# Switched to 8.1 on My Computers--Not As Easy As I Expected



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

"Not as easy as I expected." There's a massive understatement! What was Microsoft thinking when they switched from System 7 to 8.1? I'm getting used to it, but I really didn't expect it to be this much of a learning curve. 8.1 seems to be built with tablets in mind rather than a simple to use system such as System 7. Guess I expected too much.

Rich


----------



## dmspen (Dec 1, 2006)

One of MS biggest blunders, IMO, is too much change. They did it when they switched from a menu driven interface in Office 2203 to the ribbon interface in 2007. People were used to performing certain actions with a mouse. They radically changed it. For the better? Eventually I say Yes, but so much change throws people.

The advent of Windows 8 caused people to leave MS and get a MAC. Why? Because it worked more like a PC! And yes, it seems that Win8 is slated for tablets and phones rather than a PC. I'm still aon Win7 and will not update. Neither is my large aerospace company! I went into the local MS store to play with Win8. It was not intuitive and I disliked it immediately.

Since the advent of Win8, MS has started going back to a more Win7-like interface. Why won't they learn?


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

My son bought a laptop with Windows 8 on it and definitely did not like it.

He came across an option to upgrade to 8.1 and did that. He likes it much better than version 8.

He also figured out how to change it up in some of the choices you have to make it look and feel just like Windows 7 if you want it to do that. I do not know what or where they are to list the changes he made.

I felt the same way when I switched from XP to Windows 7.


----------



## grover517 (Sep 29, 2007)

You could also check out an add on called "Start8" from Stardock. You can try it out for 30 days for free and is only 4.99 to purchase. I played with it for 30 days, but since the only install I have of Win 8, is on my touchscreen XPS 18, I just kept at it, and now don't mind the touch interface all that much.

However, if your using a mouse, I agree that Win 8 (or 8.1) is a real pain to work with.


----------



## PCampbell (Nov 18, 2006)

I have used 8 and 8.1 and I will go to Mac before I change my machine to 8


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dmspen said:


> One of MS biggest blunders, IMO, is too much change. They did it when they switched from a menu driven interface in Office 2203 to the ribbon interface in 2007. People were used to performing certain actions with a mouse. They radically changed it. For the better? Eventually I say Yes, but so much change throws people.
> 
> The advent of Windows 8 caused people to leave MS and get a MAC. Why? Because it worked more like a PC! And yes, it seems that Win8 is slated for tablets and phones rather than a PC. I'm still aon Win7 and will not update. Neither is my large aerospace company! I went into the local MS store to play with Win8. It was not intuitive and I disliked it immediately.
> 
> Since the advent of Win8, MS has started going back to a more Win7-like interface. Why won't they learn?


I was so satisfied with 7 and can't believe they made such a huge change. Your son is right, I was so satisfied with 7 because it acted just like a Mac. If they come out with a more user friendly OS I'll be upgrading this.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

jimmie57 said:


> My son bought a laptop with Windows 8 on it and definitely did not like it.
> 
> He came across an option to upgrade to 8.1 and did that. He likes it much better than version 8.
> 
> ...


I got 8.1 right off the bat and I've figured out how to make it more like 7, but that's a crutch. I taught a lot of classes about using the various OSs over several years and never had the problems I've had with this...this...monstrosity. I even liked Vista. I'd rather have that than this, but I will persist. Not happily, but I will learn how to use this beast.

Rich


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

My sister bought a new PC and scoured the stores until she found one that still had 7. She found it a Staples.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

grover517 said:


> You could also check out an add on called "Start8" from Stardock. You can try it out for 30 days for free and is only 4.99 to purchase. I played with it for 30 days, but since the only install I have of Win 8, is on my touchscreen XPS 18, I just kept at it, and now don't mind the touch interface all that much.
> 
> However, if your using a mouse, I agree that Win 8 (or 8.1) is a real pain to work with.


It took me about a minute to realize that 8.1 was made with tablets in mind. I can see using a Surface tablet now. But a computer with it?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

PCampbell said:


> I have used 8 and 8.1 and I will go to Mac before I change my machine to 8


If Macs came with 17" laptop configuration without costing more than a heart transplant I'd happily go to a Mac. Stuck with this for now.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

machavez00 said:


> My sister bought a new PC and scoured the stores until she found one that still had 7. She found it a Staples.


Your sister was smarter than I was.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

What happened to the Solitaire game? Every other OS had it and I used to use it as a teaching tool. I got no games except for Xbox crap that I don't care about and they charge for them. 

