2.0 in Windows 8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alhanelem

Technically it's Games for Windows live, which has been around for a long time. You can use the same Gamertag, but there is no cross platform because the xbox is a closed system.

---

Alright, thank you for the info. ^^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VoltaAsura

Windows 8 is an amazing OS. As stated above, it does a tad better in gaming for certain games and is better than 7 imo. I do not have a touch monitor, or a multitouch mouse, I have a full regular desktop PC and I Windows 8. It also runs much faster and is more compatible with my SSD than 7 was. Did I mention that I got it for 29.99 for the basic version AND microsoft is giving away free keys for Media Center (effectively giving you Windows 8 Professional for 29.99!).

FFXIV 1.0 on Windows 8 ran fine, no issues whatsoever.

---

Voltavoltavoltavoltavoltavolta

Anyways yeah, Win8 is alright. Has some good and bad things going for it, but if you're on Win7 x64, I'd just stay put for now (like you should do with every OS).

Historifcally every other home version of Windows has been bad 3.11 god, 95 bad , 98 good, Me bad, XP good, vista bad, 7 good, 8 bad."

They go through this development cycle where they get people to buy in to a piece of crap where they tried something new, then the next version they fix all the crap they broke the first time around.

Wait for Windows 9, folks. Or switch to linux...

Windows 8 is awesome. Been running it since they released it and I can honestly not go back to 7 now. Really don't understand where this Win 8 hate comes from.

i just got one of the new win 8 tablets that runs full windows 8 not that crappy windows rt. now for a desktop i really don't know how well it would actually be.... but on the tablet its not as bad as i thought it would be really.... probably took me 30mins-1hr to get use to it and set it up my way. i put the start button on there just cause i like having it... do you really need it though? no, its just a convinence to us cause we are so use to it....

both my main desktops still run windows 7 and will stay that way..... windows 8 really is made more for a touch screen then kb+m std setup

but if your willing to learn the new stuff i don't see it being that bad, i just dont want to put it on my desktops that have no touch screens

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alhanelem

Historifcally every other home version of Windows has been bad 3.11 god, 95 bad , 98 good, Me bad, XP good, vista bad, 7 good, 8 bad."

They go through this development cycle where they get people to buy in to a piece of crap where they tried something new, then the next version they fix all the crap they broke the first time around.

Wait for Windows 9, folks. Or switch to linux...

---

Why does every person who uses this every other OS excuse ALWAYS forgets to list Windows 2000?

I also like how people who bash 8 probably didn't try out the 2012 server edition and see how much better it is to the older 2009.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhalmel

Why does every person who uses this every other OS excuse ALWAYS forgets to list Windows 2000?

I also like how people who bash 8 probably didn't try out the 2012 server edition and see how much better it is to the older 2009.

---

Windows 2000 was part of the Me/NT line wasn't it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gramul

Windows 2000 was part of the Me/NT line wasn't it?

---

NO.
ME is based on the 9x kernel and is a development from Windows 95 and 98.

2000 is based on the NT kernel and is a development from Windows NT3.1,
NT3.51 and NT4.0. Windows 2000 is actually NT 5.0
Windows 2000 and onward is based off of the NT kernel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhalmel

NO.
ME is based on the 9x kernel and is a development from Windows 95 and 98.

2000 is based on the NT kernel and is a development from Windows NT3.1,
NT3.51 and NT4.0. Windows 2000 is actually NT 5.0
Windows 2000 and onward is based off of the NT kernel

---

Ah, well shows how much I know about that age of Windows OS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gramul

Ah, well shows how much I know about that age of Windows OS.

---

http://i.qkme.me/3shx2x.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlosx

i want to know the official Statement about Windows8 and 2.0

to know if i can install windows8 and will have no affect the game performance

---

if you have ssd i would recommend it & windows 8 for 2.0 because in alpha is was amazing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alhanelem

Windows 8 is terrible and should not have been made, and you should not install it.

---

Despite having no start button which many people are probably use to, Windows 8 runs faster and is better optimized then 7.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlosx

i want to know the official Statement about Windows8 and 2.0

to know if i can install windows8 and will have no affect the game performance

---

Yoshi-P has been demoed ARR on an Ultrabook running Win8 on nico-live event 2 weeks ago so it's no problem to run ARR on Win8.

But speaking for driver, a JP gamer's info site "4Gamer" tested FF14 benchmark (current version) on Win7 and Win8 for the same HW configuration, the Win8 loses some little (<100) score.

Remember, the driver issue can be solved very quickly.

I miss threads about grass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VoltaAsura

The prices they are offering for Windows 8 is just crazy. Between the prices for "upgrades", and promotional options for OEM offering free/15$ upgrades....this is the most affordable OS by Microsoft.

