Why I've given up (for now) on Windows 8

[SNGX1275]

I'm going to post this originally in the Windows forum, and move it to Meeting Spot. With a redirect staying in Windows for a while. Maybe it is an abuse of my mod privs, but if another mod or staff (or member - just PM a mod or staff) has a problem with it, they can remove the redirect.

A while back I created this thread: https://www.techspot.com/community/...-disk-usage-performance-lag-windows-8.190289/

Now, when I created it, I thought perhaps it had been something simple I was overlooking. I hadn't used AHCI before, and therefore I was unsure if I had a BIOS setting wrong or if it was something in Windows itself. Maybe I still needed a driver that 8 didn't have?

I also had staunchly defended Windows 8 in the Windows 8 discussion thread I also created, when the Consumer Preview came out: https://www.techspot.com/community/topics/windows-8-discussion.178167/
I did this because I really believed it was a good OS. I had it running on a pretty old Pentium 4, 2.4Ghz with a gig of RAM. It was 'snappy' and the new features were cool.

Last night, I finally decided to tackle a problem I didn't bring here. I didn't bring it here because at first I thought it was something pretty minor that I'd take care of myself. Simply put, Windows wasn't updating anymore. I did a ton of googling, and had tried system restore, as well as booting from the Windows 8 dvd and trying a restore that way, as well as a complete refresh from a backup I had created. Nothing worked, restores failed because they couldn't access a file and blamed it on AV. Well I had disabled AV last night after it said that just to remove that problem (and also booting from 8 dvd totally bypasses the installed OS). I was logging what I was doing, so I could come here and make a post with details on what I'd done. But I eventually resigned that it was going to meet the same fate as the HD Lag post.

I deleted the 8 partition today, from the Windows 7 setup, and installed 7. Spent a couple hours updating and installing software I use, and now I'm back to good with Windows 7.

This also confirmed that my HD Lag issue is completely Windows 8 related (in case you didn't believe my google links showing others with the same problem, or Mict saying he had it too). Here is a screenshot of me transferring from one of my internal HDs to my OS drive (which was exactly how I'd replicate the problem in Windows 8). For those of you unfamiliar with my HD Lag thread, this is 10x the transfer speed I was seeing between the same hardware in Windows 8.

I like a lot of things about Windows 8. But it made itself as unlikeable to me as it possibly could by making things crawl to an almost halt when disk activity was involved, and by preventing me from updating it.

Could I have eventually solved the updating problem? maybe... but I don't think I could outside of such a reinstall that it would require re-activation, and at that point, why continue to fight it? It was a clean install that I had done nothing weird with, it would seem likely to come back again.

 

[cliffordcooley]

if another mod or staff (or member - just PM a mod or staff) has a problem with it, they can remove the redirect.

No problem here. I'd rather read about someones mileage, than some of the copy and paste articles any day.

 

[Jad Chaar]

You can get a ton of cool features from Windows 8 on Windows 7 if you really want.

 

[St1ckM4n]

Welcome back to the light side.

 

[Ed Tittel]

I'm surprised you didn't try the "Refresh your system" or "Reset your system" options (if you didn't have a custom refresh image, both work the same way -- by reinstalling the original Windows 8 files). Either way, the process finished quickly. But gosh, that might not have helped your disk speed issues anyway. FWIW, I don't see big differences between 7 and 8 for disk read/write speeds on either my four Win7 installations, or my four Win8 installations.
Thanks for posting: great info.
--Ed--

 

[DelJo63]

SNGX1275 good info in your last post. You certainly made a valiant effort to both fix and diagnose the issue. I am sure your effort will at least benefit others, which is in the spirit of Techspot.

Well done (y)

 

[learninmypc]

My comment is partially related.
The friend that gave me the W7 I'm on now, had bought a new W8 pc rather than upgrade the one I'm on. He also couldn't get it (W8) to take MS updates so he took it back to where he got it & they couldn't get it done either.
So he bought another W7.
Personally, I've not heard much good about W8.
Good luck to the OP.

