I wouldn't call improvement brought by wddm 1.2 "very minimal".
Printable View
Which comes back to "minimal", these numbers are only by a few seconds. I won't spend 200+ dollars on an OS that is only a few seconds faster. It also hasn't shown gaming improvements either, unless I missed it.
Of course there will be improvements over Windows 7, that is a no brainer, but is the upgrade significant enough to make me want to upgrade? In my opinion, no. Vista > Windows 7 was a dramatic OS upgrade. When Windows does something like that again, I will upgrade.
Yeah, 30 seconds shaved off of 10 min worth of tasks. Most of that was during boot. Not exactly compelling for the price they will be asking for the OS.
I'll be skipping Windows 8 unless the OS looks more like a desktop computer and less like a tablet.
I think window 8 should have been a Window 7 SP2 but you know that just me lol
I don't know, that's why I made the comment. I've been told there are a lot of back-end (performance, resource management) improvements. Beyond that, I hadn't really heard much about win8 at all.
the original design of Windows (1) worked for the time. windows 95 was a stripped down badly butchered NT (2), 98 was much better (3), ME was LOL (4), XP was the biggest improvement to windows in a long time (5), Vista was terrible (6) Windows 7 made it a lot better (7) and now Windows 8.... well, we'll see if it breaks the pattern.
I wouldn't call a game that crashes every time UAC wants something from you compatible. Lucky 2.0 should fix that.