• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Opinions wanted: is there any point to Windows 8?

H

hunterjwizzard

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2020
Messages
1,400
It doesn't post yet, but I just got probably the newest free motherboard. a socket FM2+ from circa 2012. Coincidentally the same year Windows 8 came out.

Now I know 8 is an absolute trash operating system, but does it have any redeeming qualities? Is there any point to windows 8, or is it best confined to the dustbin of history?
 
I would have liked to help you, since I once received a used Windows 8 machine. It had problems but was able to fix itself.

After a month or so, I decided to upgrade to 8.1, but the process had barely got started before the hard drive crashed.

And so ended my short ownership of Windows 8.

The major sticking point was the lack of a start button. I have no idea why Microsoft thought that idea would attract the masses.
 
hunterjwizzard said:
It doesn't post yet, but I just got probably the newest free motherboard. a socket FM2+
Click to expand...

FM2+ systems are "meh". They're fine for budget machines, but the faildozer architecture causes problems. You'll need an OS with a smart thread dispatcher to deal with the crappy core layout. Treat the APUs as having half the number of cores specified because of the CMT. Each faildozer "module" has two integer units and one FPU shared between them. If you have two demanding threads within the same module, it falls flat on its face. This is why a smart thread dispatcher is required, it does its best to keep resource intensive threads on different modules and backfills with lower demand threads and background tasks to maintain adequate performance.

Even the fastest FM2+ parts like the A10-5800K have trouble keeping up with Core i3 parts.

You'll also want to make sure you have a heatpipe cooler at minimum. AMD included horrifically inadequate aluminum heatsinks with all FM2+ CPUs that will cause the CPU to severely overheat in normal workloads. You can use older 939 or AM2/3 heatsinks and they'll work great.

About the only redeeming factor FM2+ had was that they had way better IGPs than intel parts.

Robbbert said:
The major sticking point was the lack of a start button. I have no idea why Microsoft thought that idea would attract the masses.
Click to expand...

This was during the short period where Microsoft was trying to reimagine Windows as a Tablet PC, and was pushing the "Metro" interface hard. They removed the start button in an attempt to force people to use the terrible Metro UI. It backfired in spectacular fashion, so much so that OEMs started to sell Windows 7 PCs again because Windows 8 and 8.1 devices were selling so poorly. Microsoft at one point was heavily discounting Windows 8 licenses to OEMs, and even offering special free editions to tablet PCs under a certain size.

There are no redeeming qualities to Windows 8. It was so bad that Microsoft stopped supporting it after just five years. Windows 7 was supported for another four years AFTER Windows 8/8.1 was EOL'd.
 
hunterjwizzard said:
It doesn't post yet, but I just got probably the newest free motherboard. a socket FM2+ from circa 2012. Coincidentally the same year Windows 8 came out.

Now I know 8 is an absolute trash operating system, but does it have any redeeming qualities? Is there any point to windows 8, or is it best confined to the dustbin of history?
Click to expand...
It is what it is! I am not sure its as bad as folks made out, just different and fiddly. If anything it will be a talking point....
 
I have only one FM2+ motherboard in my collection just to have one (but I have a ton of other vintage AMD boards). It was a curiosity that might have made a good home theater box back when it was new because of the built in video (but not all FM2+ CPU's even have video built in). Speed wise, the IPC of those chips sucks vs anything intel. At least it gave me a machine to stuff AMD branded RAM into (there was a AMD version of XMP profiles for DDR3 RAM out for a while called AMP).

Anyway, I never seen a reason to run Windows 8.x, and I have only one machine running Windows Vista. Windows 7 is what I would try.
 
The betas of Windows 8 are moderately interesting since it was Windows 7 with a few modest improvements and the addition of the Store. Windows 8 release was amazing in terms of how badly designed the tablet interface was for mouse usage. Hitting a single pixel near a corner was a challenge. Every UI designer needs to run Windows 8 for a few hours just to understand what should never be tried.
 
8 was basically 7 with a different interface that flopped. Much like Vista was XP with a different interface that flopped. Much like 2000 was NT with a different interface that flopped. Much like 95 was Windows 3.1 with a different interface that flopped.

I see a pattern here.......
 
I remember watching a youtube video where some gamer (maybe it was on LTT?) was mentioning that he used windows 8.1 because windows 7 was out of support at the time and he didn't want to run windows 10 because of all of the built-in ads, etc. But now windows 8.1 is out of support too, so that would no longer justify using an OS with such an AWFUL user interface.

The only thing I can think of to might justify running windows 8 these days would be that you just want to have a system running each major revision, or you have something odd that really does need windows 8, like that original Surface RT arm based tablet. I think windows 8.1 was your only option on that. I think they did provide some updates though.
 
czunit said:
8 was basically 7 with a different interface that flopped. Much like Vista was XP with a different interface that flopped. Much like 2000 was NT with a different interface that flopped. Much like 95 was Windows 3.1 with a different interface that flopped.

I see a pattern here.......
Click to expand...

Hm. I might fail to detect hidden meaning in your post, but UI dogma wise 95, NT4, 98, Me, 2000, XP, Vista and 7 are all the same. Vista may look radically different to 95 but that's just new WM with compositor - something available to Linux desktops a year or more before Vista. Whatever difference is between them is technology advancing and concept of OS doing more and more as far as user devices are concerned.

8 not only breaks the UI dogma by removing Start it also introduces an Orwellian version of mid-90s failed Active Desktop experiment spilled over entire OS. 10 got the Start back, but UI dogma wasn't reverted.
 
The hate for win8 is delicious here. I knew it was trash but I love hearing what everyone thinks.

My only experience with 8 was spending an entire afternoon loading third party ad ons to make it behave like a normal desktop.

I probably won't use it. It definitely sits in the user space of 'old enough to be obsolete, not old enough to be retro'.
 
I could never get used to the interface of 8.0 ... what was constantly going though my mind was "you guys are invented windows, don't mess it up by trying to barge into the tablet space". Somehow the interface just sucked at both. Having said that, Win 8.1 was a big improvement but .... I reverted to Win 7 as that was much better in my opinion at least.
 
Brian Todd said:
what was constantly going though my mind was "you guys are invented windows, don't mess it up by trying to barge into the tablet space". Somehow the interface just sucked at both.
Click to expand...
The supreme irony is that previous windows versions actually worked great as tablet OSs with zero modification, provided the tablet offered a few external buttons to assist with basic tasks. I have a Windows 2000 tablet around here somewhere that is an absolute treat to use. I've also done XP and 7 on tablets and liked it quite a lot more than any android OS.

The failing point comes when you build a tablet that is a cheese ipad clone, with zero ports or buttons. So really, its Apple's fault that Windows 8 was so bad.
 
czunit said:
8 was basically 7 with a different interface that flopped. Much like Vista was XP with a different interface that flopped. Much like 2000 was NT with a different interface that flopped. Much like 95 was Windows 3.1 with a different interface that flopped.

I see a pattern here.......
Click to expand...
Wouldn't call 95 a flop but a step forward. Just my opinion.
 
eswan said:
If you think Windows 8 was bad, try using Windows Server 2012. Using a windowed RDP client.
Click to expand...
I can never remember which version it is so I just call it windows 8 sever. lol. I have some customers that still use it and every time I have to do a screen share I get angry at the interface.

(un)Fortunately Microsoft has been hiding things for a long time, so over the years I've just resorted to learning the commands that take me to where I want to be in the GUI. Want to see network interfaces? ncpa.cpl Sytem properties? sysdm.cpl Old Control panel? control Device Manager? devmgmt.msc, etc, etc.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top