Windows 8

personally i'm a fan of the tile system

As much as I would love that I can't see them putting out an alternative that would kill their own console sales

Also I think the tile system is more of a start up feature and for the new touch devices they showed off earlier this year and the option will still be there for a traditional desktop

We'll have to wait for more videos

yeah I like the live tiles for phones but weather or not its gonna be good with mouse and keyboard is different. Need to wait and see.

Windows has a running record that I think will continue on the same path it has. Basically, every second OS they release blows. Example;

98 was great
ME sucked
2k was good
02 sucked
XP was FANTASTIC
Vista BLEW
7 was good
8 will suck

/personalopinononwin8

Static Jak wrote:

Ghost wrote:Windows has a running record that I think will continue on the same path it has. Basically, every second OS they release blows. Example;

98 was great
ME sucked
2k was good
02 sucked
XP was FANTASTIC
Vista BLEW
7 was good
8 will suck

/personalopinononwin8

Yup. That seems to be the shared logic. I think 7 has a lot of potential to match XP given time.

XP did not really hit its glory until the release of the Intel CoreDuo/AMD X64 chipsets and 4GB Ram support (XP SP3 and later). These two hardware leaps made XP a beast on virtually any machine based on the shear fact that you could mutli-thread an x86 process between cores while dedicating massive amounts of Ram to it as XP in it's later stages was able to run "bare bones" to cut down on resources (It was never really a resource pig to begin with)

7 blew away XP/Vista's limits by up'ing Ram to 16GB+ and allowing I/O for multiple dual cores. That said 7 IS a resource pig. I hate the fact that I have a 2.4Ghz dual core with 4GB Ram lappy running Win7 and the OS eats 35% of my resources just on running background and "essential" functions.

So I partially agree with your "7 has a lot of potential to match XP given time" comment but its only going to achieve this in 1 of 2 ways. 1. People spend mad coin to run 4 X 4GB high frequency Ram and multiple X64 mulit-core processors (turning their PC into more of a rack lol). Or 2. someone re-writes 7 to run in a "bare bones" state eliminating the majority of t he useless features that do nothing but suck resources.....

The alternative is a Unix shell. If you scrap the Intel chipsets and run a strict AMD beast then you can config a Unix install to run laps around anything M$ or Mac could every do with their OS's and only using a fraction of the hardware. The downside to this of course is ease of integration and functionality considering there is no "Plug and Play" or "Installshield" for a Unix environment and everything has to be manually installed.

Way to get me started Jak lol

I'd get it but all I really use my PC for is music production and wanking myself into a semi-coma. So nah not worth the investment