Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Windows 8 Pro Upgrade will cost $40 till Jan 31,2013
13 views
Skip to first unread message
noman
Jul 3, 2012, 4:30:33โฏPM7/3/12
to
MS announced yesterday that any user of XP, Vista and Windows7 (any
edition) will be able to upgrade to Windows 8 Pro for $40, for few
months initially. During that time WMC (Windows Media Center) can also
be added to the system for free.
<http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2012/07/02/upgrade-to-windows-8-pro-for-39-99.aspx>
It's the best promotional pricing MS have ever offered on a new
operating system (and its pro version). It basically takes away the one
complaint I had - need to buy the pro version, or an update pack to get
WMC. Windows 8 was already very suitable for an HTPC, with its metro
interface, but now that WMC is also included, upgrading to Win8 becomes
any easy decision.
I'll upgrade my desktop as well, as I have generally liked the
improvements in this new OS, few of which are:
1) Improved desktop rendering. I am not sure if it's WDDM 1.2 or what,
but the desktop in Win8 is rendered a lot better. V-sync in desktop was
added with Vista, but with Win8 the basic windows operations feel lot
more fluid. I even like the squared up corners for every window. MS have
decided, not to include AeroGlass, which I'll miss. WDDM 1.2, does have
better GPU power management options as well as better resource sharing
(same GPU across multiple apps, which was supported in WDDM1.1 as well
but is now refined further)
2) Hugely improved task manager. It's just amazing.
3) Improved file copy options. Ability to mount the ISOs and other disk
images natively within the OS.
4) Metro interface - Very suitable for HTPC, with a great on-screen
keyboard. Not bad for desktop either, but the use will be limited unless
good metro applications show up later. I don't mind the new start-screen
by the way.
Then there is also better hardware support. USB 3.0 is natively
supported. The inkjet printer I have (on WiFi network) works LOT better
compared to Windows7, where a PC reboot at times requires the printer to
be restarted as well before it can be recognized correctly (no such
issues when connected by USB, and while it may be a printer driver
issue, I haven't seen this problem yet with Win8 previews) Boot times
are *much* shorter and there is a better VM client, with a hyper-visor
that was only available before in the server edition of windows.
Windows 7 has worked very well. I am still on the original Win 7
ultimate install that I did almost three years back. It's the longest I
have gone with any OS without a reinstall, but now the time to upgrade
has almost arrived.
My 2๏ฟฝ
--
Noman
edition) will be able to upgrade to Windows 8 Pro for $40, for few
months initially. During that time WMC (Windows Media Center) can also
be added to the system for free.
<http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2012/07/02/upgrade-to-windows-8-pro-for-39-99.aspx>
It's the best promotional pricing MS have ever offered on a new
operating system (and its pro version). It basically takes away the one
complaint I had - need to buy the pro version, or an update pack to get
WMC. Windows 8 was already very suitable for an HTPC, with its metro
interface, but now that WMC is also included, upgrading to Win8 becomes
any easy decision.
I'll upgrade my desktop as well, as I have generally liked the
improvements in this new OS, few of which are:
1) Improved desktop rendering. I am not sure if it's WDDM 1.2 or what,
but the desktop in Win8 is rendered a lot better. V-sync in desktop was
added with Vista, but with Win8 the basic windows operations feel lot
more fluid. I even like the squared up corners for every window. MS have
decided, not to include AeroGlass, which I'll miss. WDDM 1.2, does have
better GPU power management options as well as better resource sharing
(same GPU across multiple apps, which was supported in WDDM1.1 as well
but is now refined further)
2) Hugely improved task manager. It's just amazing.
3) Improved file copy options. Ability to mount the ISOs and other disk
images natively within the OS.
4) Metro interface - Very suitable for HTPC, with a great on-screen
keyboard. Not bad for desktop either, but the use will be limited unless
good metro applications show up later. I don't mind the new start-screen
by the way.
Then there is also better hardware support. USB 3.0 is natively
supported. The inkjet printer I have (on WiFi network) works LOT better
compared to Windows7, where a PC reboot at times requires the printer to
be restarted as well before it can be recognized correctly (no such
issues when connected by USB, and while it may be a printer driver
issue, I haven't seen this problem yet with Win8 previews) Boot times
are *much* shorter and there is a better VM client, with a hyper-visor
that was only available before in the server edition of windows.
Windows 7 has worked very well. I am still on the original Win 7
ultimate install that I did almost three years back. It's the longest I
have gone with any OS without a reinstall, but now the time to upgrade
has almost arrived.
My 2๏ฟฝ
--
Noman
rms
Jul 3, 2012, 5:39:25โฏPM7/3/12
to
Windows 7 has worked very well. I am still on the original Win 7
ultimate install that I did almost three years back. It's the longest I
have gone with any OS without a reinstall, but now the time to upgrade
has almost arrived.
I adopted W7 on release because of the $40 preorder deal back then, and
ultimate install that I did almost three years back. It's the longest I
have gone with any OS without a reinstall, but now the time to upgrade
has almost arrived.
I'll do the same now. Surely the pressure is even higher on MS to make this
offer now compared to back then, due to increased competition from apple,
and the perception that W7 is fine while W8 only offers a different UI?
rms
John Lewis
Jul 3, 2012, 6:03:50โฏPM7/3/12
to
On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 13:30:33 -0700, noman <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom>
wrote:
>My 2ยข
All you have mentioned is only peripherally important.
The important piece will be something that you have not mentioned.
Backward compatibility with existing applications.
If Windows 8 RTM is proven NOT to break ANY application that currently
works fine in Windows 7, then it may be a buy. Until I am reasonably
assured of that functionality, I shall personally hold off and let
other customers be the guinea-pigs ( er, fully-paid-up RTM
beta-testers... nice to know that MS makes the price of entry to the
beta-test only $40 -- what a steal! And their wisdom in extending the
beta-test to 1/31/2013.....). Thank you greatly for volunteering so
readily.