 

[SNGX1275]

I'm surprised you didn't try the "Refresh your system" or "Reset your system" options (if you didn't have a custom refresh image, both work the same way -- by reinstalling the original Windows 8 files). Either way, the process finished quickly. But gosh, that might not have helped your disk speed issues anyway. FWIW, I don't see big differences between 7 and 8 for disk read/write speeds on either my four Win7 installations, or my four Win8 installations.
Thanks for posting: great info.
--Ed--

I thought about that. But I think that is essentially doing the same thing as a complete reinstall of Windows 8. It maybe saves your files, but it destroys everything you installed. I did create a full system backup through the Windows 7 Recovery something control panel. So I had tried to restore from that, as well as the regular system restore points.

I'm glad you haven't ran into the speed issues that I did. It seems I am not alone in having them though, in my other thread I provided a few links to others with strikingly similar but not, exactly the same problem. I suspect the root cause is the same, just maybe manifests a bit differently on differing hardware, or perhaps we all just noted it slightly differently. Mictlanteculti on these forums said he had the same problem too, and that it didn't occur in 7.

This may be something that Microsoft just doesn't publicly acknowledge and then later fixes silently. I've mentioned this before in here, but I ran several beta releases of XP and never had any issues with it, and then when XP was officially released I started having the famous nv4disp.dll blue screens that didn't get completely resolved until maybe SP2. I liked the CP on that P4, but I'm wishing, in retrospect, I could have dual booted the CP on this hardware to see if this has been a problem all along, or if it just got introduced in the RTM.

jobeard - Thanks, and I apologize for being a little short with you in the other thread. I was pretty frustrated at the whole speed problem by that point.

learninmypc - I'd never seen this no updating issue before, I'm certain I had performed windowsupdates successfully on it weeks prior. But upon checking installed updates, the whole frame refused to load. Oh well, I'm washing my hands of this until perhaps my next full system hardware upgrade.

 

[learninmypc]

I wish the best.(y)

 

[captaincranky]

Now, when I created it, I thought perhaps it had been something simple I was overlooking. I hadn't used AHCI before, and therefore I was unsure if I had a BIOS setting wrong or if it was something in Windows itself. Maybe I still needed a driver that 8 didn't have?

FWIW, During its early months, Windows 7 had some "teething problems" running drives in AHCI.

If a HDD took longer than 10 seconds to spin up on resume from standby, it was no longer recognized, thereby disappearing from "Computer".

I didn't notice this problem with my first Win 7 machine as I was running the drives in IDE mode.Anyway, SATA drives as small as 750GB would go unrecognized on resume, precipitating M$'s issuance of a hotfix, which was password protected, and only issued to persons deemed "needy" or "worthy". (At the end of the day those terms are interchangeable, aren't they)"
I'm guessing this problem has been addressed via normal updates, but I'll have to wait and see since I just put together a new 7 machine with two 2TB HDDs, and haven't really used it.

You've been defending Win 8 since its inception, and for the life of me, I can't figure out why. It always reads to me as though you believe you're obligated to do so.

Me, being the Archd**k of Computerland, herewith excuse, and render you harmless from any fealty or loyalty to this dreadful OS.

Remember, you defended Vista too, and look where that got you.

 

[SNGX1275]

I defended Vista because I never had problems with it. I defended 8 because in the CP I ran on an old P4 ran perfectly, better than I had anticipated it would, and certainly as good or better than the XP MCE with a few years of 'mileage' on it that it had when I got it.

I also defended Windows ME too, but that was a few TS Forums ago, so outside of getting lucky with archive.org or wayback you probably can't quote me on that. But I also never had problems with ME. This is the first time where I've defended an OS, and then later had to retract my defense.

 

[captaincranky]

Don't mind me, I'm so off put by the big M$ tablet sell out, I refuse to render a decision as to whether the "Window 8 glass", is "half full, or half empty". I say, bring me another glass entirely.

