Weekend Open Forum: Will Windows 8 be worth buying?

[Per Hansson]

Guest said:
WinXP was limited to DX9, so I simply had to get Vista in order to use my DX10 hardware and play what few DX10 games were out there. Then Windows 7 hit the fan with DX11, which you could only get with Windows 7. I go where the DirectX goes, and I'll keep on doing that for as long as games require DirectX. If this trend, adding a new version of DirectX with each new version of Windows keeps up, then (as a gamer) the choice has been removed from the equasion.

I just did a couple searching and read a little bit about Win8, and it seems it might be shipping with DX12. If it does, and if you can't get DX12 for Win7 then that's that. I'd have to get Win8. Case closed.

The way Microsoft has been using this situation to force gamers into buying their next OS is pure marketing genius (and potentially also pure evil).

DirectX 11 is not limited to Win7, it is available for Vista aswell.
The limitation they did in not making it available for Windows XP has hurt PC gaming enough.
Still to this day 50% are on XP, and only a fifth or so of systems are on Win7.

This divides the PC landscape and makes the lives of game developers so much harder.
Why do you think most games released today a decade after DirectX 9 was released still only support that API, and not the later releases?

 

[Guest]

I don't think there's an appetite for a new Windows OS right now. Win 7 did so well because there was a huge appetite for it, as XP was dated and fugly and Vista did not meet people's expectations. But with Windows 7 being so good and well liked, no one really wants to upgrade IMO. The only way they'll get people to move to 8 is if, as another poster said, they make DirectX 12 for Win 8 only. I mean really, ribbon menus? Who cares. A new theme? Who cares, there are plenty of tools available today to change the entire look of your OS or even replace explorer completely and customize your entire Windows experience. ARM cpu support? Again, who cares? The main version of Windows is a desktop/laptop OS, leave Windows Mobile for netbooks and smartphones.

 

[scout2of3]

I would buy Windows 8 if they would lower the prices for the full versions down to what you already pay for an upgrade version (I prefer not to buy upgrade versions as I like to start fresh with just one OS). Since I run Windows 7, it wouldn't make sense to me to upgrade to Win 8 as I am perfectly happy with Win 7 and also since I feel I paid a premium for a full version of the OS.

 

[Guest]

IF Microsoft decides to put back Audio Hardware acceleration in windows 8, I'll be in first line to buy it.
It's a plain shame what they did to windows vista/7 in the audio department, levelling audio quality by the crappy onboard audio market.

MS, give us HAL back!!!!

 

[Archean]

I am not sure it is a good idea to ask this question right now, as there is no beta in sight neither a list of 'new features' which will make their way into the new edition. Hence, I will rather wait until perhaps RC shows up, and make up my mind; until then Win7 is good enough to do everything I need to.

 

[Guest]

I have upgraded to every OS usually out of necessity and to support user laptops and computers. So yes I will be using 8 if for nothing else to get used to the OS and push it through it's paces. I am hoping it doesn't follow the ME or Vista Route and is actually a good upgrade but will let you know a couple weeks into the install maybe sooner.

 

[Benny26]

Not when i only managed to afford Windows 7 a year or two ago (and with the fact that it's a great OS)

Then again, Win 8 might have some magic new must have features that Win 7 hasn't got...But i doubt it.

 

[mrtraver]

scout2of3 said:
I would buy Windows 8 if they would lower the prices for the full versions down to what you already pay for an upgrade version (I prefer not to buy upgrade versions as I like to start fresh with just one OS). Since I run Windows 7, it wouldn't make sense to me to upgrade to Win 8 as I am perfectly happy with Win 7 and also since I feel I paid a premium for a full version of the OS.

You can still legally do a clean install even with upgrade versions. This link is about Vista, but it worked for me for Windows 7 also. http://windowssecrets.com/newsletter/get-vista-upgrade-never-pay-full-price/

 

[mrtraver]

Like others have commented, 3 years is too soon for the average user. I guess for the masses who buy a new PC, it makes sense, since people like my parents and wife care not a whit (nore even know) what OS their machines run. I would also possibly consider it for a new build if i was still keeping the old machine around, but definitely will not be buying it for my current build.

OH, wait, the ribbon? Well, that changes everything!! I have been using Office 2007 since work upgraded to it two years ago, and I hated the ribbon immediately. But after using it and learning some of its quirks, I now hate it even more. This alone is a deal-breaker for me for any new OS, so I guess 7 is my last Microsoft one. I'll have to learn how to use linux and windows emulators to play my windows games.

 

[fpsgamerJR62]

Windows 7 will probably get another service pack or two so I'll probably stick with it for a while longer. At any rate, 2012 seems too soon for another new Windows version and the new features don't seem compelling enough at this point. I remember back when XP was newly released, I ran it on a dual boot setup with 98SE which was my favorite Windows OS. It wasn't until SP2 that I stopped running 98SE. Every Windows version usually takes a while to get settled.

 

[g4mer]

If these are the only changes being made, then no.

 

[Timonius]

I might just switch permanently to Linux if Windows OSes stay at their ridiculous prices that they're at right now. I also hate the whole multi-tiering of the OS (Home, Home Premium, Professional, Ultimate, Enterprise, etc.). I'll always go for the 'complete and full' version and that means I am shelling out $$$ for it. If they just release just one version of Windows 8, I may consider it.

 

[Per Hansson]

Guest said:
IF Microsoft decides to put back Audio Hardware acceleration in windows 8, I'll be in first line to buy it.
It's a plain shame what they did to windows vista/7 in the audio department, levelling audio quality by the crappy onboard audio market.