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Rich said:


> What happened to the Solitare game? Every other OS had it and I used to use it as a teaching tool. I got no games except for Xbox crap that I don't care about and they charge for them.
> 
> Rich


I found it, you have to download it! Ridiculous


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Rich said:


> I found it, you have to download it! Ridiculous


Just played a couple games. They even managed to screw up that simple game.

Rich


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Rich said:


> "Not as easy as I expected." There's a massive understatement! What was Microsoft thinking when they switched from System 7 to 8.1? I'm getting used to it, but I really didn't expect it to be this much of a learning curve. 8.1 seems to be built with tablets in mind rather than a simple to use system such as System 7. Guess I expected too much.
> 
> Rich


Microsoft philosophy "If it's not broken we fix it!".


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

There also is another update coming out, maybe around August. Windows 9 "Threshold" in April.


----------



## John Strk (Oct 16, 2009)

Windows 8's new Start screen and Metro UI may have been made with tablets in mind, but there is still the desktop which is no different than the prior Windows OS versions. Don't like the new start screen? Then boot straight to desktop or just click the desktop tile on the start screen. Once on the desktop you can arrange your boring old program static icons anyway you used to. Added bonus - Install the free Classic Shell app or something similar to bring back the old windows 7 or XP style start button and menu.

I have been using Windows 8 Pro 64 bit on a self built PC since last year and love it. It's much more secure, faster, and stable than anything before it. I boot to my start screen in 9 seconds. Click my desktop tile and everything is good! :biggrin:


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

I have been using Windows 8 for over a year. The 8.1 update is an improvement. It's now easy enough to avoid "TileWorld" completely and boot directly to the desktop.

Learn some of the new Windows keyboard shortcuts. They are a big help.

I'm not a fan of Mac computers -- still too costly. But I do like iPod Touch, iPad, and Apple TV.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

I understand the Metro interface for tablets. I'm not fond of it, but I understand where they were going.

What I *don't* understand is why they thought that the couple hundred million or so existing desktop and non-touchscreen laptop computers would just simply 'vanish' and nobody would notice and, therefore, embrace 'Metro'.


----------



## B Newt (Aug 12, 2007)

I miss os2. It was the best!



Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk


----------



## coolman302003 (Jun 2, 2008)

Rich,

If you haven't already I would recommend looking over the Taskbar and Navigation properties. To access you right click on the Taskbar at the bottom > Properties > Navigation tab
There you will find options you can set, I have mine set as pictured in the screenshot below.









P.S. you can also simply press Windows Key and type _Taskbar and Navigation _then Enter to access those properties.

Also, I like to have Administrative Tools listed on the Start/Apps screen, to enable you press Windows Key [to access Start/Apps] > then hold Windows Key + C [to bring up Charms] > Settings > Tiles > Show administrative tools > ON *LINK*


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Rich said:


> "Not as easy as I expected." There's a massive understatement! *What was Microsoft thinking when they switched from System 7 to 8.1?* I'm getting used to it, but I really didn't expect it to be this much of a learning curve. 8.1 seems to be built with tablets in mind rather than a simple to use system such as System 7. Guess I expected too much.
> 
> Rich


MS been trying for decades to get a common interface for everything that runs a version of Windows.

Tablets and other touch screen equipment are now the lead devices on where MS OS is going. The PC is now second fiddle.


----------



## TXD16 (Oct 30, 2008)

If, as I am, one is more comfortable with the basic Windows interface that has essentially existed since Windows 2000 (the first "consumer" version to implement the NT kernel), simply install Classic Shell on top of your Windows 8/8.1 installation, configure it accordingly, and be done with it. I have, and I can't remember the last time I intentionally visited the Metro interface on any of my laptops or desktops.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

MysteryMan said:


> Microsoft philosophy "If it's not broken we fix it!".


They certainly applied that philosophy to 8.1!

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> There also is another update coming out, maybe around August. Windows 9 "Threshold" in April.


Know anything about it?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

John Strk said:


> Windows 8's new Start screen and Metro UI may have been made with tablets in mind, but there is still the desktop which is no different than the prior Windows OS versions. Don't like the new start screen? Then boot straight to desktop or just click the desktop tile on the start screen. Once on the desktop you can arrange your boring old program static icons anyway you used to. Added bonus - Install the free Classic Shell app or something similar to bring back the old windows 7 or XP style start button and menu.
> 
> I have been using Windows 8 Pro 64 bit on a self built PC since last year and love it. It's much more secure, faster, and stable than anything before it. I boot to my start screen in 9 seconds. Click my desktop tile and everything is good! :biggrin:


Yeah, I figured all that out, doesn't change my opinion.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

djlong said:


> I understand the Metro interface for tablets. I'm not fond of it, but I understand where they were going.
> 
> What I *don't* understand is why they thought that the couple hundred million or so existing desktop and non-touchscreen laptop computers would just simply 'vanish' and nobody would notice and, therefore, embrace 'Metro'.