BTW, Win7 Ultimate comes with both the 32-bit and 64-bit ISOs and
dual-boots on the same authentication key. If Win 8 Pro Full Retail
does not include both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions bootable using
the same authentication key, another nail in its coffin -as far as I
am concerned. I will not pay for 2 copies. I have several 32-bit
applications that will not run on Win7-64, but work perfectly in
Win7-32,
John Lewis
>--
>Noman
wrote:
All you have mentioned is only peripherally important.
The important piece will be something that you have not mentioned.
Backward compatibility with existing applications.
If Windows 8 RTM is proven NOT to break ANY application that currently
works fine in Windows 7, then it may be a buy. Until I am reasonably
assured of that functionality, I shall personally hold off and let
other customers be the guinea-pigs ( er, fully-paid-up RTM
beta-testers... nice to know that MS makes the price of entry to the
beta-test only $40 -- what a steal! And their wisdom in extending the
beta-test to 1/31/2013.....). Thank you greatly for volunteering so
readily.
BTW, Win7 Ultimate comes with both the 32-bit and 64-bit ISOs and
dual-boots on the same authentication key. If Win 8 Pro Full Retail
does not include both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions bootable using
the same authentication key, another nail in its coffin -as far as I
am concerned. I will not pay for 2 copies. I have several 32-bit
applications that will not run on Win7-64, but work perfectly in
Win7-32,
John Lewis
>--
>Noman
Rin Stowleigh
Jul 3, 2012, 8:10:02โฏPM7/3/12
to
On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 13:30:33 -0700, noman <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom>
wrote:
wrote:
>It's the best promotional pricing MS have ever offered on a new
>operating system (and its pro version).
When I saw the announcement, the first thing that came to my mind is
>operating system (and its pro version).
that this is Microsoft's response to Apple's OS upgrade strategy (OSX
upgrades are about that price), and more importantly it ensures
adoption of the whole Win8/Metro thing and fends off another Vista
fiasco.
The "Apple counterattack" theory would also be in line with the fact
they recently announced they will be making their own tablets (making
sure Apple no longer is the only one with the advantage of tight
hardware and software integration).
So while yes it's a good deal, Microsoft isn't stupid and it's mostly
just to be sure that Win8 takes off like gangbusters (it will) and
once that happens, a lot more people will want their mobile device to
work well with their desktop (helping them in the mobile area where
they've been lacking).
I know a lot of people aren't excited about Metro on the desktop and
I'm not sure they should be, but even though I've already hedged my
bets such that I'm good either way, I predict MS wins this battle in
the long run.
Although this "battle" I speak of has nothing to do with gaming
really, as MS is uncontested there.
Message has been deleted
Lou
Jul 4, 2012, 9:36:31โฏPM7/4/12
to
"Rin Stowleigh" wrote in message
news:1327v7lev939rm0r8...@4ax.com...
It looks like a good deal if you need another copy of W7. You can use
this offer for W7 Pro also.
From Anandtech on MS W8 offer:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6065/windows-8-upgrade-will-cost-just-3999
"On that note, for those of you still on Windows XP, the fact that
Microsoft is offering Windows 8 Pro as opposed to Windows 8 (consumer)
should be of particular interest. Windows 8 Pro comes with downgrade
rights, which allow the owner to legally install older versions of
Windows. So for those of you needing to upgrade from XP but still
wanting to hang back with Windows 7, this is a de-facto $40 Windows 7
Professional upgrade too."
I still haven't convinced my wife to upgrade from WXP.
noman
Jul 5, 2012, 2:29:16โฏPM7/5/12
to
On 7/3/2012 3:03 PM, John Lewis wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 13:30:33 -0700, noman <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom>
> wrote:
>
>> MS announced yesterday that any user of XP, Vista and Windows7 (any
>> edition) will be able to upgrade to Windows 8 Pro for $40, for few
>> months initially. During that time WMC (Windows Media Center) can also
>> be added to the system for free.
>>
>> <http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2012/07/02/upgrade-to-windows-8-pro-for-39-99.aspx>
>>
[Win8 feature description snipped]
> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 13:30:33 -0700, noman <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom>
> wrote:
>
>> MS announced yesterday that any user of XP, Vista and Windows7 (any
>> edition) will be able to upgrade to Windows 8 Pro for $40, for few
>> months initially. During that time WMC (Windows Media Center) can also
>> be added to the system for free.
>>
>> <http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2012/07/02/upgrade-to-windows-8-pro-for-39-99.aspx>
>>
>
> All you have mentioned is only peripherally important.
>
> The important piece will be something that you have not mentioned.
> Backward compatibility with existing applications.
(recent ones, old DX7, windows pre-directx, and GoG/DOSBox) have all
worked fine.
> nice to know that MS makes the price of entry to the
> beta-test only $40 -- what a steal! And their wisdom in extending the
> beta-test to 1/31/2013.....). Thank you greatly for volunteering so
> readily.
(currently running Windows8 release preview) There is no reason to go
blindly in.
> BTW, Win7 Ultimate comes with both the 32-bit and 64-bit ISOs and
> dual-boots on the same authentication key. If Win 8 Pro Full Retail
> does not include both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions bootable using
> the same authentication key, another nail in its coffin -as far as I
> am concerned.
--
Noman
noman
Jul 5, 2012, 2:56:13โฏPM7/5/12
to
On 7/3/2012 5:10 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>
> So while yes it's a good deal, Microsoft isn't stupid and it's mostly
> just to be sure that Win8 takes off like gangbusters (it will) and
> once that happens, a lot more people will want their mobile device to
> work well with their desktop (helping them in the mobile area where
> they've been lacking).
I do have a Windows phone, and it's way better than both iOS and
>
> So while yes it's a good deal, Microsoft isn't stupid and it's mostly
> just to be sure that Win8 takes off like gangbusters (it will) and
> once that happens, a lot more people will want their mobile device to
> work well with their desktop (helping them in the mobile area where
> they've been lacking).
Android. The UI is extremely well done.
