# Ready for Windows 8 ?



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> Windows Phone 7 is not doing well and Microsoft will be woefully late to the tablet market when Windows 8 hits shelves in mid 2012. Microsoft seems to acknowledge this reality. Windows 8 is a huge gamble by Microsoft, and represents the struggling tech giants best weapon against the onslaught of hungry operating systems that hope to dethrone it. The new Windows will have a simpler touch interface and has been designed to work on tablets (even those using ARM processors) and PCs with or without a mouse and keyboard. Oh, and did we mention that it manages to do this while maintaining all compatibility with Windows 7 applications? Microsoft is hoping customers see this as a win-win.


http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/windows-8-features-explained-whats-new-and-how-it-works/


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

SayWhat? said:


> http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/windows-8-features-explained-whats-new-and-how-it-works/


Saw a taste of it at CES this year...

The only question I keep reading about is whether its too little to late. Microsoft indicates that it will not surface on new devices until 2012 some time.

I'm sure it will be interesting...having also seen what they did with Microsoft Surface.


----------



## pfp (Apr 28, 2009)

I have no interest in the new UI


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Too little too late IMO. Microsoft should be trying to come up with the next 'Big Thing' before Apple does.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

klang said:


> Too little too late IMO. Microsoft should be trying to come up with the next 'Big Thing' before Apple does.


Actually after *Rasputin *pointed it out in the Tablets thread, it occurred to me that WP7 tiled UI could be kind of cool in conjunction with Kinect. Imagine sitting in front of a screen with no mouse, but a physical keyboard. All "mouse" gestures would be hands in the air.

While I'm not crazy about them, I think seeing the tiles they showed last week are a relief to some. As recently as April, the thought was that Win 8 might have a "ribbon" interface, similar to Office 2007.

The first look video is here, and a slide-show here.


----------



## Phil T (Mar 25, 2002)

100% Apple here. Vista and my 4 year old door stop HP was the last time I waste money on Microsoft anything.


----------



## B Newt (Aug 12, 2007)

Win7 is working fine for me. I will stick with it for now.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Phil T said:


> 100% Apple here. Vista and my 4 year old door stop HP was the last time I waste money on Microsoft anything.


Vista was the 2007 version of Windows ME. It was junk. They should have just waited for Win7.


----------



## Joe Bernardi (May 27, 2003)

If Windows 8, shown on tablets, is the same interface for Win 8 on PCs, I'm sticking with Windows 7.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Joe Bernardi said:


> If Windows 8, shown on tablets, is the same interface for Win 8 on PCs, I'm sticking with Windows 7.


FWIW, this slide shows how you can drop back into a "conventional" UI (presumably Win 7's), if that's what you prefer.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

I should add my 'too little too late' comment was about tablets and to a lesser extent phones. 

Win7 is a fine OS, I'm running it on a couple machines and as a virtual machine on iMac. If Win8 extends the goodness of Win7 they should do fine with it.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> If Win8 extends the goodness of Win7 they should do fine with it.


Seems I have to skip every other version.

98SE, Good
ME, Bad
XP, Good
Vista, Bad
7, Good
8, ?


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Yes, it will be interesting to see if the trend continues.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> Seems I have to skip every other version.
> 
> 98SE, Good
> ME, Bad
> ...





klang said:


> Yes, it will be interesting to see if the trend continues.


Especially since I get the feeling they may be rushing this one out the door, in response to iOS and Android pressure.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

:rant:
I'm comfortable with Windows 7 which is more than I could say with Vista.

Why would I want a different user interface. I've been irked at Microsoft since they came up with that stupid "ribbon" for Office applications.

For 3rd party software reasons (used by clients and/or employers), I've had to use an MS operation system since MS-DOS. I've used every trick to keep the interfaces a little consistent with prior versions since Windows 3.1. Now I am using a piece of software called _Classic Start Menu_ because I'm a creature of habit.

I have trouble enough keeping my monitor clean. Now I'm supposed to want to leave greasy fingerprints all over it? Or some cheese from a grilled cheese sandwich I'm eating at my desk?

I like my iPad, but it's an iPad not a powerhouse computer on which I'm doing complex spreadsheets, databases, photo and video processing, etc. I don't need it to be able to do everything my desktop does. I don't even use a laptop that way.

And I certainly don't need a phone on which to create complex Power Point presentations.

Are people nuts?
:rant:

Did I mention I'm old?


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

phrelin said:


> I have trouble enough keeping my monitor clean. Now I'm supposed to want to leave greasy fingerprints all over it? Or some cheese from a grilled cheese sandwich I'm eating at my desk?


Another good argument for a Kinect controller!


