Windows 8 goes gold, will hit MSDN and TechNet on August 15

By on August 1, 2012, 2:30 PM

Microsoft has announced the completion of Windows 8's development with the final build on its way to OEM partners. The RTM (release to manufacturing) milestone marks the last development stage before general availability and accurately represents the final product, barring any showstopping bugs. System builders will use the RTM version to prepare products for the operating system's launch on October 26.

Besides its inevitable appearance on torrent sites, the Windows 8 RTM will be offered through various legal means before October. Developers and IT professionals will be able to download the build two weeks from now via MSDN and TechNet. On August 16, the OS will be available to Microsoft Partner Network members and Windows 8 Enterprise will be available through the Volume License Service Center (VLSC).

On August 20, Microsoft Action Pack Providers (MAPS) will receive access and on September 1, Volume License customers without Software Assurance will be able to buy Windows 8 via Microsoft Volume License Resellers. Microsoft says availability for other partner programs will be announced when the time comes. In the meantime, the company has prepared a couple blog posts for businesses eyeing the upgrade.

Once in possession of the Windows 8 RTM, folks can begin submitting paid apps to the Windows Store (only free apps were previously permitted). Developers will earn 70% of app sales and that figure increases to 80% once the software exceeds $25,000 in revenue. Microsoft has also offered a list of certification policies along with a handy guide on implementing features such as in-app purchases and trial periods.

Microsoft says it's "humbled by the breadth of participation" in its prerelease software. The Developer, Consumer and Release builds have been the most broadly tested previews of any MS product with over 16 million PCs actively participating including 7 million on the Release Preview alone. The company thanked users for their feedback and said it would continue evaluating real-world experiences with Windows 8.

As noted, consumers will be able to purchase the operating system starting October 26. The company previously announced that it would let Windows XP, Vista and 7 users upgrade to Windows 8 Pro for only $39.99, far less than the $120 or $220 to update from Vista to 7 Home Premium or Ultimate. Also, folks who purchase a new Windows 7 PC ahead of Windows 8 will be able to upgrade for only $14.99.




User Comments: 43

Got something to say? Post a comment
lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Oh, shit.

This was sooner than I thought.

Brace yourselves for either the most important success or failure of modern computing.

Guest said:

It is really too bad Microsoft follows this pattern of good bad good bad and it just so happens 8 hits bad.

ME, XP, Vista, 7, 8.... see the pattern? I'm going to wait for "Windows 9"

TomSEA TomSEA, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Commence the whining in 3...2...1...

SNGX1275 SNGX1275, TS Forces Special, said:

I don't know guest. I saw somewhere, probably linked it in here before, that that argument is only somewhat true. It isn't an every other release sucks, it is if you look at it using only those 5 examples. But if you go back further, or count in the full timeline of when releases were (service packs), then that breaks down.

Guest said:

Well, I think most people think this will be one of the worst OS's Microsoft has ever put out. So far.

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Well, I think most people think this will be one of the worst OS's Microsoft has ever put out. So far.

It really could go both ways, which is why this is so exciting.

Guest said:

I could see myself getting a Windows 8 tablet sometimes next year. My desktop PC however, will be skipping Windows 8.

Guest said:

This is prolly the best OS I have ever used since ditching ubuntu 11.04,Windows XP...I love it, its fresh and easy to use, make my pc feel fast and responsive, easy to find anything I want.

SNGX1275 SNGX1275, TS Forces Special, said:

I could see myself getting a Windows 8 tablet sometimes next year. My desktop PC however, will be skipping Windows 8.

Why? Because of the 'touch screen' friendly Metro interface? Maybe I'm biased, and I didn't use the RP of 8 only the CP. But I think MS could totally kill off the dislike of the touch screen interface by incorporating Opera like 'mouse gestures'. Right click and swipe to move screen right, reverse to swipe left, seems fine. Mouse as pointer with swipes and no problem with the 'touch screen interface'.