---

You know why it's so cheap? They can't give it away fast enough. People dispise the new layout and lack of a start button. W8 is the new Vista/ME.

Lack of a start butt--- Ugh... Seriously, it's incredibly stupid how people who've never tried it keep bashing it. You know, if you take the damned mouse pointer where the start button is supposed to be, it pops up. Still, remember that nifty Windows key on your keyboard? It... kinda still works. -.-

I don't know why anyone would want to move to win 8 anyway, its a horrid interface...its geared towards, touch screens, tablets, and phones, not for gaming at all

Even though most games have been shown to run better. And the start menu (the only big interface change) has little to nothing to do with gaming. Fuck yeah, logic.

I'll take the performance gains made in windows 8 when they end up in windows 9, thanks. Why would I want an interface designed for a touch screen when I don't have a touch screen? You're right, I don't. Windows 7 works perfectly for me. I don't upgrade for the sake of upgrading, there has to be significant weight to the argument, minor performance increases don't cut it for me. Minor performance increase while hindering my workflow? no thanks!

You know Windows "Blue" (supposedly 9) is coming out this summer, right?

the only thing W8 does better than Vista/7 is the drastically decreased I/O overheard and activity, this makes the system much more responsive.

I have it on good authority from an alpha tester friend of mine that he was able to run the new client without a single compatibility issue or even crash.

And yeah, I wasn't in alpha so I'm not talking about myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Naraku_Diabolos

You know Windows "Blue" (supposedly 9) is coming out this summer, right?

---

Some quick searching on google seems to show that windows blue is just a future update to W8, not what I could consider W9.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhalmel

Why does every person who uses this every other OS excuse ALWAYS forgets to list Windows 2000?

I also like how people who bash 8 probably didn't try out the 2012 server edition and see how much better it is to the older 2009.

---

Because 2000 isn't a home version OS. It was not made or sold for the home user market. It came in pro/server versions only.

I really, honestly tried to get used to win8. In the end, I couldn't find any noticeable performance increases everyone has been praising which would justify upgrading from win7. Boot time difference was about 2 seconds with my SSD, not really noticeable.

The major issue of win8 is not the modernUI by itself, it's the fact they're forcing it onto hardware that doesn't support it. ModernUI is great for tablets/smartphones, but it's useless for touch-less devices. Their retarded reasoning of forcing Metro on desktop users being a compromise is what breaks it. Even if you only work on the "legacy" desktop, you're constantly faced with Metro dialogues. Ever tried to put your taskbar to the left side of the screen? Try clicking on network connections and see where the metro menu opens...

The whole experience is way too fragmented. If they went for desktop being default with metro apps running on it, that would have been the real compromise.

Another thing is that if you're still use some legacy software (FFXI/windower, for example), you will run into troubles with administrator rights. In win7, you could just turn UAC off or start it as admin... now what win8 does is, if you turn it off, it's not really off, so the program thinks it has admin rights but it doesn't -> crash. There is a registry setting that shuts UAC off for good, but doing this will kill ALL metro apps (this includes the metro control panel btw).

All in all, win8 is another experiment just like vista was. Win9 won't make Metro go away, but maybe they will at least fix the overall fragmentation of the two user interfaces so that they work together in a less jarring way. The new improvements to windows explorer/task manager etc are nice, but not something you can't add to win7 via 3rd party plugins. As such, I don't see a reason to upgrade from win7 just yet.

Yesterday's CES quote from Gabe Newell of Valve (steam) about Windows 8:

"The thing about Windows 8 wasn’t just [Microsoft's] distribution. As somebody who participates in the overall PC ecosystem, it’s totally great when faster wireless networks and standards come out, or when graphics get faster. Windows 8 was like this giant sadness. It just hurts everybody in the PC business. Rather than everybody being all excited to go buy a new PC, buying new software to run on it, we’ve had a 20+ percent decline in PC sales — it’s like "holy cow that’s not what the new generation of the operating system is supposed to do." There’s supposed to be a 40 percent uptake, not a 20 percent decline, so that’s what really scares me. When I started using it I was like "oh my god..." I find [Windows 8] unusable."

http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/8/385...ture-of-gaming

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alhanelem

Because 2000 isn't a home version OS. It was not made or sold for the home user market. It came in pro/server versions only.

---

It doesn't make it any less valid, it was the first windows OS I owned when I built my first system.

people still support winXP, im gonna use win 7 till its not worth using anymore or till microsoft pulls an apple and make you buy hot fixes/service packs and call it a new OS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by indira

people still support winXP, im gonna use win 7 till its not worth using anymore or till microsoft pulls an apple and make you buy hot fixes/service packs and call it a new OS.