I really don't get it either. I really liked 7. More like a Mac than any other Windows OS I've used. This is an act of brutality.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

coolman302003 said:


> Rich,
> 
> If you haven't already I would recommend looking over the Taskbar and Navigation properties. To access you right click on the Taskbar at the bottom > Properties > Navigation tab
> There you will find options you can set, I have mine set as pictured in the screenshot below.
> ...


Thanx, I'll give that a try. I really don't see why we have to go thru all this when 7 was so simple.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Drucifer said:


> MS been trying for decades to get a common interface for everything that runs a version of Windows.
> 
> Tablets and other touch screen equipment are now the lead devices on where MS OS is going. _*The PC is now second fiddle.*_


That just makes me feel worse. For years I battled for larger screens at work and here we are with tiny screens again. And touchscreens were just something else we went thru and got rid of.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

TXD16 said:


> If, as I am, one is more comfortable with the basic Windows interface that has essentially existed since Windows 2000 (the first "consumer" version to implement the NT kernel), simply install Classic Shell on top of your Windows 8/8.1 installation, configure it accordingly, and be done with it. I have, and I can't remember the last time I intentionally visited the Metro interface on any of my laptops or desktops.


I downloaded it and now I'm gonna play with it. I'll be back.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Rich said:


> I downloaded it and now I'm gonna play with it. I'll be back.
> 
> Rich


Well that didn't take long. Now, how do I say this? Will *THANK YOU!! *suffice? Now I'm going to do something to you that I rarely do.

Rich


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Rich said:


> That just makes me feel worse. For years I battled for larger screens at work and here we are with tiny screens again. And touchscreens were just something else we went thru and got rid of.
> 
> Rich


Well, those hi-tech screens we see on all those CSI shows are getting closer to being our everyday screen for the desktop PC.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

As some of you know, I'm an advocate of the Surface Pro 2 with 8.1. I boot to the standard Windows desktop which I've set up pretty much as I have since XP, with program and file icons on the screen and taskbar. It is true that there are a number of things that don't seem obvious. For instance, if you right click the Windows symbol at the left of the taskbar at the bottom of the desktop, you get a menu accessing many familiar Windows management utilities as noted in previous posts.

But the desktop is pretty much as functional as Windows 7.


----------



## TXD16 (Oct 30, 2008)

Rich said:


> Well that didn't take long. Now, how do I say this? Will *THANK YOU!! *suffice? Now I'm going to do something to you that I rarely do.
> 
> Rich


I'm really just the messenger, so no need to thank me. Instead, thank the hard-working folks who provide such "free" software by sending them a couple of bucks if you can.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Rich said:


> That just makes me feel worse. For years I battled for larger screens at work and here we are with tiny screens again. And touchscreens were just something else we went thru and got rid of.
> 
> Rich


When I made this post about our Surface Pro 2's as desktop computers I had no real experience using it as a tablet/laptop in meetings. While I use it as a desktop with a 23" monitor, the fact that I can pack it up pretty much like any tablet but use it with the power keyboard and bluetooth mouse, or not, has sold me on the idea. If you are most comfortable in a full Windows environment being able to use all the software you're used to, 8.1 on a Surface Pro gets you there at your desk on a large monitor with normal keyboard and mouse while allowing you the freedom of a tablet for mobility. The only thing the tiny screen does is save you from having to cope with multiple computers - you won't need a desktop, a laptop and a tablet. I've looked at a Surface Pro 3 and can see why some would prefer it, but I'm happy with the Pro 2.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

phrelin said:


> When I made this post about our Surface Pro 2's as desktop computers I had no real experience using it as a tablet/laptop in meetings. While I use it as a desktop with a 23" monitor, the fact that I can pack it up pretty much like any tablet but use it with the power keyboard and bluetooth mouse, or not, has sold me on the idea. If you are most comfortable in a full Windows environment being able to use all the software you're used to, 8.1 on a Surface Pro gets you there at your desk on a large monitor with normal keyboard and mouse while allowing you the freedom of a tablet for mobility. The only thing the tiny screen does is save you from having to cope with multiple computers - you won't need a desktop, a laptop and a tablet. I've looked at a Surface Pro 3 and can see why some would prefer it, but I'm happy with the Pro 2.


