Tech Stocking Stuffers: 18 awesome gifts under $50

Rumor: Windows 9 'Threshold' expected in April 2015

By Scorpus ยท 64 replies
Jan 12, 2014
Post New Reply
  1. Microsoft is reportedly targeting an April 2015 launch for the operating system sequel to Windows 8.1, codenamed 'Threshold'. According to Paul Thurrott, Microsoft is trying to put the less-than-fantastic launch of Windows 8.1 behind it by calling the OS Windows...

    Read more
  2. gamoniac

    gamoniac TS Guru Posts: 306   +72

    This is good news. Start menu's come back is welcomed, and allowing Modern UI to run in Desktop mode will restore the its name sake -- Windows, while allowing apps to run and deployed in a safe and uniform manner. via the Store

    Many people object to Modern UI but it does offer very tangible performance benefit. If you compare the CPU utilization when Netflix runs in Modern UI vs in desktop mode (IE), for example, the difference is 2% vs 8% on my desktop.
  3. SirGCal

    SirGCal TS Maniac Posts: 365   +136

    Is it me or are they going a little fast? They keep wanting more money for my 'upgrade'? XP/2k went for how many years? Now their best yet (7) is possibly obsolete how fast? (When did 8 arrive?, and now a potential move from 8 to 9...) Maybe it's just me but it seems to be speeding up. Still it better be pretty nice for me to give up 7 (read 'pay for 9')
  4. Teaco

    Teaco TS Rookie

    Was thinking the same thing, but after referencing the Wikipedia article, it seems every 2-3 years is the norm for release cycles with Windows.
  5. NotParker

    NotParker TS Enthusiast Posts: 28   +9

    I use Win7. I spent a few hours with Win8 and Win8.1 restoring someones laptop and updating things.

    WIndows 8 sucks. Totally unproductive compare to Win7.

    I'm not a Windows basher. I used NT4 in beta. 2000 in beta ... XP at beta 2, etc etc.

    I wouldn't pay one cent for 8 or 8.1.
  6. It's not that they're going fast, but rather they're returning to normal. Windows 95, 98, and ME in '95, '98, and 2000 respectively, as well as NT in '96, with Windows 2000 taking over for ME (for good reason) and bridging the NT path.
    Then XP in late 2001. That's a new OS every two or three years.
    Vista was stuck in development for so long that people got used to XP being around forever, but Microsoft had not intended for that to happen. Indeed, it's made people more reluctant to upgrade, because now they had an OS that was stable and had the majority of the features they wanted. That's why there's a lot of articles sort of freaking out about April's end of support for XP, because there's still so many installs of it out there.
    I would wager that a large number of people 'upgrade' only when they buy a new PC, rather than because they want Microsoft's shiny new release, because that's all they can get from major retailers unless they put forth extra effort. Certainly all the bargains only seem to apply to systems with the latest OS installed.
    Starting with XP (decent), then Vista (awful), then Win7 (decent), then Win8 (awful)... I want to believe the best of 9, but with their lowest-common-denominator approach of wanting every device to look the same, even though smartphones are always going to be less capable than desktop PCs... I think I'll be disappointed.
  7. fimbles

    fimbles TS Evangelist Posts: 1,179   +207

    Got to admit, battlefield 4 was a stuttery mess for me on windows 7.

    Much smoother performance on windows 8.1
  8. Gaara

    Gaara TS Booster Posts: 103   +26

    I agree with you !! windows 8 is suck, and windows 7 is perfect!! of course is base in windows xp that why. .. by the way im impress that you say windows 8 is suck and they have't remove your comment. I guess this is not lie neowin propaganda.
  9. 9Nails

    9Nails TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,215   +177

    I'm not a fan of Windows 8.1 on the desktop. Its because of the full screen Metro windows and getting stuck in them. (Can't find the 'X' to close, 'Escape' key doesn't escape, or 'Backspace' key doesn't back up a panel.) I use it at work, and after a few days of frustration I installed Start is Back. That fixed 99% of my problems. I had to install Adobe Reader because the default MS Reader was taking up the whole screen. Now, I just need to find an audio player to replace Windows Media Player / Xbox Player. And to find a picture viewing application to replace the built-in photo viewer.

    I can't really put my finger on what I like about it on the desktop. Possibly its that it feels faster and the task bar makes better use of multiple monitors. But that's not a whole lot of compliments.

    My Windows 8 experience leaves me feeling apprehensive about Windows 9.
  10. tipstir

    tipstir TS Ambassador Posts: 2,426   +112

    So they can't make Windows 9 128-bit as there isn't enough software around to take advantage so it's the same old 32/64-bit CPU mix support. So Windows 9 should allow you to have the power of 9 OS without Metro GUI if you don't have touch screen monitor or touch screen laptop.

