which I prefer as a lot of my software I took from my Windows XP and Windows Vista which is 32 bit. Might not run on 64 bit Windows,another reason why I want 32 bit Windows 7.

I have seen some Dell slim lines that are a little more pricier, but have close to the same as a mid range laptop, minus the optical drive.

But Windows 8 CP is a very poor version of Windows and a lot of people don't like it.Not just me. Andrea Borman.

Well considering that you have little to no understanding of how computers work or even what your complaint is about, I can see why you dont like it. Windows 8 is for people that understand how to use a computer, with a basic knowledge and ability to run a computer. You dont have to be a rocket scientist or even a tech guru to be able to use 8. Any one armed retarded chimpanzee screwing a greasy football downhill can figure it out.

 

[Drew]

"I'm just interested to know what she means. Call it sick twisted self mutilation if you want ROTFLMAO"

Reaction to reading this... LMAO!!!!

Really did LOL upon reading.

 

[Andrea Borman]

I think we had better hurry up and write to our President or Prime Minister and The European Court Of Human Rights,asking them to ban Windows 8.

Because if it gets released with the Metro theme and no start menu. Most people including me will not be able to use a computer any more.Andrea Borman.

 

[MikeHawthorne]

Hi

Windows 8 is the new version of Windows.

Just as XP was replaced by Windows 7, (I think we all want to forget about Vista) a lot of people complained abut that too.

In 3 or 4 years Windows 9 will replace Windows 8 and the same people will say, "Why are they replacing Windows 8, it's the greatest operating system ever.

The truth is a lot of people just don't like change, and it doesn't matter what happens, they will be unhappy. Hey, I'm 73 and I can deal with it!

My point of view is that Windows 8 isn't basically any different then Windows 7 as far as I can see with the exception of 2 screens. How the Programs are shown, and how the All Programs are shown.

It's not true that there isn't a start button, it's just invisible.

I'm using Windows 8 exactly the same way I use Windows 7, my desktops look alike, they work alike, and all most everything is exactly where is was in Windows 7.

Right click on the desktop and click on Personalize and what do you see, the same thing you see in Windows 7.

I'm actually finding the learning curve a lot easier then going from Windows XP to 7, where things really were in a different place.

I did create a visible Start button mostly out of vanity, (it has my picture on it) and I did finally figure out how to organize the start menu, (I could to a video on that) but I seldom use it anyway just as I didn't use it in XP or in Windows 7.

All of the discussion about Windows 8 seems to revolve around two screens that you actually need to use only rarely.

Everything I commonly use is on my desktop and not spread all over the screen, but organised by type of program and how often I want to access it.

If someone wants to use the Start screen to access their software they can do so.
I would like to have it in more of a list form, not the giant icons but it's certainly not a problem to use.

So far the advantages of Windows 8 are a little vague, there is no question for me that it's faster, booting, but since a lack of drivers that support my more demanding software keeps me from using them in Windows 8 it's hard to really appraise how much.

I'll be glad to see what happens when video drivers are available for my computer that will let me use it to it's full potential and actually do a complete project in Widows 8.

But to sum up, it is here, it's what will be on all new computers a year from now, and it will only be around for a few years, then we'll start all over again.

There is a difference between constructive criticism, and just complaining.

Mike

 

[whs]

I think we all want to forget about Vista

I don't want to forget Vista. I am still running it on 2 systems and it goes as strong as ever. Never had any problems with it and got a lot of fun from it. Only people that had no clue were bashing Vista. Those that knew things and used it properly never had any problems. Vista was the ultimate geek's system.

 

[catilley1092]

Yes, I've installed Windows 8 on my PC also. I like it so much that I've made Windows 7 look somewhat like it.

I no longer have any desktop shortcuts on Windows 7, other than the Recycle Bin. Screen is so much more attractive! Dumping 35+ shortcuts allows me to actually see the desktop theme.

Cat

 

[catilley1092]

I don't want to forget Vista. I am still running it on 2 systems and it goes as strong as ever. Never had any problems with it and got a lot of fun from it. Only people that had no clue were bashing Vista. Those that knew things and used it properly never had any problems. Vista was the ultimate geek's system.

Vista is actually a good usable OS. Until yesterday I had it installed as a tri boot between XP MCE & 7 Pro.

I didn't have the earlier versions (before any SP's), so I can't speak for that period of time. But Vista SP2 ran as well as Windows 7 on my desktop, the graphics weren't as good, but that was probably more of my lack of taking the time to configure it more than anything.

Many users gave Vista a bad rap, but not me.

Cat

 

[MikeHawthorne]

Hi

I have to admit that my bias is based on comments from others.
I never used Vista myself because it got so much bad press.

I beta tested Windows 7 and never went back to XP again.

