Rest In Pieces - Windows 7 Mainstream support ends today.

[Mauri]

Well, this isn't so bad. The average joe is buying from an OEM like dell, HP, Asus, etc. so the OEM will still offer technical support to them, who cares if microsoft won't? And for the nerds that built their own computer, the only support we need is google.

[Clyne]

I still got a lot of Win 7 keys :lol:

But still i can remember Windows 7 because i have retail boxes of Win 7 Home and Professional copies.....

But i'll probably switch when i have enough money for a SSD and Windows 10.

[Hawx]

not upgrading to a touchscreen monitor for my primary screen 

Making statements like that just makes you look stupid. I have a Razer Blade with Windows 8.1 that I've been using for a year. Doesn't have a touchscreen, and doesn't need one. I see the metro start menu no more than twice a week at best. Everything is easy to navigate with a mouse + kb.

[Toadboy]

Going to keep win 7 I hate 8.1

Might be me just not likin the GUI of it.

[Dabombinable]

NT 6.3+ is all around superior anyhow. Windows 10 will cradle to those who are too stubborn to adapt to a full screen start menu over the classic.

What about those who have been using the start menu since 95? It didn't take as much getting used to as the replacement in windows 8/8.1.

[Mao_Zedong]

I like windows 8.1 slightly more, I have classic shell so the start menu is the same. The biggest thing I like about windows 8 is the task manager, there is no real comparison between them; windows 8 demolishes it (in that way). They are really mostly the same unless you are doing some specific heavy usage.

 

[Dabombinable]

I like windows 8.1 slightly more, I have classic shell so the start menu is the same. The biggest thing I like about windows 8 is the task manager, there is no real comparison between them. 

Well the windows 7 task manager is effectively the same as the one in XP, but with a few more features and Aero.

[dalekphalm]

I like windows 8.1 slightly more, I have classic shell so the start menu is the same. The biggest thing I like about windows 8 is the task manager, there is no real comparison between them; windows 8 demolished it (in that way). They are really mostly the same unless you are doing some specific heavy usage.

 

The File Transfer is also miles better on Windows 8/8.1 compared to Windows 7. PAUSING TRANSFERS! OH GOD IT'S BEAUTIFUL! Also having a tiled/detailed screen that shows each file or folder (if you queue up multiple ones), ability to pause each one individually, and showing the transfer speed on each separate transfer.

 

The only addition I would like is the ability to add queuing as an option (So if you transfer a file, then start a new transfer, the second one jumps into a queue and doesn't start until the first one finishes - as it stands, they will all transfer simultaneously - but at least you can pause them individually if you want to speed up the transfer).

 

Well the windows 7 task manager is effectively the same as the one in XP, but with a few more features and Aero.

Exactly, which makes it ridiculously outdated.

[Dabombinable]

The File Transfer is also miles better on Windows 8/8.1 compared to Windows 7. PAUSING TRANSFERS! OH GOD IT'S BEAUTIFUL! Also having a tiled/detailed screen that shows each file or folder (if you queue up multiple ones), ability to pause each one individually, and showing the transfer speed on each separate transfer.

 

The only addition I would like is the ability to add queuing as an option (So if you transfer a file, then start a new transfer, the second one jumps into a queue and doesn't start until the first one finishes - as it stands, they will all transfer simultaneously - but at least you can pause them individually if you want to speed up the transfer).

 

Exactly, which makes it ridiculously outdated.

I've noticed that overall Linux and OSX are the fastest when it comes to transfering files, with windows 7 being a lot slower, and unable to max out my HDD when I was copying files to my SSD, which Linux can do easily (123MB/sec VS 184MB/sec). Also to me Linux's system monitor is the best, with everything being monitored, inlcuding internet download/upload speed and the amount of data transfered.

[GrimNeo]

I will upgrade to Windows 10 if it is good.

[dalekphalm]

I've noticed that overall Linux and OSX are the fastest when it comes to transfering files, with windows 7 being a lot slower, and unable to max out my HDD when I was copying files to my SSD, which Linux can do easily (123MB/sec VS 184MB/sec). Also to me Linux's system monitor is the best, with everything being monitored, inlcuding internet download/upload speed and the amount of data transfered.

The task manager does include network too. I believe it's under the "Performance" tab, in Windows 8/8.1/10.

[Opcode]

What about those who have been using the start menu since 95? It didn't take as much getting used to as the replacement in windows 8/8.1.

Something Windows 10 will address.

[TheMissxu]

WIndows 8/8.1 runs much better than Windows 7, but there are some UI oversights that can prove the OS slightly hard to get used to. I personally ignore the Start Screen and have no problem with the OS.

[Dabombinable]

The task manager does include network too. I believe it's under the "Performance" tab, in Windows 8/8.1/10.

As in the actual through-put in KB/s or MB/s, not the link speed which isn't an indicator of your actual upload/download speed.

 

Something Windows 10 will address.

If Microsoft had been smart they wouldn't need to adress it now.

[pixeldensity]

i thought they would have ended "support" around the time when wind 10 comes officially releases, i think that would have been a better idea.