I do think that if I were to buy another tablet (very unlikely), it would be a Surface. I would think that sounds rather hypocritical at this point, but I can see the interface as almost perfect for a tablet. Let's face it, even most tablet makers have taken to advertising that focuses on the entertainment value rather than being able to use it as a computer. If I want to watch a TV show or a movie, it's gonna be on a large screen. I'll never forget my GD coming upstairs and telling me her father was watching a movie on his (well, the one I didn't see any use for) iPad (when he has a 58" TV in front of him). She thought it was "dumb" and I agreed with her.

Rich


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

I have an Asus T-100 that can be a tablet or 'laptop' and as a tablet it still comes up short. There are awkward times that your finger still isn't the thing you need to operate the interface. I never experience that with the iPad designed solely for the finger.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

OK, I've figured out how to use 8.1 as a computer instead of a tablet. I'm impressed by the boot speed. Takes just a couple seconds, fastest boot I've ever seen. I'd like to thank everyone that responded for the help. 

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Rich said:


> OK, I've figured out how to use 8.1 as a computer instead of a tablet. I'm impressed by the boot speed. Takes just a couple seconds, fastest boot I've ever seen. I'd like to thank everyone that responded for the help.
> 
> Rich


Timed the boot up this morning. 10 seconds! Never have I seen a computer boot up this quickly.

Rich


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

Rich said:


> Timed the boot up this morning. 10 seconds! Never have I seen a computer boot up this quickly.
> 
> Rich


Sounds like you are over the pain of change and having fun with it now.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Just in time for the public preview of Windows 9 in a few months


----------



## JcT21 (Nov 30, 2004)

Rich said:


> I got 8.1 right off the bat and I've figured out how to make it more like 7, but that's a crutch. I taught a lot of classes about using the various OSs over several years and never had the problems I've had with this...this...monstrosity. I even liked Vista. I'd rather have that than this, but I will persist. Not happily, but I will learn how to use this beast.
> 
> Rich


ive tried 8.1 also. i feel its a huge mess. even using programs like start8 still doesnt feel quite right to me. as for vista, i liked vista also. i never had the nightmare problems with it that some experienced. then again, i never tried to use it on a low end system. i still use vista on a test pc. been using 7 for years and have no plans to change to 8.1 ever. i am eager to see what microsoft has for us with "windows 9" ....hopefully they realize what a failure 8 is and will make 9 more like 7


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

The biggest issue I have with the UI is when I need to connect to a particular VM at work that I can't directly RDP into. RDP into one 2012 server then hyper-v manager to the other server. That makes aspects of the UI tricky, but that is nowhere near a common scenario.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

8.1 certainly isn't the 'failure' that Vista or Millenium was. I've pretty much got the desktop like it was in 7.

A couple of oddities, some links / urls flip to the Metro IE or PDF reader. . . some stay in the desktop IE. I very seldom go to the Metro UI unless forced.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

jimmie57 said:


> Sounds like you are over the pain of change and having fun with it now.


Still learning, Jim. Takes me a bit of time to get really comfy with a new OS.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> Just in time for the public preview of Windows 9 in a few months


It's gotta be better than 8.1, no?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

JcT21 said:


> ive tried 8.1 also. i feel its a huge mess. even using programs like start8 still doesnt feel quite right to me. as for vista, i liked vista also. i never had the nightmare problems with it that some experienced. then again, i never tried to use it on a low end system. i still use vista on a test pc. been using 7 for years and have no plans to change to 8.1 ever. i am eager to see what microsoft has for us with "windows 9" ...._*hopefully they realize what a failure 8 is and will make 9 more like 7 *_


This is the first time I've ever had a problem with a Windows OS. I've always thought that MS was striving to be more Mac-like, but this OS totally caught me by surprise. And I've got it on a new laptop and a rebuilt desktop. I've never considered MS to be a stubborn or stupidly run company, but I can't imagine what went thru their minds when they produced this...this...monstrosity. I get how useful it would be on a tablet, but on my computers? Nope. If 9 is better I'll buy it and switch both computers to it. All I really use a computer for is a portal to the Internet and that shouldn't be as difficult as 8.1 has been for me.

