Windows 8 lets talk about Core Performance :D

[CruNcher]

Direct2D improved :)

http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/BUILD/BUILD2011/PLAT-769T

[Gser]

These kind of presentations are so full of fluff I just tend to take nap when I'm forced to endure them.

[CruNcher]

This is wow actually it's my personal favorite including the Hibernate by default improvements (boot time) :)
Xperf has been also completely overhauled, it's a much smoother GUI experience then before :)
http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/457/powerfulz.png

[Didée]

Win3.11 ++
Win95 +/-
Win98 ++
WinME --
WinXP ++
Vista --
Seven ++

D'ya see a pattern there? Next in the list is "8" ...


But hey, okay. Now I see it - WPA monitor now has a gold bar, and moreover, even a blue bar! W00t, this kicks ass!

[Midzuki]

Win3.11 ++
Win95 +/-
Win98 ++
WinME -/-
WinXP ++
Vista --
Seven ++

D'ya see a pattern there?

Yes, your list is in-accurate :)

Win3.11 +/-
Win95 +++ :cool:
Win98 ++
WinME +/-
Win2K ++++
WinXP +++++ :cool:
Server 2k3 ? ? ? ? ? :confused:
Vista --/+ :mad:
Seven --- :D

Next in the list is "8" ...

- - - - - - - - :p

BTW, "WPA" stands for "Windows Product Activation", right? :)

[mariush]

I've used 2003 and it was awesome - on par with Windows XP SP2. Actually Windows XP 64 bit uses the Windows 2003 kernel, if I remember correctly.
Now I'm using 2008 on some dedicated servers and it's also super stable and good.

I have mixed feelings about windows 8... seems like they made a lot of changes. Who knows what will remain in the final build - there were lots of promises on al operating systems since XP.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

I have mixed feelings about windows 8... seems like they made a lot of changes. Who knows what will remain in the final build - there were lots of promises on al operating systems since XP.

So far I can't see much of a difference compared to Windows 7. Maybe the Ribbons in the Explorer and the new Taskmgr are the biggest differences.

Sure, there is the new "touchscreen" user interface (Metro) that everybody is talking about these days. But Metro is really only running on top of the classical Desktop.

While I think that Metro is a big improvement for Tablets and similar devices, you certainly won't have much fun with that UI on a normal PC or Laptop...

(Hopefully they will restore a proper Start menu for the Desktop in the final release. Otherwise keeping Metro enabled wouldn't be an feasible option for PC users)

[thewebchat]

So far I can't see much of a difference compared to Windows 7. Maybe the Ribbons in the Explorer and the new Taskmgr are the biggest differences.

Sure, there is the new "touchscreen" user interface (Metro) that everybody is talking about these days. But Metro is really only running on top of the classical Desktop.

While I think that Metro is a big improvement for Tablets and similar devices, you certainly won't have much fun with that UI on a normal PC or Laptop...

(Hopefully they will restore a proper Start menu for the Desktop in the final release. Otherwise keeping Metro enabled wouldn't be an feasible option for PC users)

Actually, as I understand it, the "classic" desktop in Windows 8 has been abstracted to an "app" in the Metro interface. That's why, among other things, the "Start" button now just exists to Metro. This, along with the fact that all the news so far has been about mobile-related stuff (touch interfaces, ARM, app stores, etc.) doesn't inspire confidence in the product from a desktop-user perspective.

However, I think the new Metro interface could be great for HTPC users. The tiled interface looks very friendly to remotes and other input devices. Perhaps CoreCodec can revitalize their business there.

[CruNcher]

So far I can't see much of a difference compared to Windows 7. Maybe the Ribbons in the Explorer and the new Taskmgr are the biggest differences.

Sure, there is the new "touchscreen" user interface (Metro) that everybody is talking about these days. But Metro is really only running on top of the classical Desktop.

While I think that Metro is a big improvement for Tablets and similar devices, you certainly won't have much fun with that UI on a normal PC or Laptop...

(Hopefully they will restore a proper Start menu for the Desktop in the final release. Otherwise keeping Metro enabled wouldn't be an feasible option for PC users)

There are a lot differences but most aren't visible also on the first look or are Architecture wise the whole Security stuff is a massive update to where Vista or 7 where now there is a whole new Secured Boot chain like we know it from Smartphones already with a whole Signed Boot from Firmware on through the whole system (for Firmware Security UEFI is needed though) so Bootkits will be more problematic and if you want it even more extreme you can include the TPM into every step of this chain for extra security, it's also gonna support the new TPM 2.0 Spec.