> I know a lot of people aren't excited about Metro on the desktop and
> I'm not sure they should be, but even though I've already hedged my
> bets such that I'm good either way, I predict MS wins this battle in
> the long run.
getting used to. It has been re-tuned quite a bit in the last few months
between the several beta/preview builds that came out (developer
preview, consumer preview, release preview) and there are still some
changes that we'll only see in the RTM build.
It's a huge change, both from UI and functional perspective. But the old
desktop is there and functions using the same old methodology. My kids
by the way, love the new start screen and metro apps. However even they
go to the desktop IE when accessing sites like pbskids.org as it's more
familiar to them rather than the sparse metro version (and also the
metro IE didn't support flash plugin until recently)
Here's an interesting and very detailed article from Microsoft's
director of program management on user experience. A lot of folks may
not agree with the content, but it's a good read.
<http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/18/creating-the-windows-8-user-experience.aspx>
Another good article is about how Windows 8 will handle multiple monitors..
<http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/21/enhancing-windows-8-for-multiple-monitors.aspx>
--
Noman
--
Noman
noman
Jul 5, 2012, 3:10:57โฏPM7/5/12
to
On 7/3/2012 8:34 PM, Brian Mathews wrote:
> But who needs to go back to Vista, or CE, 8 is a totally crap OS..
>
Windows 8 actually runs great. It starts (and sleeps/wakes-up) very
quickly and the desktop remains fast and responsive, more so than any
other past MS offering.
I am not a big fan of the new start screen, but it's something that at
worst I'll hardly use (like the current useless start menu). As long as
I can pin the often used applications to task bar (or icons on desktop),
and can type first few letters to find applications/files/emails, then
nothing changes. I may even end up using the start screen eventually.
--
Noman
> But who needs to go back to Vista, or CE, 8 is a totally crap OS..
>
Windows 8 actually runs great. It starts (and sleeps/wakes-up) very
quickly and the desktop remains fast and responsive, more so than any
other past MS offering.
I am not a big fan of the new start screen, but it's something that at
worst I'll hardly use (like the current useless start menu). As long as
I can pin the often used applications to task bar (or icons on desktop),
and can type first few letters to find applications/files/emails, then
nothing changes. I may even end up using the start screen eventually.
--
Noman
Rin Stowleigh
Jul 5, 2012, 6:26:53โฏPM7/5/12
to
On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 11:56:13 -0700, noman <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom>
wrote:
>On 7/3/2012 5:10 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>
>> So while yes it's a good deal, Microsoft isn't stupid and it's mostly
>> just to be sure that Win8 takes off like gangbusters (it will) and
>> once that happens, a lot more people will want their mobile device to
>> work well with their desktop (helping them in the mobile area where
>> they've been lacking).
>
>I do have a Windows phone, and it's way better than both iOS and
>Android. The UI is extremely well done.
That statement seems too general. I have my opinions as well
(including the fact that I love the MS development platform, and I'm
aware of many aspects of the Metro UI that are much better designed,
functionally if not aesthetically, than offerings from Apple and
Google), but I think it's important to elaborate on what we mean by
"way better".
First, the most important feature of a smartphone is the apps and
content available for it. Apple just wins here, partially because the
iPhone got the headstart on everyone else. If history repeats, this
will be a short-lived advantage. Microsoft has the best development
tools in the industry, thus a lot of people WANT to develop for
Windows Phone and and Metro in general. I'm actually surprised that
Windows Phone hasn't already gained more marketshare from this fact
alone. WP7 has been slow to get a lot of apps, and many apps just
aren't available for it at all. In the mobile app world, the
development priority right now is (1)iPhone, (2)Android, (3)
everything else. And, some shops are dropping Android support because
of the costs of supporting such a fragmented OS on gazillions of
different devices.
Second, unless there has been some emerging news I've missed, WP7
devices will not run WP8. That seems to me a sign that Microsoft
really screwed something up here. One of their strengths has been
preservation of backward compatibility. Apple hasn't made this
mistake, even though they are on the obsolescence fast-track.
http://www.stuff.tv/news/phone/news-nugget/windows-phone-8-won%E2%80%99t-be-compatible-with-current-devices
Third, I haven't seen the feature sets of the Windows phones, but
until they catch up with Apple, they are going to continue to fall
behind.
For example, lots of people buy Apple devices because they are into
music, either consuming it or creating it. When I wanted a music
player that could wirelessly stream to my car stereo, the iPod was my
only viable choice... Zune's still existed at the time, and they were
okay for music if your idea of music was just downloading from some
store and listening on your earbuds, but for technophiles who want
advanced features, Apple has always been the leader. Also, Apple has
had low-latency audio drivers in all their mobile devices (not just
iPods but phones, etc) for a long time. Not only did Microsoft exit
the market with regard to Zune players, but I don't think they have
any facility for handling low latency audio needs in even their latest
phones. I've seen one article that says Metro itself is void of this
functionality, which means folks will have to stick to Win32 desktop
apps for that for now.
Speaking of which, here is a link that might be of interest to gamers
as well. Most games are more GPU-dependent than CPU dependent, but
this article seems to indicate that Windows 8 has done a great job at
kernal optimizations and overall OS speed improvements. Audio
production tends to put a load on my Core i7 that no game comes even
close to. A lot of the computations involved in audio synthesis give
a pretty good workout for a CPU, so although this article is from a
specific vendor of PC audio software, the benchmarks might still be of
interest to gamers here.
http://blog.cakewalk.com/windows-8-a-benchmark-for-music-production-applications
wrote:
>On 7/3/2012 5:10 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>
>> So while yes it's a good deal, Microsoft isn't stupid and it's mostly
>> just to be sure that Win8 takes off like gangbusters (it will) and
>> once that happens, a lot more people will want their mobile device to
>> work well with their desktop (helping them in the mobile area where
>> they've been lacking).
>
>I do have a Windows phone, and it's way better than both iOS and
>Android. The UI is extremely well done.
(including the fact that I love the MS development platform, and I'm
aware of many aspects of the Metro UI that are much better designed,
functionally if not aesthetically, than offerings from Apple and
Google), but I think it's important to elaborate on what we mean by
"way better".