Guest said:

I would like a Windows 8 Tablet, that would be cool. Tablets are great for sitting on the toilet and sometimes the living room. Other than that, I have a laptop with Windows 7 for on my patio, and a desktop with Windows 7 for real computing. WIndows 8 will be good for tablets, but Windows 7 is still amazing for everything else.

Xclusiveitalian Xclusiveitalian said:

The biggest problem really is this OS is not worth the upgrade $$$$, they need to seriously lower the price tag. Plus, Windows 7 is so stable and really good I don't feel that I'm getting anything out of upgrading. Unless I want to turn my desktop into an ultra powerful tablet?

SNGX1275 SNGX1275, TS Forces Special, said:

That is the problem for MS. They have failed to show the consumer that 8 is an upgrade. Us, that are somewhat up to date on these things, we know the upgrades, but the general public is not informed. That is the problem. "7 is good enough, why 8?"

Route44 Route44, TechSpot Ambassador, said:

So how soon before the OEM builders of laptops such as Lenovo, Dell, HP, etc. will be offering their products in Windows 8? I need to purchase a new laptop and it looks like sooner than expected.

Guest said:

Will licences for 7 still be available ?

sapo joe said:

Well, I formatted my PC and reinstalled Windows 7 x64 SP1 last week just because I learned M$ wouldn't get the Start Menu back anymore on the release of Windows 8. Metro interface is a bad joke on a desktop, and I tested it for 2 months before getting into this conclusion. Now, with a fresh install of Win7, my PC is running like new, and rock-stable. For years to come.

It's sad really, they could just add the option to have a classic desktop mode, but that IMPOSITION of Metro from M$ is just a really BAD move. Innovation is not coercion. Imposing things to users is quite the opposite of a modern software company should do.

Thankfully, Windows 7 will be supported for a long time now, maybe even longer than Windows XP, because so many people will just want to pass on Windows 8, just like happened to Vista.

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I could see myself getting a Windows 8 tablet sometimes next year. My desktop PC however, will be skipping Windows 8.

Why? Because of the 'touch screen' friendly Metro interface? Maybe I'm biased, and I didn't use the RP of 8 only the CP. But I think MS could totally kill off the dislike of the touch screen interface by incorporating Opera like 'mouse gestures'. Right click and swipe to move screen right, reverse to swipe left, seems fine. Mouse as pointer with swipes and no problem with the 'touch screen interface'.

They are not mutually exclusive. Changing how you interact with an interface does not require a change of the interface itself (assuming such interface is method-of-input adaptable). In essence, they <I>could</I> implement those gesture you speak of, but without having to remove Metro. Thing is, even then people wouldn't like Windows 8.

If you look close, people don't have a problem <I>with</I> Metro. They have a problem with the biggest Metro element: the Start Screen. From what I've read and heard, no one complains about the actual design language or the Metro apps. If gestures were there (which they will for devices with touchpads, FYI), people are still going to complain because it is fundamentally different from what we've gotten used to for the past couple of decades. Whether it is better than the Start button, though, remains a subjective matter, which is why it's going to be interesting to see how it'll turn out.

That is the problem for MS. They have failed to show the consumer that 8 is an upgrade. Us, that are somewhat up to date on these things, we know the upgrades, but the general public is not informed. That is the problem. "7 is good enough, why 8?"

Windows 8 is a superior OS all-around. There's no question about it. The problem seems to be the Start Screen, and how jarring the transitions are between it and the desktop.

The biggest problem really is this OS is not worth the upgrade $$$$, they need to seriously lower the price tag. Plus, Windows 7 is so stable and really good I don't feel that I'm getting anything out of upgrading. Unless I want to turn my desktop into an ultra powerful tablet?

You obviously don't have to get it if you're comfortable with Windows 7, but Windows 8 is $40. Windows 7 was $120 at launch...

Will licences for 7 still be available ?

Yes. Depending on how Windows 8 does, Windows 7 licences should still be sold up until 2015.

So how soon before the OEM builders of laptops such as Lenovo, Dell, HP, etc. will be offering their products in Windows 8? I need to purchase a new laptop and it looks like sooner than expected.

