OS WARS MEGA THREAD (Now debating proprietary vs. open-source!)

I'll go out on a limb now and say...I actually like Windows 8 and it's Start Screen. :hide:

I've found the live tiles to make a fair bit of sense for such applications as E-mail client, weather forecast, or news app.

True, especially the e-mail client was EXTREMELY limited in the initial release, but with the last two updates I've found it to offer, finally, the same functionality as the outlook.com website.

Add to this the extremely quick boot times and the fact that 8 was reworked to run on ultramobile devices with limited power makes it an ideal system to "revitalize" older hardware: I've installed it on my mothers's laptop, a 6 year-old laptop, which was originally running Windows XP, without problems regarding drivers (I've had to install the Vista driver for the touchpad, since it was the most recent one available, but it works).
 
...I've installed it on my mothers's laptop, a 6 year-old laptop, which was originally running Windows XP, without problems regarding drivers (I've had to install the Vista driver for the touchpad, since it was the most recent one available, but it works).

Interesting. What's the performance like? I'm kinda thinking about doing the same for a 2005 laptop when XP gets put to bed (officially...) next year.
 
While XP took at least 4 minutes to completely boot up, with 8 the computer is usable within 1-1.5 minutes, which isn't as fast as my laptop, but still, a huge improvement. Also, once booted up, the system seems more "fluid", with less hang-ups.

What are the specs of the machine you're planning on upgrading?
 
While XP took at least 4 minutes to completely boot up, with 8 the computer is usable within 1-1.5 minutes, which isn't as fast as my laptop, but still, a huge improvement. Also, once booted up, the system seems more "fluid", with less hang-ups.

What are the specs of the machine you're planning on upgrading?

Manage to boot up my Windows 7 machine in a minute completely. SSDs are a great great invention.
 
Absolutely, and I'm looking to install one in my system, but a 30s bootup time with conventional HDD is not too shabby. :)
 
If you care that much about boot speed, hibernate instead of shutting down.
 
If you care that much about boot speed, hibernate instead of shutting down.

Laptop batteries will love that.:thumbup:

OK, generally 90% of people do stuff to their laptops that the battery would punch them for if it just could.
 
Laptop batteries will love that.:thumbup:
Hibernate means "write RAM to disk and power off".
"Power down and slowly drain the battery to death" is called suspend.

Aren't newer UEFI equipped systems faster on that front?
Not a clue, it's still some obscure new standard, kind of like IPv6.
The SSD itself takes 10 seconds to warm up, so it might be irrelevant.
 
While XP took at least 4 minutes to completely boot up, with 8 the computer is usable within 1-1.5 minutes, which isn't as fast as my laptop, but still, a huge improvement. Also, once booted up, the system seems more "fluid", with less hang-ups.

What are the specs of the machine you're planning on upgrading?

Intel T2250 dual 1.7 GHz, 1 GB RAM (although I was half thinking about sticking in some new sticks up to its max of 2 GB), 945GM graphics.

That's encouraging about start-up time, my XP is definitely in the "go and make a cup of coffee and read the paper" time bracket. :lol:
 
Laptop batteries will love that.:thumbup:
If you're afraid of that, hibernate, disconnect batteries, next time you want to use it reconnect batteries and turn it on. :P

People always mistake hibernation (S4) with suspend to RAM (S3). :rant:
 
Orbiter performance in Windows 8

O-F Staff Note: posts moved here from the Orbiter performance in Windows 8 thread. Please feel free to continue the debate here.

--------


As my current PC has suffered an electrical fault that has left it unable to power up, I'm thinking of getting a new one so I'm curious on the performance of Orbiter in Windows 8 as compared with Windows 7. Is it similar or is it a XP/7 situation?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As my current PC has suffered an electrical fault that has left it unable to power up, I'm thinking of getting a new one so I'm curious on the performance of Orbiter in Windows 8 as compared with Windows 7. Is it similar or is it a XP/7 situation?

As far as I see it, Orbiter doesn't even enter into the equation. Win8 is such a Charlie Foxtrot as far as desktop usability is concerned that I'd never recommend it if Win7 is available to you.
 
Not performance related, but people have reported missing (custom) buttons at caption bars of Orbiter in-simulation dialog boxes when running on Win8.
 
As far as I see it, Orbiter doesn't even enter into the equation. Win8 is such a Charlie Foxtrot as far as desktop usability is concerned that I'd never recommend it if Win7 is available to you.

Well, I do have Win 7 Ultimate, the only problem would be finding all the proper drivers. I'll take this under advisement when I make my decision. Still, I would like a performance report, preferably with D3D9Client.
 
[I'm moving this thread to the OS WARS MEGA THREAD shortly due to the inevitable OS wars comments that have already taken the thread off-topic.]

On-topic: Orbiter runs fine on Windows 8 for me. If you like the start button (like I do), then you can install Classic Shell -- it's free.
 
Windows 8.1 is out (for PCs, at least) as a free upgrade to Windows 8. I'm running it right now. :)
 
Back
Top