First, the most important feature of a smartphone is the apps and
content available for it. Apple just wins here, partially because the
iPhone got the headstart on everyone else. If history repeats, this
will be a short-lived advantage. Microsoft has the best development
tools in the industry, thus a lot of people WANT to develop for
Windows Phone and and Metro in general. I'm actually surprised that
Windows Phone hasn't already gained more marketshare from this fact
alone. WP7 has been slow to get a lot of apps, and many apps just
aren't available for it at all. In the mobile app world, the
development priority right now is (1)iPhone, (2)Android, (3)
everything else. And, some shops are dropping Android support because
of the costs of supporting such a fragmented OS on gazillions of
different devices.
Second, unless there has been some emerging news I've missed, WP7
devices will not run WP8. That seems to me a sign that Microsoft
really screwed something up here. One of their strengths has been
preservation of backward compatibility. Apple hasn't made this
mistake, even though they are on the obsolescence fast-track.
http://www.stuff.tv/news/phone/news-nugget/windows-phone-8-won%E2%80%99t-be-compatible-with-current-devices
Third, I haven't seen the feature sets of the Windows phones, but
until they catch up with Apple, they are going to continue to fall
behind.
For example, lots of people buy Apple devices because they are into
music, either consuming it or creating it. When I wanted a music
player that could wirelessly stream to my car stereo, the iPod was my
only viable choice... Zune's still existed at the time, and they were
okay for music if your idea of music was just downloading from some
store and listening on your earbuds, but for technophiles who want
advanced features, Apple has always been the leader. Also, Apple has
had low-latency audio drivers in all their mobile devices (not just
iPods but phones, etc) for a long time. Not only did Microsoft exit
the market with regard to Zune players, but I don't think they have
any facility for handling low latency audio needs in even their latest
phones. I've seen one article that says Metro itself is void of this
functionality, which means folks will have to stick to Win32 desktop
apps for that for now.
Speaking of which, here is a link that might be of interest to gamers
as well. Most games are more GPU-dependent than CPU dependent, but
this article seems to indicate that Windows 8 has done a great job at
kernal optimizations and overall OS speed improvements. Audio
production tends to put a load on my Core i7 that no game comes even
close to. A lot of the computations involved in audio synthesis give
a pretty good workout for a CPU, so although this article is from a
specific vendor of PC audio software, the benchmarks might still be of
interest to gamers here.
http://blog.cakewalk.com/windows-8-a-benchmark-for-music-production-applications
Werner Punz
Jul 6, 2012, 6:19:09โฏAM7/6/12
to
Am 04.07.12 02:10, schrieb Rin Stowleigh:
> I know a lot of people aren't excited about Metro on the desktop and
> I'm not sure they should be, but even though I've already hedged my
> bets such that I'm good either way, I predict MS wins this battle in
> the long run.
>
The deal is good, but Metro on the desktop is unfortunately dreadful. I
will stay at win7 even 40USD is way to much for what we will get.
> I know a lot of people aren't excited about Metro on the desktop and
> I'm not sure they should be, but even though I've already hedged my
> bets such that I'm good either way, I predict MS wins this battle in
> the long run.
>
will stay at win7 even 40USD is way to much for what we will get.
Werner Punz
Jul 6, 2012, 6:21:57โฏAM7/6/12
to
Am 05.07.12 21:10, schrieb noman:
in my opinion is worse usabilitywise than Win7, for me the answer is no.
I dont have to upgrade to every windows version there is.
> Windows 8 actually runs great. It starts (and sleeps/wakes-up) very
> quickly and the desktop remains fast and responsive, more so than any
> other past MS offering.
>
> I am not a big fan of the new start screen, but it's something that at
> worst I'll hardly use (like the current useless start menu). As long as
> I can pin the often used applications to task bar (or icons on desktop),
> and can type first few letters to find applications/files/emails, then
> nothing changes. I may even end up using the start screen eventually.
The question comes down to, do you want to pay 40$ for something which
> quickly and the desktop remains fast and responsive, more so than any
> other past MS offering.
>
> I am not a big fan of the new start screen, but it's something that at
> worst I'll hardly use (like the current useless start menu). As long as
> I can pin the often used applications to task bar (or icons on desktop),
> and can type first few letters to find applications/files/emails, then
> nothing changes. I may even end up using the start screen eventually.
in my opinion is worse usabilitywise than Win7, for me the answer is no.
I dont have to upgrade to every windows version there is.
Rin Stowleigh
Jul 6, 2012, 9:31:56โฏAM7/6/12
to
On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 12:21:57 +0200, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
>I dont have to upgrade to every windows version there is.
Actually you kind of do, sooner or later, especially if you're a
>I dont have to upgrade to every windows version there is.
gamer. Don't assume the extensive support life of XP will be typical.
noman
Jul 6, 2012, 2:26:24โฏPM7/6/12
to
Windows7. I mentioned in the first post, the several tangible benefits
that I have experienced. When you add in the fact that a home premium
edition can be updated to a pro edition (my HTPC will finally have
remote desktop host, among other things), jumping on this $40 deal
becomes an even easier decision.
--
Noman
Rin Stowleigh
Jul 6, 2012, 2:30:40โฏPM7/6/12
to
On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 11:26:24 -0700, noman <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom>
wrote:
You could also use Logmein free for that functionality (including the
ability to control your HTPC from a tablet while laying back on the
couch).
Also some cable companies now offer iPad apps which make the most
badass channel / surfer DVR control that even the top-end remotes
can't compete with, though that is not a complete HTPC solution.
wrote:
ability to control your HTPC from a tablet while laying back on the
couch).
Also some cable companies now offer iPad apps which make the most
badass channel / surfer DVR control that even the top-end remotes
can't compete with, though that is not a complete HTPC solution.
noman
Jul 6, 2012, 3:07:29โฏPM7/6/12
to
On 7/5/2012 3:26 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 11:56:13 -0700, noman <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom>
> wrote:
>
>> On 7/3/2012 5:10 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>>
>>> So while yes it's a good deal, Microsoft isn't stupid and it's mostly
>>> just to be sure that Win8 takes off like gangbusters (it will) and
>>> once that happens, a lot more people will want their mobile device to
>>> work well with their desktop (helping them in the mobile area where
>>> they've been lacking).