November. Hope that's not too far for you. Even then you can still get a Windows 7 laptop now and later upgrade to Windows 8 for $14.99.

sapo joe said:

Windows 8 is a superior OS all-around. There's no question. The problem seems to be the Start Screen, and how jarring the transitions are between it and the desktop.

See the ambiguity? It's not superior all-around, it has a MAJOR flaw, which is, the lack of a proper User Interface. It could be better at kernel level, but that's it. And it's kernel can't be better to the point of justifying the upgrade to the cost of losing a proper interface for a desktop. Because windows 7 with sp1 is rock solid.

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Windows 8 is a superior OS all-around. There's no question. The problem seems to be the Start Screen, and how jarring the transitions are between it and the desktop.

See the ambiguity? It's not superior all-around, it has a MAJOR flaw, which is, the lack of a proper User Interface. It could be better at kernel level, but that's it. And it's kernel can't be better to the point of justifying the upgrade to the cost of losing a proper interface for a desktop. Because windows 7 with sp1 is rock solid.

There's no ambiguity. The Start Screen being a "major flaw" is subjective. Just as it is bad for you, it is great for me (after, admittedly, the learning curve). Our scenario will apply to a sample of literally <I>billions</I> of people, which is why it'll be interesting.

And explain to me what changes from Vista to 7 were worth $120? It's all about appearance, my friend.

And the Start Screen is not an UI. It's simply an app launcher.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

And the Start Screen is not an UI. It's simply an app launcher.
The Start Screen may not be the complete UI, but it is what sets the tone for the UI. The Start Screen is what allows the initialization of the UI. In a sense the UI is most memorable by the Start Screen.

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

The Start Screen may not be the complete UI, but it is what sets the tone for the UI. The Start Screen is what allows the initialization of the UI. In a sense the UI is most memorable by the Start Screen.

Again, no. That's like saying the Start menu is the "desktop" simply because it "sets the tone" of the rest of UI elements of the desktop.

The Start Screen is a program launcher based on the Metro interface. Just like the Start menu is a program launcher based on the, ahem, "legacy" interface. Although you natively boot into it, you hardly ever see it or use it, especially if you pin programs to the taskbar.

Also, there are several Metro elements in the desktop that are visible without ever going to the Start Screen, so I don't buy "Metro" itself is the problem, as Metro apps work perfectly with Mouse/Keyboard. Like I said, people don't have a problem with the actual design language or Metro apps, they seem rather indifferent on that aspect; the problem is the Start Screen (and I absolutely get it). However, you never wondered why people don't (outspokenly) hate the charms bar, or the multitasking pane, or the retarded hot corners, or how when you click on the Network icon on the taskbar this unnecessary black "Metro" bar pops out, etc.? I sincerely hate them, but only because I don't mind the Start Screen. Do I hate Metro? No. Just those elements.

So the problem is not the "UI", but one essential element based off of it

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Again, no. That's like saying the Start menu is the "desktop" simply because it "sets the tone" of the rest of UI elements of the desktop.
What exactly do you think UI stands for? The Start Menu is the interface in which users interface with the OS. Its not the complete interface but it is the front end. Change the Start Menu to Metro doesn't mean the whole UI was replaced just the front end which sets the tone for user experience.

Guest said:

It is really too bad Microsoft follows this pattern of good bad good bad and it just so happens 8 hits bad.

ME, XP, Vista, 7, 8.... see the pattern? I'm going to wait for "Windows 9"

a) Why did you post that was though it's some brand new original thought, when people have been spouting this shit incessantly for the last two years or something now.

b) It's a complete pile of shit.

XP was awful when it was released, and only became half decent after SP2, the fact Longhorn got delayed for so long that people were using XP on hardware far in excess of what it required also aided in the illusision it was somehow superior to Vista.

Vista was better than XP by far, especially if you compare them both them under similar circumstances rather than a near decade old XP with three service patches and hardware more powerful than what existed back when it was released, and a brand new Vista. When XP was released it had all the exact same issues like driver problems, lack of backward compatibility, sluggish performance, etc.that Vista did when it was released, except even worse. Maybe if forum ****** didn't have the memory capability of goldfish they would be able to realise this.