 

[PGHammer21]

I thought about that. But I think that is essentially doing the same thing as a complete reinstall of Windows 8. It maybe saves your files, but it destroys everything you installed. I did create a full system backup through the Windows 7 Recovery something control panel. So I had tried to restore from that, as well as the regular system restore points.

I'm glad you haven't ran into the speed issues that I did. It seems I am not alone in having them though, in my other thread I provided a few links to others with strikingly similar but not, exactly the same problem. I suspect the root cause is the same, just maybe manifests a bit differently on differing hardware, or perhaps we all just noted it slightly differently. Mictlanteculti on these forums said he had the same problem too, and that it didn't occur in 7.

This may be something that Microsoft just doesn't publicly acknowledge and then later fixes silently. I've mentioned this before in here, but I ran several beta releases of XP and never had any issues with it, and then when XP was officially released I started having the famous nv4disp.dll blue screens that didn't get completely resolved until maybe SP2. I liked the CP on that P4, but I'm wishing, in retrospect, I could have dual booted the CP on this hardware to see if this has been a problem all along, or if it just got introduced in the RTM.

jobeard - Thanks, and I apologize for being a little short with you in the other thread. I was pretty frustrated at the whole speed problem by that point.

learninmypc - I'd never seen this no updating issue before, I'm certain I had performed windowsupdates successfully on it weeks prior. But upon checking installed updates, the whole frame refused to load. Oh well, I'm washing my hands of this until perhaps my next full system hardware upgrade.

However, the very reason you had the issues you did was because you were basically caught between a rock and a hard place --while your system was ready for Windows 7, it wasn't ready for anything beyond 7 - there are doubtless cases of older hardware (or even hardware newer than yours) that got left in the lurch by the latest Microsoft operating system. (It's happened to other users before - it's even happened to me before.)

However, before pointing the finger at Microsoft (which all too many users have done when the issue is hardware) Microsoft does NOT write drivers (or even .INF files, which tell basic system drivers what to do) - those are written by/supplied by hardware manufacturers. (AMD. NVidia. Intel. Creative. Etc.) Now, if device behavior changes (example - audio behavior in Windows Vista), it may not be a driver change (or even an .INF change), but a change at the system-call (DLL) layer. (That layer IS Microsoft's responsibility.) For all the finger-pointing at Creative over changes in driver behavior between XP and Vista (same hardware), the driver .INF files changed very little between the two operating systems - the change was instead with how the audio-stack enforced driver behavior -- not all of it was due to UAC, either (which also caught its share of blame). If you (as a user) expect hardware to behave a certain way - and it can't - investigate why.

I had to help a user roll back to Windows 7 today because of a software incompatibility with Windows 8 - the issue in HER case lay with a rather atypical piece of Oracle software used in distance education. The software didn't just rely on an older version of .NET Framework (.NET 2.x), installing it on Windows 8 also caused the .NET Framework 2.x/3.x feature install to fail; even more problematical, Oracle shows absolutely ZERO intention of fixing the issue. It is the first - and ONLY - issue I have had with ANY Oracle-sourced software and Windows 8. However, Oracle's intransigence in even admitting the problem - let alone fixing it - has me rather cheesed off with Oracle in general. Since today is Sunday, Oracle gets a day off; however, tomorrow is Monday, and Oracle is going to get a complaint - from me - over this issue. If Oracle is going to supply software to the education community, it had best be able to deal with all the operating systems in use BY that community - and Windows 8 is one of them. If it won't support the use of the software in Windows 8, tell the colleges and universities that license the software from Oracle that - that way, they can find other alternatives.

 

[PGHammer21]

Don't mind me, I'm so off put by the big M$ tablet sell out, I refuse to render a decision as to whether the "Window 8 glass", is "half full, or half empty". I say, bring me another glass entirely.

So what is Microsoft to do - do nothing?
What you see as a "sellout" I see as Microsoft basically having no choice whatever.