>>
>> I do have a Windows phone, and it's way better than both iOS and
>> Android. The UI is extremely well done.
>
> That statement seems too general. I have my opinions as well
> (including the fact that I love the MS development platform, and I'm
> aware of many aspects of the Metro UI that are much better designed,
> functionally if not aesthetically, than offerings from Apple and
> Google), but I think it's important to elaborate on what we mean by
> "way better".
For me, the Windows phone OS is unmatched when it comes to consolidating
> On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 11:56:13 -0700, noman <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom>
> wrote:
>
>> On 7/3/2012 5:10 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>>
>>> So while yes it's a good deal, Microsoft isn't stupid and it's mostly
>>> just to be sure that Win8 takes off like gangbusters (it will) and
>>> once that happens, a lot more people will want their mobile device to
>>> work well with their desktop (helping them in the mobile area where
>>> they've been lacking).
>>
>> I do have a Windows phone, and it's way better than both iOS and
>> Android. The UI is extremely well done.
>
> That statement seems too general. I have my opinions as well
> (including the fact that I love the MS development platform, and I'm
> aware of many aspects of the Metro UI that are much better designed,
> functionally if not aesthetically, than offerings from Apple and
> Google), but I think it's important to elaborate on what we mean by
> "way better".
and displaying information to the user. The chrome-less UI uses almost
every inch of the screen. Switching active applications is very well
done. Live tiles are great. Photos, messages, mails, SMS can be tracked
in threads spanning multiple applications transparently. We have had
iPhones for a while (currently an iPhone 4s), and I feel very
constrained now whenever I use iOS. WP OS basically feels like a
next-gen OS compared to iOS.
>
> First, the most important feature of a smartphone is the apps and
> content available for it.
ones that matter, if not all.
> Second, unless there has been some emerging news I've missed, WP7
> devices will not run WP8.
Windows Phone 7 users will get an update (called 7.8 for some reason)
that will bring in some features from WP8. One in particular I am
waiting for is where you can further customize the live tiles on the
main screen.
> Third, I haven't seen the feature sets of the Windows phones, but
> until they catch up with Apple, they are going to continue to fall
> behind.
rebate from Nokia. The only thing where iPhone 4s has an undeniable
edge, is its camera. It's way better than what comes on Lumia900. I also
like the smaller iPhone4s size. And while this Nokia phone has lower
resolution than iPhone4s, the AMOLED screen looks great especially at
showing black levels. The screen is also lot more readable when you are
out in sunlight. I even like how it's constructed. I just wish that it
was a bit smaller.
> For example, lots of people buy Apple devices because they are into
> music, either consuming it or creating it. When I wanted a music
> player that could wirelessly stream to my car stereo, the iPod was my
> only viable choice...
Blackberry. Some of it depends on the bluetooth system in your car though.
--
Noman
Mel Franks
Jul 6, 2012, 3:07:43โฏPM7/6/12
to
"noman" <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom> wrote in message news:jsvkpe$rm3$1...@dont-email.me...
$40 upgrade option, with the caveat that it's basically a clean install and only
personal files and settings will be transferred.
This saves the hassle of having to reinstall an older OS just for the upgrade.
I personally keep my OS seperate on an SSD so this will make it really easy.
I really like Windows 8, and at $40 it's a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.
It's interesting watching the hate Metro has garnered, as I'm just not seeing any
real downside to it. I virtually never used the Start menu, and use the Start
screen just a little.
I do like some of the Metro apps however, and am interested in seeing what
develops in that arena.
noman
Jul 6, 2012, 7:27:20โฏPM7/6/12
to
On 7/6/2012 11:30 AM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 11:26:24 -0700, noman <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom>
> wrote:
>
>> For me usability wise, Windows8 release preview is already ahead of
>> Windows7. I mentioned in the first post, the several tangible benefits
>> that I have experienced. When you add in the fact that a home premium
>> edition can be updated to a pro edition (my HTPC will finally have
>> remote desktop host, among other things), jumping on this $40 deal
>> becomes an even easier decision.
>
> You could also use Logmein free for that functionality (including the
> ability to control your HTPC from a tablet while laying back on the
> couch).
For me LogMeIn or VNC are distant second to Remote Desktop. The
> On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 11:26:24 -0700, noman <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom>
> wrote:
>
>> For me usability wise, Windows8 release preview is already ahead of
>> Windows7. I mentioned in the first post, the several tangible benefits
>> that I have experienced. When you add in the fact that a home premium
>> edition can be updated to a pro edition (my HTPC will finally have
>> remote desktop host, among other things), jumping on this $40 deal
>> becomes an even easier decision.
>
> You could also use Logmein free for that functionality (including the
> ability to control your HTPC from a tablet while laying back on the
> couch).
difference is night and day. In addition to the more responsive
experience with RDP, I also use the hack where multiple sessions become
possible (one user logged in, while you remotely login to another
account) which is technically only a feature of the server editions. For
an HTPC, it's a very useful feature, as someone can watch TV or play
game where I can use remote client to log in for some administrative work.
>
> Also some cable companies now offer iPad apps which make the most
> badass channel / surfer DVR control that even the top-end remotes
> can't compete with, though that is not a complete HTPC solution.
and a multi-tuner/cable-card ready box in the home network that allows
me to watch/record cable programming in HD anywhere on any W7/Vista WMC
PC (three channels simultaneously). When it comes to watching LiveTV
through cable-card with encrypted channel support in US, nothing can
touch WMC. No cable company provided DVR box/app or MAC or Linux
application has this much functionality and/or is cable-labs certified
to watch and record standard and premium channels while respecting the
copy-once/copy-freely DRM flags.
