Hacker News Reader

You say that Windows 8.1 is better than windows 7 while occasionally poking the user in the eye?

I'm not sure nicer file copying is worth being pokes in the eye by Metro. Faster boot and power management sound interesting, but I would really need independent benchmarks before I would trust any such claims. A 5 seconds or less decrease in boot time (like http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-vs-windows-7-benchmarked_p2-7...) would not be worth it for me. A significant power boost (+10%) for a laptop might be worth being poked in the eye, if said 10% can be gained while I use the computer (ie, not while sleeping/idling/suspended). For desktop however, power management is not really a feature Im looking for.

On improving boot time, here is some Steve Jobs folklore:

Well, let's say you can shave 10 seconds off of the boot time. Multiply that by five million users and thats 50 million seconds, every single day. Over a year, that's probably dozens of lifetimes. So if you make it boot ten seconds faster, you've saved a dozen lives. That's really worth it, don't you think?

http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Saving_Lives.txt

In that regard, people should finally learn to not turn off their computers every day. Sleep takes a second or two at most and with hybrid sleep (has been in windows for ages) it's a non-issue.

We still have weekly or monthly reboots to worry about.

Folklore becomes less relevant over time. Now that computers have very efficient sleep mechanisms boot time is a lot less relevant. I probably boot my laptop once a week.

Just my opinion based on a limited and outdated experience (see down thread comment - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6565296), but I definitely didn't feel like Metro was poking me in the eye.

I feel the Windows+X menu is a disaster. It is the worse UI for a menu ever. Is it a traditional start menu? a context menu? It feels really out of place with the entire Windows 8 UI. You want a shortcut to the Control Panel? Device Manager? Event Viewer? Let's just throw it on the start/context menu! The whole Windows+X menu seems like it was added by an engineer and was completely overlooked by the design team.

I learned to love this full-screen menu, once I set up one of extra buttons on my mouse to "win" key and learned to use scroll-wheel to navigate the menu. it is fast, fluid and I do not have to focus on reading program names. became 2nd nature to me

its a "power user menu". Nobody outsides "us" knows it even exists. Not a big deal.

The items are actually useful for administration/etc.

As an admin, I don't find the menu useful. Especially when I hop on various Server 2012 servers that have a slightly different version of the menu than my 8.1 VM.

To me, win+r is all that is needed. If I can't remember the name of an msc winkey + start typing still works ok.

The fact that the metro start screen exists on the server OS is deplorable.

You know, right after Windows 8 was released, I noticed something really interesting. While I was struggling with it [1], there were a lot of people on reddit and here being extremely positive, and on reddit there were attacks against anyone that was negative about it. At first, I figured I was just out of step. Gradually, the number of people complaining about Windows 8 grew to overshadow the boosters, where finally the boosters were nowhere to be seen. I believe it was a campaign by Microsoft to try and turn the tide they knew would be there, against it. It failed because Windows 8 was so horrible.

So, 8.1 comes out and here we have a new account (6 days old) with a glowing review. Pardon me if I'm a little skeptical. I've been had before.

[1] http://envoy510.wordpress.com/2013/07/19/windows-8-worst-win...

I don't personally like the looks of Metro, or how intrusive it is (fullscreen) but it is far superior to classic start in basically every regard. Especially with keyboard. I think people don't like it because of change, not because they think is bad.

The bitching at it reminds me of people using Gnome 2 or at least complaining how great it was. It's people hating change. Gnome 2 is crap when it comes to usability and configurability. Its only advantage was speed.. but hey, Windows 2000 might be fast on today's machines as well.

And while it might look sketchy it's not a glowing review but rather a list of configuration options that user changed in order to avoid metro as much as possible.

Go read the blog entry and tell me if I'm bitching about change.

I've used every single version of Windows since 3.1. I didn't like Vista because it had huge performance issues. I've never really bitched about Windows because I've always liked it. So, you couldn't be further from the truth.

Oh god, not this conspiracy theory paid shill nonsense again. If I had a dollar for every time I was called a shill for saying anything positive about Microsoft, well, it still wouldn't make me a paid shill.

There's an alternative to your theory that requires fewer assumptions and only requires reasoning based on the types of people involved in the discussions you mention. People who like Windows 8 were comfortable using it in new ways, people who didn't want to change didn't like it. The people who don't want to change still don't want to change and so of course they are still complaining. Me? I'm tired of debating people on whether or not Windows 8 was an improvement over 7 or not. Usually it comes down to dogmatic beliefs over how they think Windows should work and those beliefs are at odds with how Microsoft thinks it should work. Why argue with dogmatism?