Windows 7 is just a fine tuned Windows Vista.

Windows 8 is just a fine tuned Windows 7 with a new UI that everyone is jumping on the hate bandwagon about.

Guest said:

What exactly do you think UI stands for? The Start Menu is the interface in which users interface with the OS. Its not the complete interface but it is the front end. Change the Start Menu to Metro doesn't mean the whole UI was replaced just the front end which sets the tone for user experience.

Why do you even care so much about the Start Menu in this day and age anyway? Barely anyone uses it (Protip: this isn't my opinion, it's an actual fact supported by actual Microsoft telemetrics). Power users generally just hit the windows key and start typing the name of the program they want until it appears then hit enter, more novice users have their primary programs pinned. Only people's grandmothers still laboriously go rooting through the "All Programs" menu and clicking on nested folders to find a program icon.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Why do you even care so much about the Start Menu in this day and age anyway?
I never said I cared about the Start Menu. I will say I care even less for Metro.

As far as pressing start and typing the name of the application I want to use, this is something I do very rarely. I pin my most used applications to the start bar and then pin my other applications to the start menu. I have no need in searching through the All Application folder, once I have everything pinned. As far as Metro is concerned, I have absolutely no desire in my PC looking similar to a checker board at anytime.

sapo joe said:

There's no ambiguity. The Start Screen being a "major flaw" is subjective. Just as it is bad for you, it is great for me (after, admittedly, the learning curve). Our scenario will apply to a sample of literally <I>billions</I> of people, which is why it'll be interesting.

And explain to me what changes from Vista to 7 were worth $120? It's all about appearance, my friend.

The metro stuff occupies the ENTIRE screen, so, yes, it can be called UI, and, some people who aren't so good at computers aren't even able to get off it and get back to the desktop. Yes, it's true.

And, about the second phrase, yes, Windows 7 was THAT much better. Vista was almost unusable before service pack 1, because it was so bloated and slow and Windows 7 corrected all that and had a much better kernel, and yes it also had a BETTER appearance (which windows 8 failed to deliver).

I dunno if you work for M$, but whether Windows 8 is an improvement from 7 (or even XP) is much more debatable than comparing 7 to Vista. If you doubt it, just take a look around the internet forums around the world.

1 person liked this | lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Again, no. That's like saying the Start menu is the "desktop" simply because it "sets the tone" of the rest of UI elements of the desktop.
What exactly do you think UI stands for? The Start Menu is the interface in which users interface with the OS. Its not the complete interface but it is the front end. Change the Start Menu to Metro doesn't mean the whole UI was replaced just the front end which sets the tone for user experience.

So... "interface in which users interface with the OS"? Lol Do <I>you</I> know what UI stands for?

The UI is an encompassing (<- key word here) abstract framework of interaction with computer systems and it's usually compromised of many different elements. Singling out one element, and calling it the user interface is wrong. The Start Screen is not <I>the</I> user interface, it's an element of it. Metro is the user interface. Can't really make it any more clearer than that.

I see you haven't refuted my point, and now we've gone from why people hate the Start Screen to semantics...

There's no ambiguity. The Start Screen being a "major flaw" is subjective. Just as it is bad for you, it is great for me (after, admittedly, the learning curve). Our scenario will apply to a sample of literally <I>billions</I> of people, which is why it'll be interesting.

And explain to me what changes from Vista to 7 were worth $120? It's all about appearance, my friend.

The metro stuff occupies the ENTIRE screen, so, yes, it can be called UI, and, some people who aren't so good at computers aren't even able to get off it and get back to the desktop. Yes, it's true.

And, about the second phrase, yes, Windows 7 was THAT much better. Vista was almost unusable before service pack 1, because it was so bloated and slow and Windows 7 corrected all that and had a much better kernel, and yes it also had a BETTER appearance (which windows 8 failed to deliver).

I dunno if you work for M$, but whether Windows 8 is an improvement from 7 (or even XP) is much more debatable than comparing 7 to Vista. If you doubt it, just take a look around the internet forums around the world.