Through an FCC mandated regulation, the cable companies are forced to
provide a cable-card to the customers, so they can have their own DVRs
instead of paying extra to the cable providers. The cable companies are
also forced to offer cable-card self activation to make this process
more hassle-free for the customers. Comcast started this self-install
sometime last year, and it was very rough early on. Only a few of their
support people even knew that they were offering such services and had
little idea how to activate and stage these cards. In time, things got
better. I bought the Silcondust HDHomerun Prime a month ago, and stopped
by at local Comcast office to pick up an "M-card" (multi stream cable
card). I ran into activation problems but eventually (within a day) the
cable-card specific support folks at Comcast were able to set things up
properly.
Ok, this is way off-topic now. But basically for the HTPC I have, Win8
Pro will be a very welcome addition, especially with the $40 deal and
the free WMC update.
--
Noman
Rin Stowleigh
Jul 6, 2012, 7:30:45โฏPM7/6/12
to
On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 12:07:29 -0700, noman <no_...@zzzyahoo.yycom>
Yes, it is a well-thought-out UI and this is one reason historically
Microsoft is not always first to the game, but they know how to win in
the long-term.
>> First, the most important feature of a smartphone is the apps and
>> content available for it.
>
>Apple has more apps in the app-store, but WP marketplace has most of the
>ones that matter, if not all.
Well I will give you some examples. Musical apps like TouchOSC,
FLStudio for mobile and iMaschine aren't even on anyones radar for
Windows Phone last time I checked, and they can't be until Windows
Phone and/or tablets has proper audio support.
Also, one of my cars is an "exotic" foreign sports car (i.e. very fast
trooper-magnet which begs to get a speeding ticket the minute you pull
it out of the garage). I've never mentioned it in this newsgroups, I
don't think, because it's never been relevant to a discussion before,
but now it is. So, in that particular vehicle I run "defensive"
measures against douchebag LEO such as the specialized smartcord and
iPhone app described here: http://bit.ly/N4ApxE
It keeps me abreast via social network uploads of where the
donut-gobbling fat bastards are regardless of whether they are running
radar, laser, LIDAR, or have just set up a DUI checkpoint. (And no I
don't think all cops suck, I've just run into so many that act like
real cockbiters because they've pulled me over for no apparent reason
other than jealousy before).
Windows Phone? Sorry, there's not an app for that that's compatible
with with proper detection devices. And it ain't happening until they
get the marketshare problem solved. It doesn't matter how good the
phone is if the apps I really need aren't there. Oh and the above app
does come in an Android version, but it sucks apparently for everyone
that falls outside the 20% or so of Android devices that it works
reliably on.
A buddy of mine just a few months ago was telling me how rediculous it
was that he couldn't download Skype for his phone a year after MS
bought the company! I believe they have resolved that now, but jeez
the amount of time it took was simply wrong.
>> Second, unless there has been some emerging news I've missed, WP7
>> devices will not run WP8.
>
>It's not a big deal. The OS/phones get updates and fixes. In fact, most
>Windows Phone 7 users will get an update (called 7.8 for some reason)
>that will bring in some features from WP8. One in particular I am
>waiting for is where you can further customize the live tiles on the
>main screen.
I do recognize that individual needs differ, and that the availability
of Metro apps *will* grow even if it has not yet grown to the point
that will suit my particular needs. And the phones are cheaper, so
the need to upgrade with each OS should be less of an ordeal.
>> Third, I haven't seen the feature sets of the Windows phones, but
>> until they catch up with Apple, they are going to continue to fall
>> behind.
>
>I have a Nokia Lumia 900, which I got for $20, and then later got a $100
>rebate from Nokia. The only thing where iPhone 4s has an undeniable
>edge, is its camera. It's way better than what comes on Lumia900. I also
>like the smaller iPhone4s size. And while this Nokia phone has lower
>resolution than iPhone4s, the AMOLED screen looks great especially at
>showing black levels. The screen is also lot more readable when you are
>out in sunlight. I even like how it's constructed. I just wish that it
>was a bit smaller.
>
>> For example, lots of people buy Apple devices because they are into
>> music, either consuming it or creating it. When I wanted a music
>> player that could wirelessly stream to my car stereo, the iPod was my
>> only viable choice...
>
>Bluetooth stereo works perfectly fine whenever I have tried it, even via
>Blackberry. Some of it depends on the bluetooth system in your car though.
Well at that time I was looking at music players, because I didn't
wanted a "car jukebox" device that was independent of my phone. To be
fair, Microsoft was not the only odd man out, I looked at all
alternatives (including Creative MP3 players which I'd had good luck
with in the past, and others) and couldn't find BT audio as an option,
and at that time MS was still selling its Zune players.
I would think the newer Windows Phones would have to have this feature
by now. I just don't like to be years behind the tech curve.
Microsoft is not always first to the game, but they know how to win in
the long-term.
>> First, the most important feature of a smartphone is the apps and
>> content available for it.
>
>Apple has more apps in the app-store, but WP marketplace has most of the
>ones that matter, if not all.
FLStudio for mobile and iMaschine aren't even on anyones radar for
Windows Phone last time I checked, and they can't be until Windows
Phone and/or tablets has proper audio support.
Also, one of my cars is an "exotic" foreign sports car (i.e. very fast
trooper-magnet which begs to get a speeding ticket the minute you pull
it out of the garage). I've never mentioned it in this newsgroups, I
don't think, because it's never been relevant to a discussion before,
but now it is. So, in that particular vehicle I run "defensive"
measures against douchebag LEO such as the specialized smartcord and
iPhone app described here: http://bit.ly/N4ApxE
It keeps me abreast via social network uploads of where the
donut-gobbling fat bastards are regardless of whether they are running
radar, laser, LIDAR, or have just set up a DUI checkpoint. (And no I
don't think all cops suck, I've just run into so many that act like
real cockbiters because they've pulled me over for no apparent reason
other than jealousy before).
Windows Phone? Sorry, there's not an app for that that's compatible
with with proper detection devices. And it ain't happening until they
get the marketshare problem solved. It doesn't matter how good the
phone is if the apps I really need aren't there. Oh and the above app
does come in an Android version, but it sucks apparently for everyone
that falls outside the 20% or so of Android devices that it works
reliably on.