I had Vista on a relatively expensive HP desktop and never had any problems with it. I liked it. But I didn't get it right off the bat, from the complaints I've heard about it, it must have been terrible at first.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> The biggest issue I have with the UI is when I need to connect to a particular VM at work that I can't directly RDP into. RDP into one 2012 server then hyper-v manager to the other server. That makes aspects of the UI tricky, but that is nowhere near a common scenario.


That whooshing sound you hear is your post going completely over my head. I have no idea what those acronyms mean. Have mercy on me, please. I do know what a UI is. :nono2:

Rich


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

Rich said:


> That whooshing sound you hear is your post going completely over my head. I have no idea what those acronyms mean. Have mercy on me, please. I do know what a UI is. :nono2:
> 
> Rich


UI = User Interface ? Most people write is as GUI = Graphic User Interface

????????


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

Rich said:


> That whooshing sound you hear is your post going completely over my head. I have no idea what those acronyms mean. Have mercy on me, please. I do know what a UI is. :nono2:
> 
> Rich


"I can't directly RDP into. RDP " I have no idea what this is either, but he does say it's not a common scenario. :eek2:


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

jimmie57 said:


> UI = User Interface ? Most people write is as GUI = Graphic User Interface
> 
> ????????


Always used and understood UI and GUI. I know they mean the same thing. Hey, you only get so many keystrokes in life, one saved is one in the bank. :rolling:

Rich


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Sorry 

RDP is Remote Desktop Protocol. Normally when we do something on a server we remote into it, we don't go to the actual server room. I have a VM (Virtual Machine) that can't be accessed directly for security reasons, you have to connect to the host that the virtual machine runs on. So in essence you end up connected to one machine, with a second machine in a window.

On Windows 7 machines, this might mean you see two or three start buttons for each of the systems. It's tougher when you need to bring up the charms or the start screen.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

billsharpe said:


> "I can't directly RDP into. RDP " I have no idea what this is either, but he does say it's not a common scenario. :eek2:


I had to go to Google to find out what it meant.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> Sorry
> 
> RDP is Remote Desktop Protocol. Normally when we do something on a server we remote into it, we don't go to the actual server room. I have a VM (Virtual Machine) that can't be accessed directly for security reasons, you have to connect to the host that the virtual machine runs on. So in essence you end up connected to one machine, with a second machine in a window.
> 
> On Windows 7 machines, this might mean you see two or three start buttons for each of the systems. It's tougher when you need to bring up the charms or the start screen.


No need to apologize (not that it wasn't appreciated), my ignorance caused my post. I found it on Google. 7 years on this forum and I still constantly have to research words and acronyms.

Rich


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

Now that I know what RDP is I can forget about it...

Indeed it's not a common scenario.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Rich said:


> No need to apologize (not that it wasn't appreciated), my ignorance caused my post. I found it on Google. 7 years on this forum and I still constantly have to research words and acronyms.
> 
> Rich


The same thing happens to me when they go rocket scientist in the DirecTV satellite anticipation threads


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> The same thing happens to me when they go rocket scientist in the DirecTV satellite anticipation threads


I have a list in my mind of members that do that on techie subjects and I avoid their posts since I know I will not understand them. I just don't have the background to keep up with all this. Every time I go to AVS, I quickly back out. I'd rather post with people who understand that I don't understand.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

billsharpe said:


> "I can't directly RDP into. RDP " I have no idea what this is either, but he does say it's not a common scenario. :eek2:


I just can't let something like that go. I have to Google it and I usually don't understand what it means, but, at least, I get the acronym explained.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Well, after using this OS for a few weeks, I feel like giving the new laptop to my GD and taking the old one back. This OS is terrible even with the shell, which I think is jamming the works up. I need help, this is frustrating and it shouldn't be. I've really never had problems with a Windows OS before and I've used/taught most of them. 

Rich


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

I go back to MS DOS 1.0. I didn't switch to Windows until version 3.0. The only disaster for me was Windows ME. Win 8.1 is working fine here on my newer HP desktop; I boot directly into the desktop and seldom switch to the tile version. I do not use any shell to get a start menu. The main toolbar at the bottom of the screen holds many of my programs and I have created shortcuts on my desktop for other programs, Control Panel, and various file folders.


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

Walmart still carry a few Win7 PC's mainly Gateway computers.


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

My cousin have a Win8 laptop and whenever he has issues on a particular website, he will lend me his laptop to see what I can do to help him, I immediately use my Win7 laptop instead, as I was totally confused or not ready for a complete change in better words, It just felt weird on a computer as oppose to a tablet.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Got a strong feeling I'm going to hate my next computer as I'm quickly approaching that age where change confuses me.