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

Hey old man Win7's start menu is a thing of beauty. hit start, start typing what you're looking for and hit enter. It's awesome.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

RasputinAXP said:


> Hey old man Win7's start menu is a thing of beauty. hit start, start typing what you're looking for and hit enter. It's awesome.


 who types? :lol:


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

The major problem with Windows is that there is typically no less than two ways to do everything and at least one of those changes with each release/distribution.

The control panel is a classic example of change for the sake of change over the years. As time goes on, it gets harder and harder to find where to change the default settings for your printer. Sometimes (and with some releases) it is in the start menu while in others it is buried somewhere in the control panel.

You used to be able to change things like screen savers and printers with a couple of clicks but now you seem to have to navigate a series of menus to accomplish the same task. Or maybe there's a shortcut somewhere that they added to address complaints from users?

Of course if Microsoft didn't change this stuff all the time, we wouldn't know the difference between releases.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> Or maybe there's a shortcut somewhere that they added to address complaints from users?


GodMode.

Sort of.

But I can still get to Printers and Screensavers in 2 clicks from the desktop.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

I can use the Windows 7 Start Menu, but IMHO there's nothing intuitive or quick about it.

I don't like to cutter up my desktop or taskbar.

So I use a software-based start menu that puts within two clicks of everything I need *using a mouse* - click the "Classic Start Menu" button on my taskbar, move the cursor up and down and sideways, click on the software or function I need to access. I can custom organize it using icons I recognize, all for my aging brain.

So for instance, if I want to deal with printers I click on "Classic Start Menu", move the cursor to "Computer Utilities" then to "Printer Management" then to whatever function I need to use. It's all right there including a renamed version of that oddly named Windows 7 Start Menu item "Devices and Printers":










This isn't a necessity for anyone. I just find it convenient. But as I said, I'm old. (And yes, I just noticed I need to put the Dell Printer stuff together into a single folder.

I'm never going to want to put my fingers on my monitor's screen.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

harsh said:


> The control panel is a classic example of change for the sake of change over the years. As time goes on, it gets harder and harder to find where to change the default settings for your printer.


Ain't that the truth. I guess they were trying to make it easier for non-technical people to find things, but for those of use who knew what we were looking for it became a PITA.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

bouncing between mouse and keyboard sucks.. I hate constintly switching between them..
I have a mouse with a couple extra buttons so I can reduce the switching..

My dad stuck with wordperfect for years just because he knew every keyboard shortcut so he didn't need to grab the mouse..


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

harsh said:


> The major problem with Windows is that there is typically no less than two ways to do everything and at least one of those changes with each release/distribution.
> 
> The control panel is a classic example of change for the sake of change over the years. As time goes on, it gets harder and harder to find where to change the default settings for your printer. Sometimes (and with some releases) it is in the start menu while in others it is buried somewhere in the control panel.
> 
> ...


Thats just nonsense. On my laptop with Windows 7, it takes 2 clicks to get to devices and printers. One on the start button, the second on "devices and printers".

Also 2 clicks to get to the display personalization. Right click on screen, then click on personalize.

Really don't see how that can get much simpler? Then again you do have a tendency to blow things way out of proportion and to pull things out of your balloon knot.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

houskamp said:


> My dad stuck with wordperfect for years just because he knew every keyboard shortcut so he didn't need to grab the mouse..


I still use WordPerfect over Word, though I have both. Controlling the appearance of a document is so much easier because Alt-F4 (using the old WP Windows interface setting) gives complete access to all format codes in the document through a subscreen.


RobertE said:


> Thats just nonsense. On my laptop with Windows 7, it takes 2 clicks to get to devices and printers. One on the start button, the second on "devices and printers".


Yes, and that gets me to a screen where I can double-click on a specific printer (or right click and go through a series of menus) in order to get to a Windows standardized screen for the printer that looks like this:








In the good old days ... yeah, I used to walk to school barefoot in 4 foot snow drifts uphill in both directions carrying my Windows 95 notebook.... 

By the way, I do like Windows 7.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> I still use WordPerfect over Word, though I have both.


I've defaulted to Open Office in part because you can edit .pdf files. That and it's FREE. I guess I need to check out the Libre Office splinter project too.



> carrying my Windows 95 notebook....


I carried a tablet, but it wasn't electrificated. And I needed a stylus, er, chisel.

But back to Win8.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Now that Oracle has ceded control of OpenOffice to Apache, it will be interesting to see what happens with it.


----------



## B Newt (Aug 12, 2007)

I miss OS/2....