A buddy of mine just a few months ago was telling me how rediculous it
was that he couldn't download Skype for his phone a year after MS
bought the company! I believe they have resolved that now, but jeez
the amount of time it took was simply wrong.
>> Second, unless there has been some emerging news I've missed, WP7
>> devices will not run WP8.
>
>It's not a big deal. The OS/phones get updates and fixes. In fact, most
>Windows Phone 7 users will get an update (called 7.8 for some reason)
>that will bring in some features from WP8. One in particular I am
>waiting for is where you can further customize the live tiles on the
>main screen.
of Metro apps *will* grow even if it has not yet grown to the point
that will suit my particular needs. And the phones are cheaper, so
the need to upgrade with each OS should be less of an ordeal.
>> Third, I haven't seen the feature sets of the Windows phones, but
>> until they catch up with Apple, they are going to continue to fall
>> behind.
>
>I have a Nokia Lumia 900, which I got for $20, and then later got a $100
>rebate from Nokia. The only thing where iPhone 4s has an undeniable
>edge, is its camera. It's way better than what comes on Lumia900. I also
>like the smaller iPhone4s size. And while this Nokia phone has lower
>resolution than iPhone4s, the AMOLED screen looks great especially at
>showing black levels. The screen is also lot more readable when you are
>out in sunlight. I even like how it's constructed. I just wish that it
>was a bit smaller.
>
>> For example, lots of people buy Apple devices because they are into
>> music, either consuming it or creating it. When I wanted a music
>> player that could wirelessly stream to my car stereo, the iPod was my
>> only viable choice...
>
>Bluetooth stereo works perfectly fine whenever I have tried it, even via
>Blackberry. Some of it depends on the bluetooth system in your car though.
wanted a "car jukebox" device that was independent of my phone. To be
fair, Microsoft was not the only odd man out, I looked at all
alternatives (including Creative MP3 players which I'd had good luck
with in the past, and others) and couldn't find BT audio as an option,
and at that time MS was still selling its Zune players.
I would think the newer Windows Phones would have to have this feature
by now. I just don't like to be years behind the tech curve.
Rin Stowleigh
Jul 6, 2012, 7:34:39โฏPM7/6/12
to
On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:07:43 -0500, "Mel Franks" <m...@xcom.net> wrote:
>I really like Windows 8, and at $40 it's a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.
>It's interesting watching the hate Metro has garnered, as I'm just not seeing any
>real downside to it.
The hate you see is just luddite syndrome. Most people are reluctant
>I really like Windows 8, and at $40 it's a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.
>It's interesting watching the hate Metro has garnered, as I'm just not seeing any
>real downside to it.
to technological change once you drift outside technophile circles. I
confess than when I first saw iPads announced, I thought "what the
hell would I do with that thing, it's just a gigantic iPod touch?" I
now do all kinds of things with the iPad I didn't forsee at that time,
including writing apps for it.
noman
Jul 6, 2012, 8:07:27โฏPM7/6/12
to
On 7/6/2012 4:30 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
> Windows Phone? Sorry, there's not an app for that that's compatible
> with with proper detection devices. And it ain't happening until they
> get the marketshare problem solved. It doesn't matter how good the
> phone is if the apps I really need aren't there.
Of course, there are fewer applications on WP marketplace compared to
> Windows Phone? Sorry, there's not an app for that that's compatible
> with with proper detection devices. And it ain't happening until they
> get the marketshare problem solved. It doesn't matter how good the
> phone is if the apps I really need aren't there.
App-store. There will be few edge cases, where there's no suitable WP
app for now, such as the ones you mentioned. However it won't affect the
99% of the folks buying these phones, and I am indeed talking about the
overall picture.
> A buddy of mine just a few months ago was telling me how rediculous it
> was that he couldn't download Skype for his phone a year after MS
> bought the company! I believe they have resolved that now, but jeez
> the amount of time it took was simply wrong.
Cut the Rope would be felt by a lot of users. I too am not sure why
Skype took so long. Skype beta for WP7 only became available early this
year I think, and now it's fully supported. Spotify is there, but
Pandora isn't (although there are unofficial user apps to give you access)
In general, things have improved a lot in past six months for WP
marketplace.
--
Noman
Xocyll
Jul 7, 2012, 2:07:29โฏAM7/7/12
to
Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@gmail.com> looked up from reading the entrails
of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:
You never need to upgrade to _every_ windows version there is.
You could easily stick with XP and completely skip Vista and Win 7 and
jump straight to Win 8.
Just as people hung in with 98 until XP came out and completely skipped
WinME.
It's not like the hardware has made quantum leaps that actually require
the latest OS, especially with so much of gaming being driven by the
limitations on console hardware.
Yeah maybe WinXP can't use the latest Direct-X features, but how many of
them are actually _necessary_.
Every few years you'll have to jump to a newer version of windows, but
they never have to be consecutive version. Not unless Microsoft start
taking a very long time between OS releases OR there is a quantum leap
in computing power that the current OS cannot take advantage of but the
next version can.
MS would certainly like you to believe that you need every version as
soon as it's available, but it's never been true.
Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:
You could easily stick with XP and completely skip Vista and Win 7 and
jump straight to Win 8.
Just as people hung in with 98 until XP came out and completely skipped
WinME.
It's not like the hardware has made quantum leaps that actually require
the latest OS, especially with so much of gaming being driven by the
limitations on console hardware.
Yeah maybe WinXP can't use the latest Direct-X features, but how many of
them are actually _necessary_.
Every few years you'll have to jump to a newer version of windows, but
they never have to be consecutive version. Not unless Microsoft start
taking a very long time between OS releases OR there is a quantum leap
in computing power that the current OS cannot take advantage of but the
next version can.
MS would certainly like you to believe that you need every version as
soon as it's available, but it's never been true.
Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
Rin Stowleigh
Jul 7, 2012, 1:58:37โฏAM7/7/12
to
On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 01:07:29 -0500, Xocyll <Xoc...@kingston.net>
wrote:
>Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@gmail.com> looked up from reading the entrails
>of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:
>
>>On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 12:21:57 +0200, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
>>
>>>I dont have to upgrade to every windows version there is.
>>
>>Actually you kind of do, sooner or later, especially if you're a
>>gamer. Don't assume the extensive support life of XP will be typical.
>
>You never need to upgrade to _every_ windows version there is.
>
>You could easily stick with XP and completely skip Vista and Win 7 and
>jump straight to Win 8.
>Just as people hung in with 98 until XP came out and completely skipped
>WinME.
Meh.. semantic nitpicking. Why not just say "nobody really needs a
computer to get by in life". True perhaps but laughable at the same
time.
>It's not like the hardware has made quantum leaps that actually require
>the latest OS, especially with so much of gaming being driven by the
>limitations on console hardware.
>
>Yeah maybe WinXP can't use the latest Direct-X features, but how many of
>them are actually _necessary_.
None of them are _necessary_. Using a combustion engine as a
technology for daily travel isn't necessary either, but most people
acknowledge they are living in the stone ages if they don't. This is
why I said "actually you kind of do, sooner or later, especially if
you're a gamer". Note use of "kind of" and "if you're a gamer".
>Every few years you'll have to jump to a newer version of windows, but
>they never have to be consecutive version. Not unless Microsoft start
>taking a very long time between OS releases OR there is a quantum leap
>in computing power that the current OS cannot take advantage of but the
>next version can.
Its not about quantum leaps in chip design, it's about the support
lifecycles of any software product. Game (and all software) vendors
care about getting paid for their expensive labor, so they tend to
target a specific OS configuration. Falling too far outside that
configuration means no longer getting updates and support. That
eventually becomes a security risk and maintenance headache that
anyone smarter than a caveman would do well to avoid; at the same time
anyone is free to be a caveman if they choose.
>MS would certainly like you to believe that you need every version as
>soon as it's available, but it's never been true.
MS has at some times been clever with marketing and other times not so
much, but I can't recall a time when they've ever pitched their
software as "you need this NOW". They usually try to add value
through features and their marketing is usually about showing the
"nifty" things that can be done with said features (whether anyone
really thinks they are nifty or not is a different story, but like I
said if nothing else the support cycle is reason enough to upgrade,
eventually). I never said that upgrading upon initial release of a
new version of it is necessary and I don't recall MS saying that,
ever, either.
wrote:
>Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@gmail.com> looked up from reading the entrails
>of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:
>
>>On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 12:21:57 +0200, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
>>
>>>I dont have to upgrade to every windows version there is.
>>
>>Actually you kind of do, sooner or later, especially if you're a
>>gamer. Don't assume the extensive support life of XP will be typical.
>
>You never need to upgrade to _every_ windows version there is.
>
>You could easily stick with XP and completely skip Vista and Win 7 and
>jump straight to Win 8.
>Just as people hung in with 98 until XP came out and completely skipped
>WinME.
computer to get by in life". True perhaps but laughable at the same
time.
>It's not like the hardware has made quantum leaps that actually require
>the latest OS, especially with so much of gaming being driven by the
>limitations on console hardware.
>
>Yeah maybe WinXP can't use the latest Direct-X features, but how many of
>them are actually _necessary_.
technology for daily travel isn't necessary either, but most people
acknowledge they are living in the stone ages if they don't. This is
why I said "actually you kind of do, sooner or later, especially if
you're a gamer". Note use of "kind of" and "if you're a gamer".
>Every few years you'll have to jump to a newer version of windows, but
>they never have to be consecutive version. Not unless Microsoft start
>taking a very long time between OS releases OR there is a quantum leap
>in computing power that the current OS cannot take advantage of but the
>next version can.
lifecycles of any software product. Game (and all software) vendors
care about getting paid for their expensive labor, so they tend to
target a specific OS configuration. Falling too far outside that
configuration means no longer getting updates and support. That
eventually becomes a security risk and maintenance headache that
anyone smarter than a caveman would do well to avoid; at the same time
anyone is free to be a caveman if they choose.
>MS would certainly like you to believe that you need every version as
>soon as it's available, but it's never been true.
much, but I can't recall a time when they've ever pitched their
software as "you need this NOW". They usually try to add value
through features and their marketing is usually about showing the
"nifty" things that can be done with said features (whether anyone
really thinks they are nifty or not is a different story, but like I
said if nothing else the support cycle is reason enough to upgrade,
eventually). I never said that upgrading upon initial release of a
new version of it is necessary and I don't recall MS saying that,
ever, either.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
noman
Jul 12, 2012, 5:05:19โฏPM7/12/12
to
On 7/12/2012 9:31 AM, Zaghadka wrote:
> for "genuine" users. I mean, it's not like the thing has a "ribbon"
> interface, and it runs under the DWM, right? Is there a Metro version of
> it/does it use Metro or Win8 specific stuff?
>
> Seems like a carrot to me, is all I'm saying. It is purty though.
>
I think, it can be easily brought back into previous OS. It has nothing
to do with metro. However, I don't see anyone spending time and money to
do the backporting and then to do QA. I am surprised just by the fact
that this feature made it into Windows8.
--
Noman
> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 13:30:33 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
> noman wrote:
>
>> 2) Hugely improved task manager. It's just amazing.
>
> But probably nothing MS can't roll back into Vista SP3 and/or Win7 SP2,
> noman wrote:
>
>> 2) Hugely improved task manager. It's just amazing.
>
> for "genuine" users. I mean, it's not like the thing has a "ribbon"
> interface, and it runs under the DWM, right? Is there a Metro version of
> it/does it use Metro or Win8 specific stuff?
>
> Seems like a carrot to me, is all I'm saying. It is purty though.
>
I think, it can be easily brought back into previous OS. It has nothing
to do with metro. However, I don't see anyone spending time and money to
do the backporting and then to do QA. I am surprised just by the fact
that this feature made it into Windows8.
--
Noman
0 new messages