As evidence for the dogmatism of this belief, look no further than your own comment. You simply cannot believe anyone would think Windows 8 was good, or that Windows 8.1 is good.

You and the House stenographer would get along.

People who like Windows 8 were comfortable using it in new ways, people who didn't want to change didn't like it.

Go read the blog entry and tell me that's about change. You can't look at that large list of problems and tell me it's my problem.

You're talking about yourself (and repeatedly telling people to go read your blog post, which they're not required to do) - the other posters are talking about users in general.

No doubt that you may well be an outlier. Every piece of software has groups of people who use it differently, including some that are infuriated by it. That doesn't mean that everyone that posts a positive experience is a paid shill.

I'm happy with Windows 8, and your blog entry doesn't reflect my experience.

> People who like Windows 8 were comfortable using it in new ways, people who didn't want to change didn't like it.

I'm fully comfortable changing how my desktop works. I've used Windows 98, Windows XP, Windows 7, and even Windows Vista on other computers. I've administrated Windows Server editions from 2000 to 2012. I've also used several Linux distros with varying desktop environments. I'm now using Debian Wheezy, after primarily using Windows environments my entire life.

I still say Windows 8 doesn't solve any problems that I have, and introduces several. That is why I don't use it and don't recommend it. The split-brain nature of the operating system makes it close to unusable, for both myself and a number of non-technical people I know.

Scoff scoff scoff.

Microsoft has been caught planting shills in online communities for 20 years.

http://web.archive.org/web/19980112192836/http://www.pjprime...

Yeah by GPs logic I suppose I am also a "paid shill."

You know why I'm not on Reddit supporting Windows 8 any more? Windows 8 works for me -- it works _fantastically._

I'm a little preoccupied with enjoying my computer; I see no reason to surround myself with a stream of negativity about an OS that has worked flawlessly for me.

Sorry this is a new account but I'm not a new HN reader. Shill argument here we come.

To be honest I'm not enamoured with windows 8.1. It's just marginally better for me than windows 7 was and I'm trying to spread some help for those who will be picking it up today who will no doubt expect it to work a bit like windows 7.

If I was a shill, surely I'd be saying "metro is fucking awesome!" and other such things which it clearly isn't based on the fact I want rid of it.

I've got 15 years of UNIX and Linux experience as well and would rather have my head in an old Sun workstation than this shit, but it's not where the world is for me unfortunately.

If I was a shill, surely I'd be saying "metro is fucking awesome!"

Yeah, that's what you'd do. You won't try and be subtle at all. I agree, you are no shill.

Look, I don't know if you are or not. Your post seemed odd to me, especially coming so quickly after the release of 8.1.

8.1 has been out for devs for a while I think.

The fact that you are still using the word "metro" means you aren't a shill ;)

I would actually call GP a post of useful tips to make Windows 8 less annoying.

Your post, not so much in the 'value-add' department.

Edit: Well damnit. For that matter, neither is mine :(

Mustn't feed the trolls. One never comes out ahead.

I was one of the converted boosters. Windows 8 was good enough out of the box. But the real usability problems came later.

Because the majority of the initial complaints were - "start screen ugly, metro apps unusable" - I was busy answering - start screen not that intrusive if you use shortcuts, metro apps uninstallable.

But the real problems blossomed for me much later - the inability of GFWL to work on windows 8 so I cannot play the legally bought Bulletstorm, Arkham City and Assylum, some software working weirdly (Stroke it), the phantom french keyboard that appears from time to time (don't ask), the general locked-ness of the metro runtime (I was insisting close to a year ago that they cannot be that stupid and will just open the platform), problems with Cisco VPN, and so on.

So for me W8 turned from different to terrible gradually.

I was able to get GFWL games to work on W8 with this fix: http://www.alialsawaf.com/post/36741943821/how-to-fix-games-...

I don't know if those people were shills or not but the thing about the Win 8 boosters that surprised me was how angry many of them were or are.

Someone would complain about the start screen or badly integrated metro apps and the chorus would start up about how anyone who didn't like the new menus and hot corners were luddites terrified of change. Absolutely ridiculous.