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Given what that picture of Win8 looks like and the impending release of iOS like OSX Lion, I am afraid we are entering the world of "touch" computing. Not a big fan.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Herdfan said:


> Given what that picture of Win8 looks like and the impending release of iOS like OSX Lion, I am afraid we are entering the world of "touch" computing. Not a big fan.


Just curious. Is it the GUI design that bothers you? Otherwise, no reason you couldn't click on those Win 8 tiles with a mouse or keypad, is there?

I think the problem with Windows in the past was they designed it for mouse and keyboard and tried to adapt _that _to pen. I think the reverse is easier. Design for touch, and mouse works too. Just my .02.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

RobertE said:


> Thats just nonsense. On my laptop with Windows 7, it takes 2 clicks to get to devices and printers.


Is that for all distributions (Home .vs. Pro)?

Vista didn't have that "shortcut".

I have to support at least three versions of Windows and there doesn't seem to be any single way that works on all three versions.

Then there is the question of whether it is under "preferences" or "properties".


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

harsh said:


> Is that for all distributions (Home .vs. Pro)?
> 
> Vista didn't have that "shortcut".
> 
> ...


You'd be surprised at how many shortcuts are availble regardless of which version of Windows one uses. The problem is most people lack computer skills and have little to no knowledge of what their PCs are capable of.


----------



## Lucavex (Apr 26, 2011)

From what I've seen of the GUI, I sincerely hope you can switch between "touch" and "desktop/latop" interfaces. That touch interface is blocky and ugly, and if I using my PC I like a little more screen real-estate to be used for things other than launching applications.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Lucavex said:


> From what I've seen of the GUI, I sincerely hope you can switch between "touch" and "desktop/latop" interfaces [...]


That's in there, at least for now. They show it in slide #5, here.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Steve said:


> That's in there, at least for now. They show it in slide #5, here.


What I'm looking for is anything that looks like this:








Slide #5 appears to look like it except it looks an awfully lot like the dreaded greasy finger, not a mouse, in the lower left:








But I suppose there will be six apps at $39.95 each that I will be able to use together to get back to my comfort zone.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

phrelin said:


> Slide #5 appears to look like it except it looks an awfully lot like the dreaded greasy finger, not a mouse, in the lower left:


Ya. I'm pretty sure those particular slides were of Win 8 running on a tablet.

Microsoft spokespeople made it very clear, tho, that unlike other tablet OS's, you _will_ be able to use 8 with a mouse and keyboard, as well as access the underlying file system.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

I'm thinking that I hope 7's EOL is a long ways off.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> I'm thinking that I hope 7's EOL is a long ways off.


I'm sure it will be. XP's extended support continues through April 8, 2014, and Vista's through 2017.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Steve said:


> Just curious. Is it the GUI design that bothers you? Otherwise, no reason you couldn't click on those Win 8 tiles with a mouse or keypad, is there?


Just afraid that at some point the mouse will go away.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Herdfan said:


> Just afraid that at some point the mouse will go away.


I don't see that happening. Not even for a trackpad. Just my .02.


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

Herdfan said:


> Just afraid that at some point the mouse will go away.


Touch computing is the future. If you don't believe me, just watch the movie "Minority Report". 

I LOVE Windows 7... but I'm not impressed with what I see of Windows 8. Since my Windows 7 computer went kaput early this year, I've been using either my iPad or my Windows XP laptop, and intend on upgrading to a new desktop this Christmas. What I've seen of Windows 8 does not make me want to put off that purchase...

~Alan


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Steve said:


> Not even for a trackpad. Just my .02.


Oh, I love my trackpad. So I guess technically I don't use a mouse.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Kinda figured we'd have a Flower post by now.


----------



## facerw (Feb 1, 2005)

I don't know. I'm not that impressed lately with Windows. I took a big gamble with Windows 7 and fortunately it paid off. Skipped Vista for sure. But I'm looking for new things. Don't get me wrong I like how W7 improved on many little annoyances in XP but I don't know. I've been using Windows since Windows 2.0 and I think for this to work or be more exciting is to lose the legacy stuff found in XP and lower and to make better advantages of newer hardware.

With that end if view I'm getting a new PC with an I7 processor and lots of memory for one innovation which I've been waiting over 14 years.....Duke Nukem Forever


----------



## pfp (Apr 28, 2009)

facerw said:


> With that end if view I'm getting a new PC with an I7 processor and lots of memory for one innovation which I've been waiting over 14 years.....Duke Nukem Forever


That's one really expensive game


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

facerw said:


> With that end if view I'm getting a new PC with an I7 processor and lots of memory for one innovation which I've been waiting over 14 years.....Duke Nukem Forever


I have an I7 PC, but haven't yet pre-ordered _Duke Nukem Forever: Balls of Steel Edition_ PC version for $89.99 at Amazon. I'm not sure I really want all this:


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Personally, I decided not to preorder. One, I'm not sure it can live up to the wait and hype and actually be a great game. Also, I'm confident the price will drop at some point. I've waited for 15 years, I can wait some more.