[GoodBytes]

i thought they would have ended "support" around the time when wind 10 comes officially releases, i think that would have been a better idea.

So you saying that you DO NOT want support until 2020, but prefer having less to 2015, when Windows 10 will be released?

[MeltingPoint]

I'm not touching 8/8.1. I'm staying with 7 until 10 comes out.

[shermantanker]

I thought mainstream support ended months ago. lol

[dalekphalm]

As in the actual through-put in KB/s or MB/s, not the link speed which isn't an indicator of your actual upload/download speed.

 

If Microsoft had been smart they wouldn't need to adress it now.

It does indeed show actual usage, in addition to link speed. It shows usage in Kbps/Mbps (Kilobits - not Kilobytes), so you do need to do a conversion if you'd like to see what your usage is in MB/s or KB/s. It shows both Send and receive as well, with a nice little plot chart graph. There could certainly be improvements, like customization to the graph, but still useful.

[SurvivorNVL]

Given that Win10 should be out by the time Zen is around - probably will 'upgrade' my main OS.  Dual-boot with ArchLinux and then.. I will be set. 

[Yog]

Still using windows 7. My computer is too old (five or six years now) to bother switching to 8, especially with 10 on the horizon. Besides, I've never called windows for customer support and don't even plan to so this wouldn't change anything for me anyway.

[LAwLz]

An average user like yourself wouldn't understand the underlying improvements that the NT 6.3 kernel has made in comparison to the hacked up Vista kernel that Windows 7 runs. If Windows 7 works for you then so be it no one is forcing you to upgrade. Tho if you think Windows 8 is horrible because a very few people like yourself cannot adapt to the superior functionality of the new start menu then you're already out of your league. The same kind of people who buys a car because it looks nice and wonders why it breaks down every 50 miles.

Yeah... Compare users who don't like the start menu to users who buys a car because it's pretty...

Metro is objectively inferior to the start menu for a lot of things. I have already posted a bunch of other reasons why I dislike Windows 8 a few pages ago but the start screen is by far the worst offender.

When I want to start a program I press the windows key, type a few letters and then press enter. With the start menu, I can continue working on stuff while I launch the new program. With Windows 8 the start screen appears, covering all the things I am working on while I type and then disappears. It is completely unnecessary. All it does is prevent me from continuing to do what I was doing, and it's really jarring to have that slow ass animation play and then everything on the screen changes shape and color.

 

If the start screen was superior then how come like 90% of the Windows 8 advocates here recommends installing a program that removes the start screen.

 

 

It's not that I can't adapt either. I used Windows 8 for months and figured out how to navigate it. The reason why I switched back was because Windows 8 was less efficient than Windows 7 for my usage. It took longer time to do things and that's a real deal breaker for me.

But I guess I should just adapt to something being slower, simply because the slower thing is newer and therefore it must be better! Right? Or maybe Microsoft realized what a fuckup the start screen is on desktops and will bring the start menu back in Windows 10 because of it. Hopefully they will fix the other issues I got with Windows 8 as well (seems like they are) and not introduce any new ones (sadly, seem like they will).

[Dabombinable]

Yeah... Compare users who don't like the start menu to users who buys a car because it's pretty...

Metro is objectively inferior to the start menu for a lot of things. I have already posted a bunch of other reasons why I dislike Windows 8 a few pages ago but the start screen is by far the worst offender.

When I want to start a program I press the windows key, type a few letters and then press enter. With the start menu, I can continue working on stuff while I launch the new program. With Windows 8 the start screen appears, covering all the things I am working on while I type and then disappears. It is completely unnecessary. All it does is prevent me from continuing to do what I was doing, and it's really jarring to have that slow ass animation play and then everything on the screen changes shape and color.

 

If the start screen was superior then how come like 90% of the Windows 8 advocates here recommends installing a program that removes the start screen.

 

It's not that I can't adapt either. I used Windows 8 for months and figured out how to navigate it. The reason why I switched back was because Windows 8 was less efficient than Windows 7 for my usage. It took longer time to do things and that's a real deal breaker for me.

But I guess I should just adapt to something being slower, simply because the slower thing is newer and therefore it must be better! Right? Or maybe Microsoft realized what a fuckup the start screen is on desktops and will bring the start menu back in Windows 10 because of it. Hopefully they will fix the other issues I got with Windows 8 as well (seems like they are) and not introduce any new ones (sadly, seem like they will).

Its interface is why businesses were slow to adopt it or just kept using windows 7. They didn't want to buy an OS that would cost even more money getting staff re-trained in using it.

[MoonSpot]

lol, 8.1 is fine. Stop circlejerking

Correction.  8.1 PRO or enterprise.  plain old win8 is still horrid, that's why 8.1 update is free! (or is for me)

ya know..if we're picking favourites.

 

@LAwLz Win + R & Win + S not doing it for you?

 

(starts catching up on thread after posting)

[DeViLzzz]

Hey MS are you going to move to releasing a new OS every single day in the future? Seriously stop messing up in your console division and find a way to make it profitable and do some other things besides releasing new operating systems to often.

I will continue to use Windows 7 64 bit well into the future til I am forced to use something else.