No it can't. Read previous paragraph.

And no, Windows 7 wasn't that much better for it to be worth $120, especially when taking into account that the incremental difference between 7 & 8 is equal (if not larger) as that of Vista & 7, while still being 80% cheaper than Windows 7 at launch. Sorry but your argument is flawed.

And no, I don't work for Microsoft. Why suggest that, because I'm objective? Should I imply since you don't like Windows 8 that you <I>must</I> work for Apple too? Please. Truth is, Vista is a better OS than XP. Everyone agrees it had very, very rough launch, but those who <I>truly</I> know, know it's a superior OS to XP.

"But oh no, that can't be true, it's Vista!" Yeah, well, reputation is a *****. And just like rumors, bad rep spreads pretty quickly.

People might stick to XP as a way to show off how much an "old-school" power user they are (whatever that means). Some hated Vista because of it's unnecessary animations, general lack of UI polish, or maybe the never sticked with it long enough to see SP1. The same applies to 7, some don't like the (better) use of Aero, lack of UI customization when compared to XP, others still think it's Vista with a different taskbar, etc.

Some people won't get Windows 8 on the desktop because of the Start Screen, but you'd be surprised to know many of the <I>will</I> get a Windows RT tablet. Truth is, there are millions of people out there, and whatever you see, read, or hear, is not quantitatively indicative of the 1+ billion computers powered by Windows.

Zen Zen, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Some hated Vista because of it's unnecessary animations, general lack of UI polish, or maybe the never stuck with it long enough to see SP1.

Bingo!

I don't think I've ever seen anyone around here, since the time I got here to now, hit the nail on the head and with one sentence tell so much truth about the misconceptions, misgivings and blatant hate mongering of Windows Vista. Frankly, I have loved Vista since it launched! Granted, before service pack #1 it was a tab bit rough going, but after service pack #1 things stabilized, got more rock solid, and things got faster! At present I am a loyal and die hard Windows Vista Ultimate (64-bit) user and I can vouch that things with Vista get even better after service pack #2, mine if fully loaded, 100% of the certified updates are in here and since the last update went in, up until now, the thing has never let me down, not one bit!

And this whole argument or at best, heated conversation in regards to which O.S. is better, personally speaking......"who really cares"? Just because Microsoft is about to launch another operating system, it doesn't mean everyone has to make the switch! There are still plenty of good options out there, as far as operating systems. You still have Windows XP (Home) and (Pro), we still have Windows Vista (Home) and (Pro-32) and (Pro-64), We of course have Windows 7 in all of it's elegant flavors, people can also choose a non Microsoft operating systems like Linux in all of it's various distro's! And for some, if switching to Linux isn't good enough, people can choose to buy an Apple machine and use OSX.

We have options right now, some good, some great, some "so so" but we have options right now, we should just be thankful for that!

*** Zen hugs his copy of Windows Vista Ultimate (64-bit) and is thankful that he bought the 15 year product support licence! ***

Night Hacker Night Hacker said:

I can't stand Windows 8. I don't like the metro interface and didn't like the fact that it's smartscreen came up with a warning when I went to install a free game I created and treated it like it would be dangerous to install it. There was one button, OK, you click it and it aborts installation. You have to click on some tiny text etc... to force it to install. The average person might be scared off by this dire warning about a potential disaster that was narrowly averted thanks to Microsoft. Well, they can shove Windows 8 where the sun don't shine, $40 is too much to pay for garbage.

Windows 8 = the modern version of Windows Vista. They're again ignoring what people like in favour of what they wish to push on us and they will find out... again... that they need to pay attention to what the people, who are buying your software want. Don't hand me a turd and tell me it's chocolate.

p51d007 said:

Passing on Win8 for now, as I did when Win 7 first came out. That time, it was because my hardware wasn't "ready for prime time", so I waited until I built a new system that could handle it. This time, it is for a few reasons. One, I don't have a touch screen. Two, for what I have played with, I can't see the "need" for win8. 7 Still is plenty fast, has the features I need. So, I'll hold off for now.