----------



## A_Bear (Jun 16, 2011)

i think windows 8 will be good once they are finifhed with it


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

The problem with that is that Microsoft is due for a bad version of Windows.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

dpeters11 said:


> The problem with that is that Microsoft is due for a bad version of Windows.


Others would say that they are long overdue for a really good version as opposed to one that doesn't stink on ice.


----------



## Lucavex (Apr 26, 2011)

harsh said:


> Others would say that they are long overdue for a really good version as opposed to one that doesn't stink on ice.


98 was good, XP was good, And 7 is good. All the other versions are terrible.

God, don't remind me of the debaucle that was ME. I owned a Compaq that ran ME for a number of years. I have never more frequently been tempted to introduce my computer to the window of my 2nd story office.

EDIT: Oh and 3.1 was good.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Overall, I liked 2000, but there were some bad service packs. 98 SE was better than 98.

I really like Windows 7, probably my overall favorite.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

From what I've seen of 7, they're going to have to go a very long ways to beat it.


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

I've got three computers running XP, Vista, and Win 7 respectively. No real problems with any of them, although Win 7 is definitely an improvement.

Windows ME was a disaster.

Bill


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

If Windows 7 was half what they hinted it would be at their technology expos, it may have been great. As it is, it is mostly a pretty face on Server 2008 which is a bearcat to work with with all of the overlapping wizards and roles.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

I won't argue that there were some things I liked better in XP. The "Repair" button for network connections for one. Also it was easier to disable/enable a connection in XP, or so it seems.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

harsh said:


> If Windows 7 was half what they hinted it would be at their technology expos, it may have been great. As it is, it is mostly a pretty face on Server 2008 which is a bearcat to work with with all of the overlapping wizards and roles.


Windows 7 is considered very solid, fast, nimble, and more reliable than any MS OS to date by virtually all the IT folks I've ever spoken to....and that would be thousands of people.

It took the Vista kernel....skinnied down the OS, and redid the UI and other key programs around that. The overall OS is 40% "thinner" than Vista and 5% thinner than XP SP2, according to the Microsoft engineers I spoke with at 2 CES's. But it never was designed to operate on a tablet.

Windows 8 is a re-write...thinner yet, and specifically designed for tablet operation. It will have a "switch" to install / use it on the desktop as well.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> I won't argue that there were some things I liked better in XP. The "Repair" button for network connections for one. Also it was easier to disable/enable a connection in XP, or so it seems.


Ya. I still use XP on my laptops and love it, especially the network connection "repair' option you mentioned. Why they removed that feature is a mystery to me. :scratchin I'm very happy circa 2001 XP's official "end of life" isn't until 2014. Pretty remarkable run, IMHO!

I use Win 7 SP1 on my desktop PC and like it as well, though it's a bit more of a resource hog than the leaner XP, which is why I took it off my laptops. 7's arguably superior UI means very little to me as a home user, because 99.9% of the time I'm either running Chrome or an app, so it's usually transparent to me which OS is underneath. Both OS's provide stable and snappy app support, which is all I need.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Is there such a thing as a third party utility to do the "Repair"?

If not, could there be? [hint, hint]


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> Is there such a thing as a third party utility to do the "Repair"?
> 
> If not, could there be? [hint, hint]


If it's a laptop wi-fi connection you want to "repair", toggling wi-fi off and on should be a good work-around. I know one of my laptops has a physical wi-fi "power switch". I think the other has a Fn-key combination that toggles it off and on.

On my Win 7 desktop, I usually go to the adapter settings screen (below), and disable and re-enable the device.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> On my Win 7 desktop, I usually go to the adapter settings screen (below), and disable and re-enable the device.


That's what I've been doing so far. I had to do it to release and reacquire a new DHCP IP address for the new DSL modem.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> That's what I've been doing so far. I had to do it to release and reacquire a new DHCP IP address for the new DSL modem.


XP "repair" may actually be doing more things than this, but you just made me realize how simple it is to _effectively _replicate "repair"! Create a text file that only has the following 2 lines in it:

_ipconfig /release
ipconfig /renew_

Don't save it as a ".txt", tho. Save it on your desktop as "repair.bat". Now whenever you double-click it, it should automatically work as expected.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

SayWhat? said:


> That's what I've been doing so far. I had to do it to release and reacquire a new DHCP IP address for the new DSL modem.