----------



## satcrazy (Mar 16, 2011)

Two things:

RICH- maybe I missed it...... Why would you leave 7 for 8?

Ready for your head to explode, everyone?

and yes, I asked my computer buddy who built my computers how accurate is the source? [ he sent it to me] reply- pretty darn accurate.

bye, bye everything else, just when I was getting the hang of 7 [ 8? no thanks!] I'm amazed at the number of people who keep shelling out for new OS everytime MS hiccups. I went from 98se to XP to 7 and I'm good with 7, [ even though I've only had it for slightly more than a year and a half] but apparently MS needs more moola. I'm really disgusted with MS at this point.

http://semiaccurate.com/2014/07/14/microsoft-decided-blackmail-windows-7-users/


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

satcrazy said:


> Two things:
> 
> RICH- maybe I missed it...... Why would you leave 7 for 8?
> 
> ...


The name of the site is I guess a good one. The article is semiaccurate at best. There are some glaring errors or misconceptions.

Just read some more and I'm even more disgusted with this article. It gets very basic concepts extremely wrong. I'll stop reading before it gets my blood pressure up and I get the urge to send something to the author.

If you don't want to move to 8.1, 9 etc, you'll get security updates for Windows 7 through 2019. Now, you won't be able to call Microsoft for help on an issue, and they won't fix any new non security related bugs before that, but it's really the security fixes that are important at this point.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

billsharpe said:


> I go back to MS DOS 1.0. I didn't switch to Windows until version 3.0. The only disaster for me was Windows ME. Win 8.1 is working fine here on my newer HP desktop; I boot directly into the desktop and seldom switch to the tile version. I do not use any shell to get a start menu. The main toolbar at the bottom of the screen holds many of my programs and I have created shortcuts on my desktop for other programs, Control Panel, and various file folders.


I might have to go that route. I think I gave up too quickly. Should have learned instead of changing. My son has 8.1 on a Dell laptop and he does what you do. I think the shell is bogging the laptop down.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

acostapimps said:


> Walmart still carry a few Win7 PC's mainly Gateway computers.


Microsoft isn't gonna support 7 for anything but security issues and stuff like that after a certain date. Don't remember the date but it's not that far away. You'll have to pay for any other updates.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

acostapimps said:


> My cousin have a Win8 laptop and whenever he has issues on a particular website, he will lend me his laptop to see what I can do to help him, I immediately use my Win7 laptop instead, as I was totally confused or not ready for a complete change in better words, It just felt weird on a computer as oppose to a tablet.


It's a whole lot more than weird.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Drucifer said:


> Got a strong feeling I'm going to hate my next computer as I'm quickly approaching that age where change confuses me.


Get ready for a real shock, Drew. I understand 9 is gonna be released soon, perhaps that will not be as nasty as this is. One can only hope.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

satcrazy said:


> Two things:
> 
> RICH- maybe I missed it...... Why would you leave 7 for 8?
> 
> ...


My old laptop was acting strangely and I was having problems with the sound system, so one day, my wife suggested that we give the old laptop to my GD and I buy a new one. I ended up with 8.1.

I hadn't seen that article in the link, but I had read several similar articles that agreed with the one in your link. Extortion is a good word for what they're doing, but why are they doing it? That's what puzzles me. If I hadn't read all that stuff, I would have put 7 on this computer right after I got it. So, the only answer to your original question is, I did something stupid again. If it wasn't for the over the top price I'd have to pay for a 17" Mac, I'd buy one and...I don't know what I'd do with this thing.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> The name of the site is I guess a good one. The article is semiaccurate at best. There are some glaring errors or misconceptions.
> 
> Just read some more and I'm even more disgusted with this article. It gets very basic concepts extremely wrong. I'll stop reading before it gets my blood pressure up and I get the urge to send something to the author.
> 
> If you don't want to move to 8.1, 9 etc, you'll get security updates for Windows 7 through 2019. Now, you won't be able to call Microsoft for help on an issue, and they won't fix any new non security related bugs before that, but it's really the security fixes that are important at this point.


Well that just confuses me even more than I was confused before I read it. Not that I didn't understand what you wrote, I don't understand what they're thinking.

Rich


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Rich said:


> Well that just confuses me even more than I was confused before I read it. Not that I didn't understand what you wrote, I don't understand what they're thinking.
> 
> Rich


These are some of the areas I have issues with from the article:

"After Windows 8 shipped and died in the market, Microsoft decided to unilaterally deny security patches to most XP customers, note the word most."