MS, give us HAL back!!!!

Windows Vista & 7 support hardware sound just fine through OpenAL.
Why would you want it to be limited to one single manufacturer which has not released an update for it's proprietary API in 6 years?
Ontop of that a manufacturer which according to the Steam Hardware Survey accounts for 2.9% of the users market?

Lastly, Creative themselves have stated this about EAX;
"According to Creative's OpenAL 1.1 specification, EAX should be considered deprecated as a developer interface. New development should use OpenAL's EFX interface, which covers all the EAX functionality and is more tightly coupled with the overall OpenAL framework"

The only way they'll get people to move to 8 is if, as another poster said, they make DirectX 12 for Win 8 only.

I hope for the sake of PC gaming that this does not happen.
If it does it would be the final nail in the coffin (if that has not already been given!)
I mean do you seriously think PC developers would cater to the minority of a userbase that DX12 would then represent?

 

[Guest]

Most likely not worth it for Windows 7 users, probably a decent enough upgrade to warrant the purchase for users still on Vista, and obviously worthwhile for those still clinging to XP.

There's nothing wrong with more frequent and less dramatic updates, it's how the rest of the software market works and it's how Windows releases worked prior to XP. No-one is forcing consumers to buy each and every one.

 

[Guest]

<-- I'll probably install it somewhere just to play with it, but for a real, usable OS, you're generally better off skipping a version. Example:
Win 98
skip ME
XP
skip vista
Win 7 -->

You mean
Windows 95
Try Mac OS 8 but return to Windows 95
Skip Windows 98
Windows 98 SE
Skip Windows ME
Try out Debian 2.2 but return to Windows 98 SE
Wait a couple years before migrating to Windows XP
Try out various versions of Linux randomly throughout nearly seven years but always return to Windows XP
Skip Vista
Try out Windows 7 expecting it to suck and fall in love with it.
Try out the Ubuntu 11.04 and realize they destroyed the OS with Unity.
Go back to Windows 7
Skip Windows 8 because there is nothing it can offer(that I can think of) to justify upgrading.
Live happily ever after with Windows 7.

 

[Relic]

Given that I just upgraded to Windows 7 last year and am perfectly happy with it, I don't see myself jumping onto Windows 8 if released next year. I may look at the possibility of an upgrade depending on what 'must-have' features are offered and if I'm upgrading my system at the time, but still prefer not too this soon.

 

[red1776]

don't think there's an appetite for a new Windows OS right now

Thats good....they're not releasing it right now. Maybe they will be have a hungry appetite to devour a new OS next year

 

[3DCGMODELER]

I just wish the software companies would get with the program...

So many apps I have will not run on 64 bit OS...

The companies, 3rd party, are slow to recompile, to use 64 bit addressing and multithreading support...

Great Win 7 stuff, its the Other Software companies need to get off there lazy duffs and upgrade the software to compete with Win 7 and Win8...


What use is on OS when programs will not run on the OS's due to compatability..

Example : I have a telescope, and use a star mapping program, great program, will not run on 64 bit Win 7.... And do u think they would recompile to so it would run on win 7 ... no ...

Lazy companies...

 

[3DCGMODELER]

boot up time

My machine does it in less than a Minute, time enough to turn it on go get a cup of coffee and come back and its up and running.

If it took more than 5 minutes to boot up then it would kindas be a nusaunce,

I remember the Amiga days it took an hour for the computer to boot up... 20 meg of ram, 32 megahertz processor...

Wow boot up in less than 5 minutes that is fast compared to 20 yrs ago...

 

[ET3D]

Per Hansson said:
Still to this day 50% are on XP, and only a fifth or so of systems are on Win7.

It's the other way round for gamers. If you look at the Steam survey, only 23% of gamers (who participated) us XP. The rest have Vista or 7 (even Vista has more users than XP, though just slightly).

Regarding 8, I think there's one feature I'll find compelling in a Microsoft OS, but I don't know if 8 has it, and that's no reboots. I don't want to ever have to reboot my PC, and Windows still wants that on many updates.

Still, I think that if I end up getting 8 it will be because I buy a laptop (or other such device, like a tablet) that comes with it. I haven't yet upgraded my desktop from Vista, even though I have several 7 licenses. Just never felt a great need.

 

[Guest]

Windows 7 have very nice and positive name from the perspective of marketing. Windows 8 they will destroy this advantage without replace it with a similar advantage. Windows 8 as a name is neutral.

Microsoft I think is better choose a solution like PLUS for sell (if they don’t want give it for free as sp) the new code than a whole new version of windows.

The advantage in time line from the hype of a new windows version is much smaller than the advantage of the windows 7 name.

ps: Intel has keep the 7 for their cpus too.

 

[Guest]

...
Windows 98 they had a name connected in a year. So that name was easy outdated. And the millennium (ME) was really a big hype so then at those days the new version was correct move.
But now the 7 has the strong and stability and the 8 isn’t anything special.

 

[avoidz]

Too soon for another Windows. Five years is a reasonable cycle for both home consumers, gamers, and businesses.

And the ribbon is horrible to use.

 

[ET3D]

I think that the major reason for Windows 8's existence is ARM support. For this feature only it's worth releasing this version of Windows.

 

[Xclusiveitalian]

The reason i state boot up and shut down times as important is because my gf's 1 year old Mac destroys my freshly restored and updated windows PC which cost 1400 and has a fast drive in it. It shuts down in 2 seconds, and boots up in 5-6, my windows PC should do that same and that fact that it doesn't is sad.