The command 'ipconfig /renew' would have worked.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

klang said:


> The command 'ipconfig /renew' would have worked.


Actually, on my desktop, doing "renew" alone does not show my network connection being disabled and re-enabled, down by the clock. It may be happening so quickly I don't see it, but my little batch file above gives me more peace of mine that I actually killed the connection.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Steve said:


> Actually, on my desktop, doing "renew" alone does not show my network connection being disabled and re-enabled, down by the clock. It may be happening so quickly I don't see it, but my little batch file above gives me more peace of mine that I actually killed the connection.


I thought he just wanted to get a new IP address from the new modem. I think that just renew will do that.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

klang said:


> I thought he just wanted to get a new IP address from the new modem. I think that just renew will do that.


Gotcha! :up:


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Got'em saved.

Will try them alter when the need arises. I just never learnt Didd'ly 'bout batch files.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

repair is still in win7.. it's just under troubleshoot (right click network icon by clock)


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

houskamp said:


> repair is still in win7.. it's just under troubleshoot (right click network icon by clock)


That's a *Win 7 *wizard that takes you throught a bunch of useless steps and never solves the problem, though, at least in my limited experience with it.

We were talking about the *XP* "repair" function, also found by right-clicking the network icon by the clock. It's a simple *single-click* utility that actually did a lot besides making a new DHCP request, now that I've researched it a bit. According to a Microsoft tech note, it actually does all the following:

Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) lease is renewed
Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) cache is flushed
Reload of the NetBIOS name cache
NetBIOS name update is sent
Domain Name System (DNS) cache is flushed
DNS name registration
As a result, my little simulation batch file above should be edited to read accordingly:


```
ipconfig /release
ipconfig /renew
arp -d *
nbtstat -R
nbtstat -RR
ipconfig /flushdns
ipconfig /registerdns
```
Windows XP SP1 also added an "IEEE 802.1X Authentication Restart" to "repair", but I was unable to find out how to do that from inside a batch file.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

I just ran that one. It looked like it threw some kind of error in the command window, but then proceeded and closed the window before I could read it. It probably worked from what I can see, but is there a way to hold that window open after it finishes?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Steve said:


> Windows XP SP1 also added an "IEEE 802.1X Authentication Restart" to "repair", but I was unable to find out how to do that from inside a batch file.


At least from a home user standpoint, hardly anyone would need that function.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> I just ran that one. It looked like it threw some kind of error in the command window, but then proceeded and closed the window before I could read it. It probably worked from what I can see, but is there a way to hold that window open after it finishes?


You can insert the command "pause" as the last line of the batch file. When it executes, the Window will sit there with a message to _"hit any key to continue"_, or something like that.

BTW, you may have already figured this out, but once you save the text file with the _.bat_ extension, you can edit it by right-clicking and choosing "edit".


----------



## HDJulie (Aug 10, 2008)

If you open a command window from run & then run the batch file in that window, won't the window stay open?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

"HDJulie" said:


> If you open a command window from run & then run the batch file in that window, won't the window stay open?


Yes it will, but it's easier to just double click it from your desktop and use pause. Otherwise, you have to save the batch file in the root of your profile, open the command window and run it, or out it in a folder that's in your path environment variable. Like most things Microsoft, thee are about 10 ways to do it. As a coworker told me when I was going to do something in a batch file, "why don't you just write a vb script or use PowerShell?" because a three line batch file is just easier


----------



## kevinwmsn (Aug 19, 2006)

They need to simply the product line. How about making it 64 bit only? You want 4 gig of RAM for Windows 7 anyway. Just offer Home and business edition too or better yet just offer the pro versions like windows 2000. It would help having to pull out the feature matrix and the decoder ring to see what version is needed.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Eventually it will be 64 only, it could be Windows 8. I've completely switched over myself.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

kevinwmsn said:


> They need to simply the product line. How about making it 64 bit only? You want 4 gig of RAM for Windows 7 anyway. Just offer Home and business edition too or better yet just offer the pro versions like windows 2000. It would help having to pull out the feature matrix and the decoder ring to see what version is needed.


1. Windows 2000 was never offered for home use. That was the point.

2. You don't need 4GB of RAM for 7. My kid's machine works perfectly fine playing Flash games and surfing the web with 1GB.

3. 64 bit only is coming, but not yet.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

I've got 8Gb in this one, 4 in the laptop.

I'm trying IE9 in some cases, but I've found a couple of sites that rejected IE9-64bit so I had to have the 32bit version also.

I agree that they could drop the limited function starter version though.


----------