Since win7 is rtm, and will go to developers/OEMs on the 15th, you can bet it will show up on the torrent sites about a week before that LOL.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

The UI is an encompassing (<- key word here) abstract framework of interaction with computer systems and it's usually compromised of many different elements. Singling out one element, and calling it the user interface is wrong. The Start Screen is not <I>the</I> user interface, it's an element of it. Metro is the user interface. Can't really make it any more clearer than that.
For the record I never said Metro wasn't Windows 8 UI element to replace the Start Menu of Windows 7. Therefore I don't understand why you are pushing that detail. I am suggesting its the element that is seen most, so therefore the most important element of the UI from a users perspective.

We seem to be saying the same thing, so I'm just gonna drop out now before I twist and tangle my words even further.

Guest said:

I am not going to rehash what has already been said, but for those complaining about Metro it is fairly clear you have not even used Win8. Stop looking stupid to everyone.

I use my Win8 laptop daily and I never see Metro unless I specifically choose to see it (which is rare). If you don't know how this could be then you clearly have not used Win8. I mean seriously.

If you are dead set on having a start button (I like it just for nostalgia sake) then install Classic Shell and be happy (it's free and awesome).

Now everyone shutup on the Win8 hate.

sapo joe said:

I am not going to rehash what has already been said, but for those complaining about Metro it is fairly clear you have not even used Win8. Stop looking stupid to everyone.

I use my Win8 laptop daily and I never see Metro unless I specifically choose to see it (which is rare). If you don't know how this could be then you clearly have not used Win8. I mean seriously.

If you are dead set on having a start button (I like it just for nostalgia sake) then install Classic Shell and be happy (it's free and awesome).

Now everyone shutup on the Win8 hate.

So, you're saying we should spend money on a new OS and then install programs on it to make it look like the old one.

HOW STUPID IS THAT?

SNGX1275 SNGX1275, TS Forces Special, said:

^ If you think the only difference between 7 and 8 is the start screen.....

sapo joe said:

^ If you think the kernel of win8 is THAT much better....

I find it amusing how people are blinded by new stuff. The lack of polish of Win 8 is so visible that even major software makers are stating it publicly.

It's not that I don't like Windows. I do. In my opinion, Windows 7 x64 is the best desktop OS ever. But Win 8 is worse. Much worse. Lack of start menu and intrusive Metro interface is something I can't swallow. I can do much more in less time with windows 7 just because it's EASIER to use. Can that be acceptable on a "new" OS? Things should improve, not the other way around!

Guest said:

So by your logic we should never install anything on an OS because how stupid would it be to make an OS do what we want it to do. I MEAN THAT IS STUPID!

Thanks, that is the funniest shit I have read all day long.

sapo joe said:

So by your logic we should never install anything on an OS because how stupid would it be to make an OS do what we want it to do. I MEAN THAT IS STUPID!

I see. You like spending mommy's money... LOL

1 person liked this | lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

The UI is an encompassing (<- key word here) abstract framework of interaction with computer systems and it's usually compromised of many different elements. Singling out one element, and calling it the user interface is wrong. The Start Screen is not <I>the</I> user interface, it's an element of it. Metro is the user interface. Can't really make it any more clearer than that.
For the record I never said Metro wasn't Windows 8 UI element to replace the Start Menu of Windows 7. Therefore I don't understand why you are pushing that detail. I am suggesting its the element that is seen most, so therefore the most important element of the UI from a users perspective.

We seem to be saying the same thing, so I'm just gonna drop out now before I twist and tangle my words even further.

You said the Start Screen is Windows 8's UI simply becuase it's the frontend. My comment is trying to explain to you, that the Start Screen is simply an element of the Metro UI, and that people don't have a problem so much with Metro, as they have with Start Screen. I know what you meant to say, I just wanted to point out when you say UI we are talking about the big picture, including everything that's "Metro-fied" but it's <I>not</I> the Start Screen. It turns out people don't seem to have a problem with everything else that's been "Metro-fied", it's just the Start Screen, which is important to then single it out as an UI element. That's what I said in my comments.