---

Windows users are not sheep so it will never happen, even if they did linux will be more apparent by that time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by indira

people still support winXP, im gonna use win 7 till its not worth using anymore or till microsoft pulls an apple and make you buy hot fixes/service packs and call it a new OS.

---

sounds like they are going to do that starting with windows blue

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhalmel

Windows users are not sheep so it will never happen, even if they did linux will be more apparent by that time.

---

i would only use linux but they dont have a standard yet. the big distros devs need to get together and make a different repository thats has a standardization so everything works on all distros.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by indira

i would only use linux but they dont have a standard yet. the big distros devs need to get together and make a different repository that's has a standardization so everything works on all distros.

---

Google can play a big part of setting that standard, we all know Android is pretty much based off of Debian. They could promote it heavily as the "consumer" standard to hardware OEMs and driver writers.

Nvidia already has good support for linux, and valve's attempt to bring more gaming to it shows signs of change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhalmel

Google can play a big part of setting that standard, we all know Android is pretty much based off of Debian. They could promote it heavily as the "consumer" standard to hardware OEMs and driver writers.

Nvidia already has good support for linux, and valve's attempt to bring more gaming to it shows signs of change.

---

linux will never get those major PC releases. corporations want lock-outs designed and catered specifically to them Microsoft is happy to oblige that, linux will never support any DRM technology ever HDCP, secur-rom, laser lock, this list can stretch miles and most games use up to 4 different types of DRM. the lack of native DX only makes the already apparent dream of Linux becoming a gaming OS farther away

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valmonte

linux will never get those major PC releases. corporations want lock-outs designed and catered specifically to them Microsoft is happy to oblige that, linux will never support any DRM technology ever HDCP, secur-rom, laser lock, this list can stretch miles and most games use up to 4 different types of DRM. the lack of native DX only makes the already apparent dream of Linux becoming a gaming OS farther away

---

And hows that working for them..? :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valmonte

Linux will never get those major PC releases. corporations want lock-outs designed and catered specifically to them Microsoft is happy to oblige that, Linux will never support any DRM technology ever HDCP, secur-rom, laser lock, this list can stretch miles and most games use up to 4 different types of DRM. the lack of native DX only makes the already apparent dream of Linux becoming a gaming OS farther away

---

If you're implying that DRM can't be made for Linux you're wrong. No one has bothered to make DRM in Linux there's no real benefit to it, not because it can't be done.

You're also implying that the developer can't simultaneously make an OpenGL version of a game.

What's funny is that all of those methods you've mentioned have already been hacked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhalmel

If you're implying that DRM can't be made for Linux you're wrong. No one has bothered to make DRM in Linux there's no real benefit to it, not because it can't be done.

---

it'll never happen the Linux community would tear it apart like a pack of starve mad piranha's. the distro would be dead before it ever got to release.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhalmel

You're also implying that the developer can't simultaneously make an OpenGL version of a game.

---

you think just becuase the games Graphical programing language is written in OpenGL it Magically becomes Linux compatible? easier to port sure, but my point was the majority of top rate titles are not programed in OpenGL. for linux not only would the executables and files need to be compatible you would also need to make the graphical API compatible. A huge waist of resources and publisher money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhalmel

What's funny is that all of those methods you've mentioned have already been hacked.

---

whats even more ironic is they were more than likely hacked using Linux.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shougun

And hows that working for them..? :P

---

For linux? pretty poorly, if you had any hope of turning a computer into a decent MultiMedia Center without Forking over cash for Unix distro's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhalmel

Windows users are not sheep so it will never happen, even if they did linux will be more apparent by that time.

---

I wouldn't be so sure seeing how there are still people defending the bizzare design choices M$ is forcing unto their win8 customers... and linux has still a long way to go.

The only ray of hope for linux in regards to gaming is valve porting some steam games to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlosx

i want to know the official Statement about Windows8 and 2.0

to know if i can install windows8 and will have no affect the game performance

---

If I can play 1.0 on Windows 8 then I will be able to play 2.0 on Windows 8... Oh yeah... I can with NO PROBLEM after you apply the Windows Updates it needs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhalmel

It doesn't make it any less valid, it was the first windows OS I owned when I built my first system.

---

I'm not calling the OS "invalid", I just don't consider it in the list because it wasn't marketed for home users. Thus most people who aren't hardcore enthusiasts don't know about it. I don't care whether it is good or bad, it doesn't count for this list because this list is for home end-user versions of windows.

Quote:

---

it'll never happen the Linux community would tear it apart like a pack of starve mad piranha's. the distro would be dead before it ever got to release.

---

Steam is coming to linux. Standard Steam DRM applies.

Most linux users aren't against retail software being available on linux- Some purists won't install any non-free (Free in the context of freedom, not price) software on a linux machine, but most people are just looking for an alternative to Winodws because they don't like it or don't like Microsoft for whatever reason.