How ever I don't use the start menu, in either 7 or 8 and that doesn't mean that you have to have your desktop all cluttered up.
I have everything organised by category and in the order I access them the most, and my desktop is neat and clean
I don't have to go anyplace else to access anything except on rare occasions.



Mike

 

[Andrea Borman]

Well as you know I was using Windows 8 Developers Preview and I was pleasantly surprised. Because all of the Windows XP,Windows Vista and Windows 7 software worked on it.And so did software for earlier versions of Windows,95,98,2000.

And you could disable the Metro theme which was ideal for people like me. But even if you did choose to have the Metro theme it was not like Consumer Preview. It was quite user friendly even in Metro. And you still had the Windows XP and Windows 7 start menu even if you did use the Metro theme,thanks to Classic Shell. And of course the ribbon did not cause any problems or freeze my mouse on DP.

And I even made a You Tube video praising Windows 8 Developers Preview.

But Windows 8 Consumer Preview is a different story. You cannot disable the Metro theme,it is very very slow. It is completely the opposite of DP.

I think that Windows 8 Consumer Preview should be called WINDOWS 8 NIGHTMARES PREVIEW.Because if they release this version of Windows with no option to disable the metro theme. and not to mention all of the problems with this version. Being stuck with this,Windows 8 CP will be our worst nightmare. Andrea Borman.

 

[catilley1092]

Well as you know I was using Windows 8 Developers Preview and I was pleasantly surprised. Because all of the Windows XP,Windows Vista and Windows 7 software worked on it.And so did software for earlier versions of Windows,95,98,2000.

And you could disable the Metro theme which was ideal for people like me. But even if you did choose to have the Metro theme it was not like Consumer Preview. It was quite user friendly even in Metro. And you still had the Windows XP and Windows 7 start menu even if you did use the Metro theme,thanks to Classic Shell. And of course the ribbon did not cause any problems or freeze my mouse on DP.

And I even made a You Tube video praising Windows 8 Developers Preview.

But Windows 8 Consumer Preview is a different story. You cannot disable the Metro theme,it is very very slow. It is completely the opposite of DP.

I think that Windows 8 Consumer Preview should be called WINDOWS 8 NIGHTMARE PREVIEW.Because if they release this version of Windows with no option to disable the metro theme. and not to mention all of the problems with this version. Being stuck with this,Windows 8 CP will be our worst nightmare. Andrea Borman.

Then why don't you go back to using Windows 8 DP? It's supported until January 2013. That would be much better than complaining about Windows 8 CP. By the time Windows 8 is released, there may be changes.

If Windows 8 DP pleases you, then use it, and forget about CP until it's ready. I, as many others around here, runs what's best for each user. You like 8 DP, run it & be happy.

Cat

 

[Joe S]

Cat
That would make sense but then she wouldn't have anything to whine about and annoy people all with her useless posts.
Joe

 

[catilley1092]

Cat
That would make sense but then she wouldn't have anything to whine about and annoy people all with her useless posts.
Joe

Yes, all over the Web.

Cat

 

[Andrea Borman]

Then why don't you go back to using Windows 8 DP? It's supported until January 2013. That would be much better than complaining about Windows 8 CP. By the time Windows 8 is released, there may be changes.

If Windows 8 DP pleases you, then use it, and forget about CP until it's ready. I, as many others around here, runs what's best for each user. You like 8 DP, run it & be happy.

Cat

Because I cannot find the download link for Windows 8 Developers Preview. When I installed Windows 8 DP I did not make a copy of it on a CD because i knew it was going to expire in March. But they have changed it.

Microsoft have removed the download link for Windows 8 DP and replaced it With Windows 8 Consumer Preview. That's WINDOWS 8 NIGHTMARES PREVIEW. And nightmares it is if Microsoft release this version of Windows 8 as the final version.

But on the other forum,Neowin forums, it seems the members there are for the no start menu and Metro theme. In fact they got on my nerves.When they told me the option to disable Metro and the Windows 7 start menu is never coming back.

I hope they are not right. And Microsoft will give us an option to disable Metro in the final release. If not we are doomed to be stuck with an operating system we cannot use. Andrea Borman.

 

[whs]

I have to admit that my bias is based on comments from others.
I never used Vista myself because it got so much bad press.

Mike, that is not the proper way for a geek. Spreading hear-say without having a clue does not help.

 

[MikeHawthorne]

You have to admit it got a lot of bad press! LOL
Even Microsoft couldn't wait to get rid of it.

 

[whs]

Right, it got a lot of bad press by ignorant morons that went by the same hear-say as you. And I do not think that MS wants to get rid of it. Vista still has a bigger market share than e.g. all Apple computers put together - not to speak of Linux that is even less.