This makes it sound like Microsoft made the decision to stop supporting XP after Windows 8. This isn't true. The final fate of XP was set in 2009. Microsoft's standard policy dates to 2004. Mainstream support for 5 years, or two years after the successor (Vista). Then extended support for 5 years or two years after the next release (Windows 7). And for both of those it's whichever is longer.

"With Windows 8.1 they did it again, if you didn't upgrade from 8 to 8.1, you were cut off from security patches almost immediately."

False. Windows 8 will get security updates until 2023. Now, if you have 8.1 and do not apply the 8.1 Update, then this is true. But the update to 8.1 isn't like moving to 8 or even 8.1. If the software is compatible with 8.1, there is no reason for it to not be compatible with 8.1 Update. And of course 8.1 is a free upgrade from 8, as is the update for 8.1.

"if you are on Windows 7 you have six months from yesterday before Microsoft unilaterally cuts off your access to security patches. You know, those holes that they are responsible for, the ones you pay them to not put in products in the first place, the ones they promised wouldn't happen in this version, or the last, or the one before that. On January 13, 2015 you can't get patches anymore unless you pay Microsoft a lot of money. Once again they will be making the patches until January 14, 2020 but they won't let you have access to these vital security patches."

This is blatantly false. Extended support applies to everyone. As long as the system has an Internet connection, everyone with Windows 7 will get security patches until 1/14/2020. XP was in extended support from 2009 to earlier this year. Vista is currently in extended and has been for two years. It still gets security updates until April 2017. No money has to be paid to Microsoft, just have the system set to automatically update, or run Windows/Microsoft Update manually. What will stop are non security updates. So if a bug in Windows 7 is found that is not a security vulnerability, it won't be fixed. But from that standpoint, 7 is currently as good as it's going to get.

The other thing is, it's not like this is limited to Microsoft. XP got security updates for about 12 years. Look at Apple. OS X 10.1 was released a month before XP. It's unsupported along with the next 5 versions. And this was before they made upgrades really cheap or free. Or try updating the OS for an iPad 1. This is a list of security fixes that were included in iOS 6 that the iPad 2 got but iPad 1 did not.  http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5503 
Android phones can be even worse, for official updates you have to rely on the carrier, which may or may not update, even if it's fixed in a point release.


----------



## TXD16 (Oct 30, 2008)

Rich said:


> I might have to go that route. I think I gave up too quickly. Should have learned instead of changing. My son has 8.1 on a Dell laptop and he does what you do. I think the shell is bogging the laptop down.
> 
> Rich


After loading at boot time, Classic Shell sits resident at about 1.1 MB (that's MB, not GB) of memory. It uses so little CPU processing, that it doesn't even register as using any after boot. If you're having issues with your laptop "bogging down," the fault lies elsewhere, not with Classic Shell.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

TXD16 said:


> After loading at boot time, Classic Shell sits resident at about 1.1 MB (that's MB, not GB) of memory. It uses so little CPU processing, that it doesn't even register as using any after boot. If you're having issues with your laptop "bogging down," the fault lies elsewhere, not with Classic Shell.


Have to agree, I got rid of the security program that comes with all the Lenovo products and the laptop is working well again.

Rich


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Unfortunately the big security suites really hog resources. I just use the builtin Windows 8 protection, or for those users that I don't necessarily trust to follow safe browsing habits, a third party AV only.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> Unfortunately the big security suites really hog resources. I just use the builtin Windows 8 protection, or for those users that I don't necessarily trust to follow safe browsing habits, a third party AV only.


I'm using Windows Defender and Malwarebytes. How's that sound?

Rich


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

Rich said:


> I'm using Windows Defender and Malwarebytes. How's that sound?
> 
> Rich


Sounds good to me. I am using Windows Defender with Win 8.1 and used the previous MS AV program on my now-retired XP.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Rich said:


> I'm using Windows Defender and Malwarebytes. How's that sound?
> 
> Rich


Would work for me, Malwarebytes free is a good on demand scanner. I threw on Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit on my system as well, only time I've had to disable it is when I clicked the update button in the Java control panel, it didn't like it.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> Would work for me, Malwarebytes free is a good on demand scanner. I threw on Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit on my system as well, only time I've had to disable it is when I clicked the update button in the Java control panel, it didn't like it.


If it's good enough for you and Bill, it's good enough for me! Thanx to the both of you.