Several Performance and Memory improvements a improved ASLR also :)

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/4359/secureboot.png

The Hybrid Boot is already been shown often a Improved Hibernate :)

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/2280/fastboot.png

For this boot Experience though also some Graphic Architectural stuff had to be changed Flickers (mode changes) have been eliminated though this is mostly a feature that comes through the use of UEFI @ least on boot they use some clever OEM Boot logo handling also Graphic Driver installations wont flicker anymore ;)

http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/2871/wddm12.png

http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/575/seamlessbootexperience.png

Faster Text Rendering

http://img846.imageshack.us/img846/9429/direct2dtext.png

Faster Geometry

http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/1447/direct2dgeometry.png

[IgorC]

The most important feature of Win 8 for me is ARM support. I want true mobility not 3 hours of battery or 5 hours but with tiniest netbook's display.

[CruNcher]

Hehe that's another good thing Microsoft demands from Manufactures a Consistence Experience they demand that in Connected Standby for Example in a time Period of 60 Hours the Battery should only be drained by 5% ;)
They just make it very easy they say its Technical Possible so the damn do it, Microsoft for that matter replaces the Manufactures Power Management with their own Driver that forces the Manufactures Hardware Power Management to do Application Specific things the way they want, and the whole Metro Stack is optimized for Power Efficiency and Consistency throughout this Ecosystem ;)
And their Automatically Desktop Benefits also from that as some very Power intense stuff has been removed (several timer stuff has been redesigned and improved so the idle is better then Windows 7s idle (and damn that's already good).

[LoRd_MuldeR]

Actually, as I understand it, the "classic" desktop in Windows 8 has been abstracted to an "app" in the Metro interface. That's why, among other things, the "Start" button now just exists to Metro. This, along with the fact that all the news so far has been about mobile-related stuff (touch interfaces, ARM, app stores, etc.) doesn't inspire confidence in the product from a desktop-user perspective.

Well, hundreds of thousands of existing Windows applications will continue to run on the classical Windows Desktop. And most of these applications will never be ported to the Metro UI, either because they are not developed anymore, because it is not worth the effort or (most important) because these applications simply are not suitable for a "touch" UI. Therefore we can assume that the great majority of the Windows 8 users will stick with the classical Desktop most of the time. Still, in the current Developer Preview, there is no convenient way to launch Desktop applications, unless they are already pinned to the taskbar (but you can't pin everything). Having to go through the Metro UI instead of the Start menu each time is big pain, if you are working on the Desktop most of the time (which the great majority of all users will continue do). Having to search the EXE file in Windows Explorer is not very convenient either. Last but not least you have to keep in mind that hundreds of thousands of existing applications create Startmenu entries. These applications have been implemented to be launched from the Start menu (so some functions may not even be accessible without the Startmenu entry) and the user manuals for these applications have been written with the Start menu in mind. Conclusion: Completely removing the Start menu in favor of a "Start screen" that really is only useful for "touch" devices would be totally insane! Making the OS more suitable for Touch devices to gain new costumers in that area is reasonable, but scaring away the huge Desktop/Laptop user base that has grown for several decades at the same time sounds illogical to me...

(Unless, of course, "Windows 8" will be sold as a Touch-Device only OS, while Windows 7 will remain the OS intended for Desktops and normal Laptops)

[CruNcher]

Well, hundreds of thousands of existing Windows applications will continue to run on the classical Windows Desktop. And most of these applications will never be ported to the Metro UI, either because they are not developed anymore, because it is not worth the effort or (most important) because these applications simply are not suitable for a "touch" UI. Therefore we can assume that the great majority of the Windows 8 users will stick with the classical Desktop most of the time. Still, in the current Developer Preview, there is no convenient way to launch Desktop applications, unless they are already pinned to the taskbar (but you can't pin everything). Having to go through the Metro UI instead of the Start menu each time is big pain, if you are working on the Desktop most of the time (which the great majority of all users will continue do). Having to search the EXE file in Windows Explorer is not very convenient either. Last but not least you have to keep in mind that hundreds of thousands of existing applications create Startmenu entries. These applications have been implemented to be launched from the Start menu (so some functions may not even be accessible without the Startmenu entry) and the user manuals for these applications have been written with the Start menu in mind. Conclusion: Completely removing the Start menu in favor of a "Start screen" that really is only useful for "touch" devices would be totally insane! Making the OS more suitable for Touch devices to gain new costumers in that area is reasonable, but scaring away the huge Desktop/Laptop user base that has grown for several decades at the same time sounds illogical to me...