Tablets and slates - regardless of what operating system they run - are a reality of IT. That is something we all see day in and day out - whether we use them or merely support those that do. I own no tablets OR slates - running any OS; however, I'm still the "family geek"; that means I am the go-to person for family members that do. (So far, it's been entirely iOS and Android - mostly Android.) And the number of such tablets and slates grows more and more every hour - and that's here on the EAST Coast - far from Microsoft's Redmond, WA campus. I can't ignore the encroachment of tablets and slates, and all I have to do is support them. Microsoft can't ignore them, either - as long as they are all running a non-Microsoft operating system and/or Microsoft application software, they are threats.

What is the draw of tablets and slates?

They are lighter than even laptops and notebooks, have longer battery life than laptops and notebooks, and (this is the MOST critical today, given economic conditions) they cost less. Nobody has ANY idea how long we will stay in the current economic doldrums - certainly Microsoft doesn't. Windows 7 isn't going anywhere - extended support doesn't drop dead until 202x. And Windows 7 simply does NOT fit the tablet/slate paradigm - not even as well as the Windows 8 Developer Preview did - ask anyone that got a Samsung Series 7 slate in the shipping condition of running 7. WindowsRT certainly couldn't carry the ball alone - look at what happened the LAST time Microsoft tried to sell a tablet-specific SKU. Also, Microsoft was not alone in looking at the encroachment of tablets and slates with alarm - Intel and even AMD looked upon the encroachment with fear and dread. That meant a *superset OS* was needed - one that supported tablet/slate features AND the productivity applications, games, etc. that 7 did - Windows 8, in other words.

That's right - even though I personally would NOT use a tablet or slate (I loathe virtual keyboards with a passion), I can't ignore tablets OR slates, and Microsoft has even less choice than I do.

However, how many of us get that? From what I can see, very few.

 

[captaincranky]

So what is Microsoft to do - do nothing?

What you see as a "sellout" I see as Microsoft basically having no choice whatever.

Spare me.

So did M$ have, "no choice whatever", to remove the media center and try and sell it back to you later".

Windows detects every piece of hardware in the system as it installs. How much further would M$ have to go, to allow the individual user the dignity of choice as to the type of install?

They already have the code written for the start menu and classic desktop. Athough I'm not a programmer, I suffer under the illusion that a simple user input, "or" command, would guide the installer to the type of installation he, or she, would be most happy with.

What is the draw of tablets and slates?

For me, absolutely none. From what I can gather from the TV, you're supposed to buy "XYZ Provider's", "will soon be $200,00 a month, deluxe ripoff package", then gather your children around an armchair, so you can ignore your 50" LCD TV, and watch "Avatar" on a 10" tablet.

So, offhand I'd say that slates and tablets appeal to lazy imbeciles of all races, creeds, and national origins. Lost that pesky TV remote? No problem! You've got an iPad to tide you over. It'll turn up one day, no doubt.

(I omitted responding to the last part of your post, since it was a rehash of things I'm already aware of, most of which were statements of the obvious).

My Ivy Bridge i3-3225 has a TDP of 53 watts, (VGA included), and the batteries in my wall never go dead. Nor do they seem to have a finite number of recharges allotted them.

As to the "Surface Tablet", as with most M$ hardware "war surges", I "fear(*)" M$ may have gotten to its own epic fail months, or perhaps years, too late.

So forgive me for not being on the portable device bandwagon. I secretly hope that this generation devotes itself solely to "portable devices", forgets how to produce food, and dies the f*** out.

(*) My definition of "fear" with respect to M$, is "privately overjoyed".

 

[St1ckM4n]

So what is Microsoft to do - do nothing?
What you see as a "sellout" I see as Microsoft basically having no choice whatever.

I don't understand your post. The quoted bit relates to Microsoft, as in the OS. The rest of your post talks about tablet hardware.

