Windows 9 Preview Expected For End of the Year

[Me1z]

That reminds me you know what really needs another service pack? WINDOWS 7!

 

Really? I have SP1 and I can't say I have anything to complain about. I've found that a clean install of SP1 with disabled updates is one of the most stable operating systems I've ever used. Probably going to jinx myself, but this current installation is over two years old and has been completely blue screen free. Last time Windows 7 gave me any trouble was when my SR-2 kept butchering hard drives, which was obviously a hardware problem. Are there any particular fixes you think justify another service pack?

[Tr3vor]

It sucks. There is no USB support until Windows 98. I couldn't use a USB flash drive with my old IBM laptop.

 

Maybe that's because USB wasn't around back then? geez, its like faulting a black and white TV for not supporting HDMI.

 

You can get it to work, you just need drivers for your devices. USB wasn't really properly supported until ME.

[TheProfosist]

Really? I have SP1 and I can't say I have anything to complain about. I've found that a clean install of SP1 with disabled updates is one of the most stable operating systems I've ever used. Probably going to jinx myself, but this current installation is over two years old and has been completely blue screen free. Last time Windows 7 gave me any trouble was when my SR-2 kept butchering hard drives, which was obviously a hardware problem. Are there any particular fixes you think justify another service pack?

The 150+ updates I have to download each time I do a clean install. i could also do with full proper UEFI support rather than what it has now. I know thats a huge selling point of Win 8 though.

Maybe that's because USB wasn't around back then? geez, its like faulting a black and white TV for not supporting HDMI.

 

You can get it to work, you just need drivers for your devices. USB wasn't really properly supported until ME.

oh no it was around then and 98 SE and full support if USB 2.0 including built in drivers for flash drives.

[Tr3vor]

oh no it was around then and 98 SE and full support if USB 2.0 including built in drivers for flash drives.

 

Only on the later builds. and it still has issues. I don't use USB on anything pre 2000.

[Sauron]

USB wasn't really properly supported until ME.

 

To be honest saying ME properly supported anything is a bit of a stretch

[Lord Gaben]

And Windows 8 and 8.1 just launched...

Seriously Microsoft?

Windows 8 launched 2 years a go and 8.1 was 1 year ago, how did they just release them?

[TheProfosist]

Only on the later builds. and it still has issues. I don't use USB on anything pre 2000.

It still worked and existed well prior. USB 2.0 had the same situation back in the day that we had with USB 3.0 in recent years.

[StingBull]

Windows 8 launched 2 years a go and 8.1 was 1 year ago, how did they just release them?

 

Don't you think 1 year is a little too less than desirable? Microsoft could have pulled this crap 10 years ago where the computer world wasn't very stable and hardware progress was much faster, but not it doesn't make sense for people to buy a new version of the same operating system every year or two. Considering they pulled an Apple and started selling 0.1 versions, it's an odd thing to do just forget that and release a new version without even going to Windows 8.3.

 

The only reason I can think of is that Windows 8 was a failure much like Vista, and just like Vista they want to distance themselves from the name.

[StingBull]

Explain to me how Windows 95 is bad.

 

Or how Windows 3.1 is good.

 

[Tr3vor]

Or how Windows 3.1 is good.

 

How is 3.1 bad?

[TheProfosist]

Don't you think 1 year is a little too less than desirable? Microsoft could have pulled this crap 10 years ago where the computer world wasn't very stable and hardware progress was much faster, but not it doesn't make sense for people to buy a new version of the same operating system every year or two. Considering they pulled an Apple and started selling 0.1 versions, it's an odd thing to do just forget that and release a new version without even going to Windows 8.3.

 

The only reason I can think of is that Windows 8 was a failure much like Vista, and just like Vista they want to distance themselves from the name.

Its "failed" due to public image more than anything else. Oh and baaaaaaad marketing.

[StingBull]

How is 3.1 bad?

 

I'll be honest I don't know much about how 3.1 was at its time. But for me retroactively bad. Because a lot of the games that were released for the damn thing do not work in anything else ever.

[Phillyphries]

oh no it was around then and 98 SE and full support if USB 2.0 including built in drivers for flash drives.

 Yeah, no. If you've ever actually used Windows 98SE in your life, you would know that hardly any flash drives would work. In fact, even though it had USB support, it was a load of shit and it was hard to load drivers for each device.

 

That's why there are things such as unofficial service packs and other tools that you had to use in order to easily get function of those devices. Not to mention you literally had to have the Windows 98SE disc with you ALL OF THE TIME. You also usually had to point to where the drivers are, and believe me that's a huge pain in the ass. Unofficial service packs made it so that the windows driver search would automatically scan all drives for correct drivers.