(Unless, of course, "Windows 8" will be sold as a Touch-Device only OS, while Windows 7 will remain the OS intended for Desktops and normal Laptops)

Yep that's the big question i didn't read logo requirements yet but i don't think they will force Windows 8 to be Touch only for the whole Ecosystem it would be to early right @ the Beginning forcing everyone into this new Natural Interface Era.
This will come slowly it's just the Beginning so it will be Optional im pretty sure of that, also seeing how easy it is to disable Metro in this new OS Architecture currently it's driven by 1 .dll that activates it it's just enough to rename it to disable it and bring it into the normal Build mode the name of the dll also suggests it's running as a simple Shell Extension currently :)
So it's pretty flexible on the Top what you do with it and How you integrate what where and we are still in the Milestone Space so many things can still change on the top in terms of usability (though the core User Experience foundations of the Interface and all the Cognitive Research of it have been already defined with Windows Phone and many years ago in Microsofts Research Labs on Natural Desktop Interfaces) :)
Though it has it's own Rules as soon as it's active it has different rules then the traditional Desktop Shell and you dynamically switch those rules without noticing it, pretty good job :)

And if you compare Androids Shell and Shells other 3rd Parties created for it even HTC or take Sony for example with XMB it's a big big difference what are the core paradigms behind this are is just heavy in terms of usability and learning curve which is so minimal even in the demographic development it makes perfect sense :) and Microsoft wants from the Beginning that everything runs flawless on Release and that every Developer feels @ home making every important Programming language available for them including HTML5 @ the core and they are very strict about this they want this to succeed (this thing has decades of Research in it hardly comparable with anything Google did or what the foundations of Google are ;) ).

The only ones capable of having a chance vs this are Apple they didn't keep their research cycles to long before making them into actual product, though even they will have a hard run vs Metro when it goes alive on all Platforms and enables a very consistence experience on all of them with the possibility to switch into a more productive space (optional).

Also i wouldn't be very surprised if the new Xbox "760" would also shift over to make this whole thing final for years as Microsofts Core Interface :)

This creates such a hard defined Ecosystem between devices Microsoft can leverage for years from it, and if you compare they switched the button so fast between x86 and ARM just amazing though they set the foundations of this early on when starting to unscramble the Web of OS components and extracting the Kernel from the Rest (Minwin) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minwin this alone was heavy work @ Redmond and they succeeded and now finally we slowly see how they take advantage of this and improve based on this the whole OS year after year now :)

[CruNcher]

Ps after looking very deep now into Windows 8 im confident to say and claim this is what should have been

Windows codenamed Blackcomb :)

I carefully looked @ all the Evidence all the Codename changes the Architectural Differences (The Personal changes inside Microsoft) i even took the Market movements the Mobile Development everything into account and im very confident to claim this :)

and nope it's totally wrong 7 is not Blackcomb it is strictly just a intermediate release (codenamed Vienna) to get things back on track for this major Release which in every logic assumption is Blackcomb so this is what should be also architectural the full successor to Windows XP its fully correct that NT 6 is the successor of NT 5 but it lacked in every carnation on some key aspects that XP (NT 5) still did better (yes even 7 as good the experience is from a Performance view that's why its even existing @ all) :)

And looking @ how crazy this cycle was it wouldn't surprise me in anyway if the Final Release name of Windows 8 becomes the actuall Codename of it so we might gonna see Windows 8 -> becoming @ release Windows Blackcomb (though every marketing department inside of MS is most probably not going to let that happen ;) ).

[Vurbal]

(Unless, of course, "Windows 8" will be sold as a Touch-Device only OS, while Windows 7 will remain the OS intended for Desktops and normal Laptops)
That's pretty much impossible since the primary point in sticking with a 3 year release cycle is to convince companies to buy software assurance with their volume licenses. Going too long without a new version of Windows makes SA a really bad investment.

[Sharktooth]

M$ said companies can skip windows 8 since they are still into the windows 7 transition and windows 8 wont bring any new useful stull for business.

[Vurbal]

Interesting. I remember hearing a lot about all the complaints they got from companies who were unhappy when they didn't get any use from 2 SA licenses per machine with XP.

[smok3]

M$ said companies can skip windows 8 since they are still into the windows 7 transition and windows 8 wont bring any new useful stull for business.

apple did't say that, but i cant see anything useful looking at their lion videos either, or am'i wrong?