OSDev.org

Some might say Windows 3.1 was the best...

I like Win7, but Vista was sh1t, clearly.

Stability wise, xp.

Graphical wise 7. If xp ran your system, you could run 7 with more graphical features.

and if your someone whos actually put time into using 7, and got use to the features that made everyday tasks easier
to get to, they ull find 7 was easy to use when you learn how to use it.



Unless your still running that awful integrated SiS graphics processor. You should be fine.


But ribbon on explorer in 8. Thats just dumb. Some child at microsoft thought the more that filled the screen the "cooler" it was.

I have burnt a DVD with all the required patches & related in order to run my brand-new 6-core machine with XP only. It took three installs before I succeeded, but with the DVD it would be a breeze to redo it. The important lesson is to apply Service Pack 3 before installing the motherboard support drivers.

I will not give-away hundreds of dollars to M$ for a Win 7 when I can manage with XP. Especially not when their OEM licence only allow a single install on a single machine. My old XP licence obviously works on multiple machines.

That'll work out great when they EOL XP and it gets no more security updates.

Also, I really don't understand the ribbon hate. I can see the dislike for putting it in Explorer, but it really made things less buried in Office and you can minimize it if you want the space back.

I havent used it yet. But from the screenshot I really hate it but I think some folks will really love it. I know many people who just thinks having something with a better(i mean with lots of moving designs and effects) UI makes them more modern or something like that.

Well I really wont use it. The primary reason why it had me shifted to Linux is because I hated the UI of windows 7. When I click on an app, I want the app to open and all the mini waiting effects had me frustrated. It actually (even if it is for a moment) makes you forget why you clicked it. I want speed more than any thing and easy access of the apps I use. Not what comes with the OS.

So I tried ubuntu, and saw that it was lacking my personal preferences, then tried XFCE and it was good and then finally settled with Lubuntu which of course has some bugs but delivered what I exactly needed. And also I really hate and am fed up with lots of settings. The primary reason why I liked Panda Cloud Antivirus when I used windows was beacuse it had little or fewer settings. I love it when it is fast and simple to access and use.

Maybe windows 8 will succeed. But I would never use it.

But I do want my Os UI to be eye-candy and things like that. Well that is different being my OS and all .

For me it depends totally on what I'm using the computer for. I love eye-candy as well but only if it serves a purpose. A good example would be a GUI for a media center or as an interface for a video game console. When it comes to everyday work I use dwm which basically has no graphics at all, is keyboard driven meaning I don't need to use my mouse and just totally kick-@$$ when it comes to effectiveness which is so much more important really than pretty graphics. I could not imagine using KDE or Gnome or any kind of graphical window manager because it doesn't really add anything when you are occupied working. I would of course not use Windows 8 either, not just because it adds graphics but just because it lacks any sort of tools or environment that works for me as a programmer. But to it's defence it isn't ment for people like me so it is totally understandable.

My biggest beef with Windows has always been it's greatest selling point. Point and click interfaces are easier to learn but harder to use for those skilled few. Command line often provides quicker access to what needs to be done in the hands of a skilled user. Windows is not for the skilled user it has advantages in small to mid size business ventures in that they offer technical support and the settings are easier for someone to describe. If you're running Linux/BSD/Solaris you will still need tech support which leaves you with either contracting or hiring tech support which is costly but could balance out if the number of installations is high enough or the features of Linux are actually necessary/useful.

It is a lot like choosing between C++ and C#. C# does not expose a lot of the useful tools that are available in C++ which makes it easier to write code in and if you don't need the features of C++ C# might be a better choice (faster turn around on development) but for some development you need the capabilities of C++.

Windows is targeted at 90% of the computer user market that has no desire to become a power user and just wants to surf the web and write documents. I am personally not a fan of the UI for Windows 8 but it is now familiar to people with "Smart Phones" and may be practical from that perspective. However I will not be one of the users of Windows 8 (worked fine in VirtualBox for me on a Windows 7 x64 host.) Although it's UI is no worse than Unity...

Hi, I would like to add that you can disable the ribbon and or metro.
And the errors like the [][][]S[][][] one are caused because the computer's motherboard needs to support Virtualization/HV

Lionel wrote:Hi, I would like to add that you can disable the ribbon and or metro.
And the errors like the [][][]S[][][] one are caused because the computer's motherboard needs to support Virtualization/HV

Its a Requirement for running it in virtual machines, Virtual box for example, has a check box for this.