 

[NaiyaShamiso]

That's not totaly true. Linux has a large foot print in the world and if you wanted to get a true reading of it then you would have to count all the phones, PDAs, tablets, desktops, servers, routers, switches, gateways, printers, copiers, yada yada yada that run a Linux based OS. Most places only account for Desktops and Servers, but forget that it runs on so much more than that. I'm not saying that Linux based OSes out weight Windows, but the fact remains that they are much closer then most given them credit for.

Mike, I can see how it would be a bit of a chore to work with Vista. I used it and when it came to software, it was amazing. I never really had any issues running software at all. Everything would work or with just a little know how could be made to work with out anything more than a few extra mouse clicks. The complaints that I had about Vista was the hardware support. Things like webcams, USB mics, tablet pens, phones...Microsoft seemed to dromp the ball on support for some stuff. There were lots of things that worked fine, but the issue came in when older, things that had drivers for it in XP, did not in Vista. Not a huge deal, but still an issue. Also, with some products even if there was a driver, it may not completely work. Some functinality would be limite and just plain bad proformance. When I talked to HP about newer drivers for the 2 year old web cam I had for goofing off, I was told to buy a new $80 one, so that it would work. Then there was the issue with the Aero. When a computer is branded blah blah compatable, it is a good assumption to think that all of blah blah will work. Not so much with Vista. Just because it had the Vista Compatable label on it, did not mean that it would run all of Vista. Parts like Aero and Media Center had issues running on some computers. There where compouters with lower end built on graphics cards that would not run Aero, though had the ability to add on another card. With this it would be add new card, disable old card, run at better specs. Not so much. Some comptuers did not allow for the disabeling of the built on card, so Vista would still ID that card, and because it was not an Aero able card and not running corectly, it would still not run Aero. Some might say this sounds like something a cheap $200 POS would do...For the most part you would be correct, but even $700 and &1100 models where doing that as well. The point of this is that Vista did have issues, but most of the BS that was put on it, was just slander made up by Apple and their smear campeigne. It did not really deserve most of the bad press that it got over the years.

 

[catilley1092]

Right, it got a lot of bad press by ignorant morons that went by the same hear-say as you. And I do not think that MS wants to get rid of it. Vista still has a bigger market share than e.g. all Apple computers put together - not to speak of Linux that is even less.

I believe that MS would much rather get rid of XP over Vista. Those who are die hard users of the OS, will run XP until the wheels fall off. No matter what, these users will trust their souls to XP.

While I do use XP from time to time, I'm not a die hard user of the OS. I can live without XP/2000.

Vista does have a larger market share than Apple, as far as OS's goes. Apple makes a lot of their cash on gadgets, like those music players, & the iPhone. If Apple's gadgets were not counted, they would be in dead last place, behind Linux.

And that is where Apple will sink one day. Steve Jobs, the brainstorm of Apple, is not replaceable. Once the next round or so of products that has his input in them are gone, then what? We'll all then see just what Apple's backbone is made of. Tim Cook could hardly complete his 1st presentation, these things came natural to Steve.

There is other competition too that Apple has to contend with, other than MS. Amazon & Google are 2 of them, fighting for market share. At some point, Apple will be forced into giving up on their "aluminum & glass" PC's, & going with recycled plastic, like other companies. Not that I'm against Apple here, but the truth is just that. They're the leading gadget maker, and competition is breathing down their throats.

Cat

 

[MikeHawthorne]

I hate it when people I know go on and on about how there Macs are flawless and never have problems.

My friend Paul's son is a Mac freak.

Try running a search for "My Mac won't boot" you get......

5,490,000 results, and this is for a brand that has only about 8% of the market share.

And of course the real advantage that Mac has it that their operating system only has to run on the computers they build themselves.
Windows has to have to run on any machine that any dork puts together in his basement, made from the cheapest parts he can get.

 

[catilley1092]

I hate it when people I know go on and on about how there Macs are flawless and never have problems.

My friend Paul's son is a Mac freak.

Try running a search for "My Mac won't boot" you get......

5,490,000 results, and this is for a brand that has only about 8% of the market share.

And of course the real advantage that Mac has it that their operating system only has to run on the computers they build themselves.
Windows has to have to run on any machine that any dork puts together in his basement, made from the cheapest parts he can get.

"And of course the real advantage that Mac has it that their operating system only has to run on the computers they build themselves."

Which is why MS should have went for HP's PC division when they were flip-flopping about giving it up. It would have been a great opportunity for MS.

HP does build good printers, but their consumer PC's have being going downhill since they took the Compaq brand in. For the most part, HP's consumer computers are re-branded Compaq's. Many retailers sells more than one model for less than $400, a complete PC. I just seen 3 of them today, while shopping for a monitor. I also own one, and can vouch for it's quality.

Cat