Thread: 2.0 in Windows 8

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).

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

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.

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?

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.