^ If you think the kernel of win8 is THAT much better....

I find it amusing how people are blinded by new stuff. The lack of polish of Win 8 is so visible that even major software makers are stating it publicly.

What software makers have publicly stated Windows 8 lacks polish? There's no lack of polish, because if there was, you'd be implying Windows 7 lacks polish. Because, you know, Windows 8 looks <I>exactly</I> like Windows 7. But wait! It has the Start Screen...

It's not that I don't like Windows. I do. In my opinion, Windows 7 x64 is the best desktop OS ever. <b>But Win 8 is worse. Much worse. Lack of start menu and intrusive Metro interface is something I can't swallow</b>. I can do much more in less time with windows 7 just because it's EASIER to use. Can that be acceptable on a "new" OS? Things should improve, not the other way around!

Well, that's weird. It is a widely known fact, Windows 8 is architecturally faster in literally everything than Windows 7. But wait! It has the Start Screen...

See the trend here?

sapo joe, it is fairly evident you have no clue what you're talking about. You sound like a consumer that thinks of himself as a "power user." You don't know or care to know why Windows 8 is as much of an upgrade as 7 was to Vista (while still being 80% cheaper than 7) because all you see is the Start Screen. Just like when people were fed up with Vista, as soon as they read about the new, "all-glass" taskbar, they suddenly fell in love without even knowing what exactly made 7 so much better than Vista.

You don't have to like Windows 8, I'm not here to convince you, but when you say Windows 8 is worse, lacks polish, etc. you should be referring to the whole OS, not simply the Start Screen. Which is, apparently, your biggest problem as per the bold text above.

Night Hacker Night Hacker said:

I am not going to rehash what has already been said, but for those complaining about Metro it is fairly clear you have not even used Win8. Stop looking stupid to everyone.

I use my Win8 laptop daily and I never see Metro unless I specifically choose to see it (which is rare). If you don't know how this could be then you clearly have not used Win8. I mean seriously.

If you are dead set on having a start button (I like it just for nostalgia sake) then install Classic Shell and be happy (it's free and awesome).

Now everyone shutup on the Win8 hate.

No. I won't. Windows 8 is a bad operating system and to sit here and say nothing would be wrong. People need to be warned about what they are buying and all the flaws it has so they can make an informed decision. As a developer I want the freedom to distribute my software any way I see fit without Micro$oft treating it like a virus if it isn't pre-approved by them. That's my main beef. I think the Metro interface is horrible as well, the Start Menu makes more sense and is easier to navigate. This looks like they made something new to appeal to the cell phone junkies and just so they could say "look, we made something new!!!".

MrLightRail MrLightRail said:

Then get your app approved! I do not want to install your app unless I know it's clean, and I'll be damned if I take your word for it. So quit your bitching, and get with the program.

MrLightRail MrLightRail said:

One thing that really has not been covered, is whether Android tablets with the ARM architecture will be able to install Win8. I have a Asus TF101, that I'd love to try it with. I do know that I will have to change to a touch screen display for my PC when I install Win8. Using a mouse just isn't too pleasant.

DanUK DanUK said:

What's this? A Windows 8 post and the majority of the coments are bitching about metro? Who would have guessed?!

As the upgrade from windows 7 is so cheap I'm deffo gonna give this a go. Not tried windows 8 at all yet but from what I've read on here looks like it's just going to be a better version of 7 so why not!

tw0rld tw0rld said:

Windows 8 is the the easiest Os to use. It is very snappy, and easy on resources. I don't see what the big fuss is about. This Os should be a success unless Microsoft blows the marketing.

Night Hacker Night Hacker said:

For one, the operating systems starting with Windows Vista and on won't even allow an app to install in the wrong place so I don't know what you're worried about. Plus a simple virus checker should be on your computer so what is there to approve? You only trust Microsoft approved products? Seriously? The company that released software so full of security holes it was pathetic? You are gullable. No, I won't get it approved by those assholes, I'll switch to another operating system instead if I have to.

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.