[Noctus]

I still think my original post of "good / bad" cycle stand's. Sorry :v

[GoodBytes]

Its "failed" due to public image more than anything else. Oh and baaaaaaad marketing.

I agree. Windows 7 ads were amazing, especialy with the 7 sec ads. And Microsoft web site was filled with videos showcasing every single features, and how to get started with Windows 7.

That was brilliant!

In addition, the ads were quick and small, allowing more occurrence in the TV.

 

So, I really don't know what happened with Windows 8. The ads barely explain things, and I think I only get that "barely" because I know how to use Windows 8., didn't showcase anything beside the Start Screen, which looked more like a new Media Center thing or alternative menu, and the OS itself came with no transition help between Windows 7 to 8. Windows 8.1 had Help+Tip app, while something, it's not great. I have never seen a Windows commercial, web or TV, nor even on Microsoft YouTube channel, showing you the new features.

 

The only good thing that Microsoft has done is the Development blog of Windows 8, which showed a full detail article, and explained the direction they are going, and they thought process behind it, and included a video showcasing that new feature.

 

Example:

Building Windows 8 blog: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/default.aspx?PageIndex=4

[TheProfosist]

Yeah, no. If you've ever actually used Windows 98SE in your life, you would know that hardly any flash drives would work. In fact, even though it had USB support, it was a load of shit and it was hard to load drivers for each device.

 

That's why there are things such as unofficial service packs and other tools that you had to use in order to easily get function of those devices. Not to mention you literally had to have the Windows 98SE disc with you ALL OF THE TIME. You also usually had to point to where the drivers are, and believe me that's a huge pain in the ass. Unofficial service packs made it so that the windows driver search would automatically scan all drives for correct drivers.

I sadly had to for all of my middle school and high school years and I know for a fact that I could plug my 32MB Lexar JumpDrive right in and it would run using built in drivers. I did later have a 128MB secure drive that require a driver. Needing the disc for many things was required even in XP. There were plenty of ways to avoid using it though. I will also say that I have successfully used a flash drive in windows 95.

[Akolyte]

Will windows 9 be a free upgrade if you have windows 8.1?

I really bloody hope so!  

[Ren]

I just want something that looks modern with all of the bells and whistles regarding functionality. I don't care for sliding interfaces, docks that I can lock programs onto or anything strange like macs (no idea if this ever changed for Maverick or something, but Win7 has a similar feature w/program pinning). Not sure if I'm describing things well but my main concerns with Windows 9 are going to be:

 

- Lack of reliable functionality early on

- No innovation

- Innovation that just makes it something different rather than something that feels updated and more modernized (Windows 8 vs Windows 7, but even worse).

- Something that makes it worthwhile to pick up

- Poor optimization

- Something that feels it was made solely for the desktop and not for everything Microsoft develops

- "Same old 'same old'" with the UI and aesthetics. Either too much like a modified Windows 7, or just what Windows 8 should've been. I want familiarity, but there's about a hundred different ways you can make the OS look better just by changing menus and the task bar.

- Less ghetto-ness. I've not actually used Win8 but I was using Windows XP up until late 2010 I believe. Windows 7 is hardly different, at least in memory, and that's not necessarily a good thing when it comes to a lot of the things Windows has.

 

 

There's more, far more detailed things but I'd literally be going on for a few thousand words without any payoff. I can almost guarantee that at least 3 of these "fears" will be experienced upon release of Windows 9, but that doesn't mean Windows 9 will be a failure. However, that's almost entirely dependant on which of the 3 end up true.

 

 

 

 

I'm not optimistic, I wasn't optimistic about Vista or 7. While I'd rather not use any other OS just by judging at a glance (maybe Ubuntu/Linux has something for me, but it's not supported well), I'm not holding my breath. Sorry, Microsoft. I am a fanboy but I'm also not entirely ignorant.

[Lord Gaben]

Don't you think 1 year is a little too less than desirable? Microsoft could have pulled this crap 10 years ago where the computer world wasn't very stable and hardware progress was much faster, but not it doesn't make sense for people to buy a new version of the same operating system every year or two. Considering they pulled an Apple and started selling 0.1 versions, it's an odd thing to do just forget that and release a new version without even going to Windows 8.3.

 

The only reason I can think of is that Windows 8 was a failure much like Vista, and just like Vista they want to distance themselves from the name.

but Windows 8.1 was not a whole new OS, they just fixed problems with Windows 8, its still a 3 year upgrade period (which IMO is long enough), and they do small upgrades for fixing the problems with the new OS yearly with in that 3 year gap.