Rich


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

I got a 3 pc LIFETIME license for Malwarebytes real-time for around $15 in a slickdeals.net posting. Best purchase ever. I also remove Norton or McAfee (or anybody else) and load Security Essentials or Defender (Win 8).

Rich, glad you found your problem. I couldn't understand why you disliked 8.1 so much. Other than it occasionally flipping to the tiles for a PDF or Explorer link, I have the desktop pretty much like 7. Faster and more memory available.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I'm also a fan of Kaspersky, but more familiar with their Enterprise versions.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dennisj00 said:


> I got a 3 pc LIFETIME license for Malwarebytes real-time for around $15 in a slickdeals.net posting. Best purchase ever. I also remove Norton or McAfee (or anybody else) and load Security Essentials or Defender (Win 8).
> 
> Rich, glad you found your problem. I couldn't understand why you disliked 8.1 so much. Other than it occasionally flipping to the tiles for a PDF or Explorer link, I have the desktop pretty much like 7. Faster and more memory available.


McAfee, that was what I got rid of. Man, did that speed things up! I kept meaning to do it, but being my usual nearly terminally lazy self, I kept putting it off and, believe me, I know better than to have those things on a computer. I've learned that the hard way. Slickdeals.net, huh? I gotta try that. I just bought Malwarebytes outright.

Thanx, Dennis,

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> I'm also a fan of Kaspersky, but more familiar with their Enterprise versions.


Whoosh.....! :rolling:

Rich


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Rich said:


> McAfee, that was what I got rid of. Man, did that speed things up! I kept meaning to do it, but being my usual nearly terminally lazy self, I kept putting it off and, believe me, I know better than to have those things on a computer. I've learned that the hard way. Slickdeals.net, huh? I gotta try that. I just bought Malwarebytes outright.
> 
> Thanx, Dennis,
> 
> Rich


McAfee is horrible. There are multiple reasons Intel is getting away from that name, but John McAfee is only one of them.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> McAfee is horrible. There are multiple reasons Intel is getting away from that name, but John McAfee is only one of them.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Should have been the first thing I did. Won't happen again. For all the comments I've heard about Norton, about it being a memory hog and things like that, I used it on an HP desktop running Vista for years and saw no difference when I finally got around to taking it off. My wife has it on her Lenovo laptop and she has no problems with her computer. But, I do listen and learn. I'll be more careful the next time. Sometimes, most of the time, I'm my own worst enemy. :nono2:

Rich


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

Rich said:


> Should have been the first thing I did. Won't happen again. For all the comments I've heard about Norton, about it being a memory hog and things like that, I used it on an HP desktop running Vista for years and saw no difference when I finally got around to taking it off. My wife has it on her Lenovo laptop and she has no problems with her computer. But, I do listen and learn. I'll be more careful the next time. Sometimes, most of the time, I'm my own worst enemy. :nono2:
> 
> Rich


I hear all the complaints about Norton also, but, I have it on my Lenovo laptop that is a pretty cheap machine, 2 ghz, 2 gig of ram, 320 HD and do not have any problems with it at all.
I also run it on my HP desktop that is a bad motor scooter and it has no problems with it either.
I run it because it came on the HP originally but then when it was time to renew I found out that it was FREE from Comcast ( our internet service ).

In Services in the Task Manager it shows n360.exe it is using 5,848k of memory.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Norton has improved over the years I think, though Peter Norton hasn't been involved in the company in a long time. He's certainly done better than John McAfee. That's one thing I like about Kaspersky, it's still privately owned and Eugene is very involved.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

jimmie57 said:


> I hear all the complaints about Norton also, but, I have it on my Lenovo laptop that is a pretty cheap machine, 2 ghz, 2 gig of ram, 320 HD and do not have any problems with it at all.
> I also run it on my HP desktop that is a bad motor scooter and it has no problems with it either.
> I run it because it came on the HP originally but then when it was time to renew I found out that it was FREE from Comcast ( our internet service ).
> 
> In Services in the Task Manager it shows n360.exe it is using 5,848k of memory.


Glad I'm not alone.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> Norton has improved over the years I think, though Peter Norton hasn't been involved in the company in a long time. He's certainly done better than John McAfee. That's one thing I like about Kaspersky, it's still privately owned and Eugene is very involved.


I've been using Norton since it was the Norton Navigator of the Norton Desktop, don't remember which came first. Back in the day, it was necessary, I thought. That was quite a while ago, now that I think of it.

Now, as usual, you've made me curious and I've gotta Google Kaspersky. Yup, just what I thought. More than my addled mind can cope with. :nono2:

Rich


----------