Win8 was a "sellout" in the sense that you're forced into a tablet-esque environment. MS had a choice, which Cpt. Cranky talks about above.

 

[SNGX1275]

However, the very reason you had the issues you did was because you were basically caught between a rock and a hard place --while your system was ready for Windows 7, it wasn't ready for anything beyond 7 - there are doubtless cases of older hardware (or even hardware newer than yours) that got left in the lurch by the latest Microsoft operating system. (It's happened to other users before - it's even happened to me before.)

I very much disagree that my system is too old for Windows 8. There happened to be some hardware issues with running the drives as native SATA rather than IDE emulation. I think there is probably a fair chance that if I had not chosen to install with SATA AHCI on, that things would have ran just fine.

In the Windows 8 discussion sticky, which I made when the CP was released, I was running it on a P4, 2.4GHz and I had no such issues and it ran acceptably well.

 

[IvanAwfulitch]

I'm running Windows 8 and am having no problems, and most of my hardware is between 3 and 5 years old. There's no such thing as "too old and not ready for Win8", as long as it was built when the P4, dual, and quad-cores were around. Anything else on that subject is wild conjecture and unsubstantiated, as evidenced by SNGX1275 running 8 on a P4 system.

In relation to the hard-drive issues, I suspect that some of the more minor hard-drive issues people might be having right now may have come from the "Power Saving" options, and from the "teething" and growing pains Windows 8 is probably plagued with.

Somewhere buried in the options is an advanced menu where you can tell the computer when to turn off the hard-drive, among other things. For most, it's probably set to turn off the drive after 10 minutes. There are a lot of other really annoying power saving options set in that menu that Windows 8 users should be made aware of. The fact that they are set to some of the most conservative settings possible is, frankly, ridiculous; I'm running a gaming computer. "Power saving" is not even a WORD in the gaming arena. Power efficiency, may be related... but not power saving. Turning my hard-drive off after 10 minutes of "inactivity" is stupid and unnecessary. If the power flowing into my 650 watt power supply isn't being used correctly, then I'd say a minor software tweak isn't enough to solve such a problem.

And as far as teething is concerned, it's nothing that some serious updates or service packs couldn't fix. Windows 8 has a lot of potential, in my opinion. Having been one of the nay-sayers who hated the tile/tablet interface, I've gotten very used to it. To all of you who swear not to touch it on some prejudices, the simple fact of the matter is that you have to develop new shortcuts and adapt yourself to it. I've gotten to a point where I can use my Windows 8 install just as effectively as my Windows 7 install and it's from just spending more than a few weeks with it and putting in the effort. I'm not suggesting you spent only a day on it, I'm merely suggesting you didn't spend enough time overall. I don't even miss my start-bar at this point, and everything feels just as responsive in 8 as it did in 7.

In response to the updating issue... that's something I've never even heard of. It's usually almost impossible to AVOID them. Maybe there was a system repair option you could've tried, or a troubleshooter, and it might have rectified the problem. But inability to update is a brand new one for me. Maybe it could be worth your time to give it another shot when its been patched and service-packed. I wouldn't write it off until a new build. That seems a little bit extreme, but I would be very angry too if my Windows 8 system gave me as much grief as you were getting. I used an update disc, so if MY install goes bad, I have to buy a completely new license just to get it up and running again (assuming a restore/backup fails).

 

[captaincranky]

I'm running Windows 8 and am having no problems, and most of my hardware is between 3 and 5 years old. There's no such thing as "too old and not ready for Win8", as long as it was built when the P4, dual, and quad-cores were around. Anything else on that subject is wild conjecture and unsubstantiated, as evidenced by SNGX1275 running 8 on a P4 system.

You do realize that this is a 2.4Ghz P-4, probably a socket 478, and maybe even a Northwood. The system is likely pushing 10, not 4 or 5 years old.

In relation to the hard-drive issues, I suspect that some of the more minor hard-drive issues people might be having right now may have come from the "Power Saving" options, and from the "teething" and growing pains Windows 8 is probably plagued with.