It was a surprising change of tone from how Windows users usually discuss things. The anger is usually reserved for inexplicable changes which don't work. The defenders usually shrug it off with a "Well, Vista always worked for me." Windows is not normally the sort of thing which attracts the sort of angry defensive passion which Mac or Linux users used to display.

So I can see how the abrupt change of tone would make people suspicious.

"Edit 2: I haven't figured out backups yet. Windows 7 backup was trivial with an external disk."

There is a CLI option but the GUI is gone.

But you don't need backup since you have SkyDrive now ;)

> But you don't need backup since you have SkyDrive now ;)

Oh what a fallacy this is. Cloud storage is at best a backup solution for some personal files you don't value too much, but in no way a replacement for a full-system backup.

This was a mistake by Microsoft, de-emphasizing the full disk backup options. There were serious issues with it, it was pretty brittle in terms of backing up and restoring* but those problems should have been fixed rather than obscured. To find the Windows 7-style backup options, hit start, type "Backup" and select "File History". Then in the bottom left corner, click "System Image Backup". The GUI is there, it's just been needlessly hidden. :(

http://i.imgur.com/YqIn0MB.png

Excellent. Thanks for pointing this out!

Would you mind sharing a bit more info on how to accomplish these?

1. This is probably a matter of running gpedit.msc (IIRC) and then enable disable lock screen somewhere.

2. This might be an option in inetcpl.cpl, perhaps under Advanced?

3. Task bar properties? Not sure if the "boot to desktop" option sits there, though.

4. That's probably using Windows Setup, so appwiz.cpl and select "enable/disable features" or something like that.

Asking because people often resort to me for their Windows problems even though I don't run it myself.

> Edit 2: I haven't figured out backups yet. Windows 7 backup was trivial with an external disk.

Look up the File History feature. It's essentially Time Machine for Windows.

http://www.hanselman.com/blog/Windows8Step0TurnOnContinuousB...

Notice that "Windows 7 File Recovery" hiding down in the corner? That's the backup feature from Windows 7, working just as it always did.

This is removed in Windows 8.1. Now it's File History or nothing.

When I started using 8 I wasn't too bothered by the missing start button, now I think I might actually prefer it without. I like the start screen, but I don't use any actual metro apps.

I'm slightly sad about the return of the start button too, I'd have been happy with an option to disable it.

Somewhat off-topic, but there's a fork of PuTTy called KiTTy with some improvements.

Thanks didn't know that (can't say I looked). Will have a play.

Not sure if this is the link...

http://kitty.9bis.net ( http://www.9bis.net/kitty/ )

Is this the right website for what you were referring to?

Yes, that's it

>Use Windows+X as your new start menu afterwards - it rocks. In fact I wish earlier versions of windows had that!

If you mean launching apps with Winkey+number then it isn't new and is most definitely in Windows 7.

No, Windows+X shows a small "start menu" with some simple often used functions like cmd prompt / task manager / control panel / run.

No - winkey+X (the actual X key) throws up a new menu. See below:

http://i.imgur.com/Tmq3iWp.png

How long did the upgrade take? I'm just wondering if this is more like a service pack, or if I'm going to lose a better part of an afternoon doing the upgrade.

that's going to vary highly depending on hardware and your link speed, but I just did in on 3 relatively newer PC's with SSD's over a 30Mbps connection, and it took between 30-45mins.

Thanks for the info - I have a comparable setup.

I'm just doing the upgrade at the moment: the download was 3.4GB and was maxing my connection, but the install has taken an hour so far, but this isn't on an SSD. The process looks like it's coming to an end soon.

I did a fresh install from MSDN iso onto a disk cleaned with diskpart from a USB stick (see [1]). I didn't do an upgrade. I wouldn't ever upgrade Windows manually after a screw up going from Vista to 7.

To do a full clean install on my Lenovo T400 with Samsung 840 Pro SSD off a fairly old Sandisk Cruzer took less than 10 minutes.

[1] http://wudt.codeplex.com/

For me, Start8 (paid software, costs $5) has been great. I get the core improvements from Windows 8, and get to have a real start menu.

Did have a problem with it still activated when you did the upgrade to 8.1?

There's also Classic shell, which is free software. While I prefer Start8 I think that Windows 8 with either is in no way worse than Windows 7.

Who actually uses the microsoft account login?

I do. It's fantastic. I also have 8.1 on my work computer which is AD, but you can link your microsoft account to that account as well which allows all preferences to sync.

right-click on new windows_menu_button opens same menu as win+X