[Akolyte]

I will save money for windows 9 copy, but if its not what i want ill just pass.

Directx12 included.

Lots of customizable stuff,and to allow user made content,epecially for themes and menus and such im sick of 3rd party plugins and crappy broken themes.

*Better performance.

Optional i seriously hope they make the desktop and the windows in W9 fluent and gpu accelerated like metro, but with all the options you have on desktop and power user/mouse+keyb user friendly.

 

The old style windows and such are outdated but metro is a baby,not man enough to take over,thats why i hope for some really crazy stuff in W9,since windows 7 they did nothing great just prototypes released as official versions.

I also wish they bring back the option to switch back to the old Blue Screen.  If I got a blue screen and didn't know why the Sad face with a timer would be completely useless?!?!

 

And the ability to get into Safe Mode at boot. 

[Ren]

but Windows 8.1 was not a whole new OS, they just fixed problems with Windows 8, its still a 3 year upgrade period (which IMO is long enough), and they do small upgrades for fixing the problems with the new OS yearly with in that 3 year gap.

Hell, 3 years is almost too much right now in my opinion.

 

I think it's fine, but the problem is expecting people to dish out money that consistently just for what is essentially a large update. They change enough to warrant a new title but never give anything that's worth paying for. Windows' thriving existence has not been that long overall and I've not used anything on a professional/business level but I agree. To me, there's nothing wrong with releasing Windows 9 any time soon but you're making a mistake by charging that much for such underwhelming products.

[SwoonJoon]

I'm pretty excited for this. Although it gives me another reason to hold out on my laptop upgrade (I'd prefer a laptop that comes pre-loaded with Windows 9). My current will be running 5 years this December and I doubt it'll hold out much longer .

[deviant88]

Does anyone even know whats new in windows 9.

I mean yeah great new windows everyone all over the web whenever i search for windows 8 or 9 stuff all i get metro and start menu talks are people and article writers nuts or WTF? what are the new features? NO ONE upgrades windows for a freaking start menu.

I seriously cant find any rumor or talk about whats gonna be so grea about windows 9, we all know what we would like to have but what exactly will be so great to worth paying over 100$? if all they are going to do is start menu,desktop apps and *cough* cough* better security bullsht talk im probably gonna bash wind9 even if its not bad,unless they will sell linceses for 40$ again.

[dunnkers]

Oh I certainly hope that Microsoft will put some better mice and keyboard support in Windows 9

[TheProfosist]

I really bloody hope so!

No it wont be but I really hope they do that $40 upgrade thing again

I just want something that looks modern with all of the bells and whistles regarding functionality. I don't care for sliding interfaces, docks that I can lock programs onto or anything strange like macs (no idea if this ever changed for Maverick or something, but Win7 has a similar feature w/program pinning). Not sure if I'm describing things well but my main concerns with Windows 9 are going to be:

 

- Lack of reliable functionality early on

- No innovation

- Innovation that just makes it something different rather than something that feels updated and more modernized (Windows 8 vs Windows 7, but even worse).

- Something that makes it worthwhile to pick up

- Poor optimization

- Something that feels it was made solely for the desktop and not for everything Microsoft develops

- "Same old 'same old'" with the UI and aesthetics. Either too much like a modified Windows 7, or just what Windows 8 should've been. I want familiarity, but there's about a hundred different ways you can make the OS look better just by changing menus and the task bar.

- Less ghetto-ness. I've not actually used Win8 but I was using Windows XP up until late 2010 I believe. Windows 7 is hardly different, at least in memory, and that's not necessarily a good thing when it comes to a lot of the things Windows has.

 

 

There's more, far more detailed things but I'd literally be going on for a few thousand words without any payoff. I can almost guarantee that at least 3 of these "fears" will be experienced upon release of Windows 9, but that doesn't mean Windows 9 will be a failure. However, that's almost entirely dependant on which of the 3 end up true.

 

 

 

 

I'm not optimistic, I wasn't optimistic about Vista or 7. While I'd rather not use any other OS just by judging at a glance (maybe Ubuntu/Linux has something for me, but it's not supported well), I'm not holding my breath. Sorry, Microsoft. I am a fanboy but I'm also not entirely ignorant.

I dont really think you went into any of that enough for me to give you a proper reply.

I also wish they bring back the option to switch back to the old Blue Screen.  If I got a blue screen and didn't know why the Sad face with a timer would be completely useless?!?!

 

And the ability to get into Safe Mode at boot.

They had good reason to take the old bluescreen away. There are at least semi normal person readable errors on the current one and if you need more just check the dump.

you can get into safe mode of boot there is just a new method because of the fast boot due to UEFI.