    I don't see the thinking there at Microsoft I know I gave them a hand full with my complaint over them on Windows 8 phone. Never got it and to get a refund from them directly just go processed last night after waiting over a week and no one from MS ever contacted me. I got 3 emails telling me what I already know late last night. If I didn't get the phone by mail then issue me a full refund. They told me I could reorder I don't think so. I'll take my business somewhere else.

    My Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Tablet will stay with 7 for now. I am in no rush to put 8.1 on it. All my 5 quad core desktops run 7 64-bit, dual core 2x laptops run 7 64-bit, single core 2x netbooks run 7 -32-bit. I use to have more systems but they're RIP they work but too old to really use.

    My TCP/IP for 7 runs as fast as 8 and 8.1. System is runs smooth and clean both 7 and 8 suffer from poor system clogging. I keep all 7 systems clean every day them that way. Still MS limits the TCP.sys to 10 MSC, I have one set to 250 since my enterprise wired VPN router can do 350 on NAT side. Again to me 8 was a test out in the wild. But I want them to offer systems with a choice at boot. Load Windows 7 or Load Windows 8. Give us a dual boot option . Leave Media Center alone comes in handy if you ditch CATV or SATV or OTA HD-DTV.
  11. Nobina

    Nobina TS Evangelist Posts: 1,274   +786

    These are good news. They are planning to bring start menu back and apps won't be fullscreen. Everything I wanted from Windows 8/8.1.
  12. Railman

    Railman TS Booster Posts: 708   +101

    Another excuse not to buy a PC for another year?
    cliffordcooley likes this.
  13. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    That would be pretty awesome if it was a free upgrade from any OS, not just Windows 8. Look at OS X Mavericks, people with OS X 10.6 could upgrade to it. If MS makes us pay for needed upgrades, I, and many others, will be very bitter and mad.
    psycros likes this.
  14. je29836

    je29836 TS Rookie Posts: 26

    SteamOS will **** on windows 9
  15. Joshw

    Joshw TS Rookie Posts: 17   +8

    I couldn't be mad if they decided to listen to their customers again.The reactions to the Xbox One and Win 8 prob made them snap back to reality.
    psycros likes this.
  16. ET3D

    ET3D TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,344   +140

    Babies often do that to their parents. Hopefully it will grow up soon enough.
  17. fimbles

    fimbles TS Evangelist Posts: 1,179   +207

    Drag apps to the bottom of the screen to close :)
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2014
    9Nails likes this.
  18. m4a4

    m4a4 TS Evangelist Posts: 925   +493

    That's sure is a lot of entitlement. They don't need to make anything free, and there's no reason to be annoyed by that fact.
    They will most likely do something similar to what that they did when Windows 8 first released (the 15$ upgrade price), rewarding the early adopters with a low price...
  19. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    True, but I feel like if MS really wanted to drive people off of XP and Windows 7 then they would make it free so that many people, especially businesses, would want to upgrade, and not see it as an expense. MS doesnt want to push updates to XP after April 2014, so they would want as many people off of it as possible. Also, the PC sector is dying and a free OS might breed some new life into it. Especially with Steam OS and OS X going free from now on, it would be a competitive choice to make it free.
  20. Windows 8.1 + Start butom = Windows 9 :p
  21. m4a4

    m4a4 TS Evangelist Posts: 925   +493

    We'll have to see what happens since we can't see the full picture like MS should be able to :p
  22. hahahanoobs

    hahahanoobs TS Evangelist Posts: 2,007   +661

    Microsoft is a software company and their flagship is Windows. What do you expect them to release? You only complain about "fast" releases when you fear change or just never planned to upgrade anyway.

    m4a4 likes this.
  23. Darth Shiv

    Darth Shiv TS Evangelist Posts: 1,800   +460

    SteamOS has an enormous mountain to climb to be successful. It doesn't have the advantage of 90+% of AAA releases available. Just ask yourself "Why has Linux been such a dismal failure on the desktop?".
  24. Cycloid Torus

    Cycloid Torus Stone age computing. Posts: 2,838   +560

    XP? RIP. Win7 current keeper. Win8 tried one, nuff said. Win9, path from 7 - but watch out for the 'rental' gag. SteamOS might keep Redmond 'honest' - hope there will be a Win emulator.
  25. One thing no one has mentioned is the way Microsoft does everything possible to get you to sign up for a Microsoft e-mail, cloud etc account in Win 8 & 8.1. Can't even download from the store without this account which links your computer with MS. I want to be able to use my computer with a local account. MS is in trouble. many useable OS's in their past with few turds, but already they have had to bury Vista, and now this article implies Win8/8.1 will be buried by calling the update Win 9. Innovation is great, but who are their testers? Surely not representative of most of their users. I have a MacBook Pro circa 2009 and the latest Maverick OS runs on it faster with less problems than the previous OS's. Enjoying Win7 again, but since the IE update to 11, IE crashes. Makes me wonder what the heck they are doing at MS that they cannot deliver what the majority of their users want that runs smoothly.
    psycros likes this.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...