Somewhere buried in the options is an advanced menu where you can tell the computer when to turn off the hard-drive, among other things. For most, it's probably set to turn off the drive after 10 minutes. There are a lot of other really annoying power saving options set in that menu that Windows 8 users should be made aware of.

I can't even find, "spin down drives" in Win 7, and I have god mode installed. I can, from time to time, find it in XP, where I override it. So, is "spin down drives", something that either you or M$ are claiming is a "new power saving feature"?

I used an update disc, so if MY install goes bad, I have to buy a completely new license just to get it up and running again (assuming a restore/backup fails).

Buying a license, that would be a setback....

 

[cliffordcooley]

I used an update disc, so if MY install goes bad, I have to buy a completely new license just to get it up and running again (assuming a restore/backup fails).

No you wouldn't. Re-install the previous OS and upgrade again, if a simple re-install doesn't work. That Windows key has been activated on your hardware before so their shouldn't be an issue, especially if you follow the same upgrade path as before.

 

[captaincranky]

No you wouldn't. Re-install the previous OS and upgrade again, if a simple re-install doesn't work. That Windows key has been activated on your hardware before so their shouldn't be an issue, especially if you follow the same upgrade path as before.

See how different we are, you and I Clifford? You always assume the best, and I always assume the worst....

 

[IvanAwfulitch]

I lay no claim to creating that feature. That "power saving feature" is totally on MS, not me. If you want to check it out, Control Panel --> System and Security --> Power Options --> Change Plan Settings (on any plan -- doesn't matter which) --> Change Advanced Power Settings

Expand the Hard Disk Tab, and expand the "Turn off the hard disk after" tab, and then set that stupid thing to 10,000 minutes like I did.

Also, yes, I realize the P4 is at least 10 years old. I was just saying that PCs within 4 or 5 years of today's date could definitely run Win 8. My PC meets that credential.

 

[captaincranky]

I lay no claim to creating that feature. That "power saving feature" is totally on MS, not me. If you want to check it out, Control Panel --> System and Security --> Power Options --> Change Plan Settings (on any plan -- doesn't matter which) --> Change Advanced Power Settings



Expand the Hard Disk Tab, and expand the "Turn off the hard disk after" tab, and then set that stupid thing to 10,000 minutes like I did.

Found it, thanks

Also, yes, I realize the P4 is at least 10 years old. I was just saying that PCs within 4 or 5 years of today's date could definitely run Win 8. My PC meets that credential.

The syntax you presented didn't give this impression. Maybe I failed to channel it correctly.

And yet, why talk about 4 or 5 YO systems, when the thread is about a much older box.

When you come right down to it, M$ recommended AGAINST upgrading my eMachines XP SP-2 machine to Vista since it probably wouldn't have suitable hardware drivers written for it. So, now are we all working under the assumption that suddenly the hardware makers have relented and written drivers for a box that's 2 years older than that and 3 three OS releases after that?

As far as it goes, I doubt that drive spin down is the issue at hand. You move the mouse, the drives spin up. Data transfer rate isn't dependent on the drive sleeping. If you're copying and pasting, the drives are running.

SATA / AHCI in those old boards required the old "Press F-6 Intel storage floppy drivers w/ XP. PITA are those. They're why everybody is in still the habit of going into the BIOS and setting the drives to "run as IDE".

Going back an OS generation earlier, I don't know if Win 2000 was even capable of SATA operation at all. In that era, if you wanted faster HDD access, you used SCSI.

 

[SNGX1275]

IvanAwfulitch - The hard drive issue I was having was not related to spin downs/power saving. I don't think you were implying that, but just in case.

I also had tried a few ways to do a system restore and several restore points.

I agree with you that I just think it was probably a perfect storm of hardware and windows 'teething' problems as you put it. I do have the original install (before things went bad, at least I *think* before they went bad) on a 400gig hd. There is a small chance I'll revisit this at some point in the future.