Strangely, I feel exactly the same general indifferance toward Windows8 and "Metro" as I felt towards windows ME.

 

It's like reading about uninteresting things happening to complete strangers far, far away.

 

Yawn.

 

Maybe the next "book" will have a better plot, or the current release will turn up on the bargain bin and catch me when I'm particularly bored.

 

Or maybe the "publisher" will release a much improved "revised" version.

 

Being fair, even now its not a completely horrible book...... Just a kind of pointless, boring one.

 

I know of one rule regarding Windows, alternate releases usually are the best sellers/better quality. Look at XP, a great OS. Followed by Vista, a bust. Then Windows 7, awesome OS, followed by a flop, Windows 8. Not sure about releases before XP, but I think the same held true.

 

That suggests to me that they release new versions far too frequently. Leave a nice gap between each release, and you give yourself time to create something that is truly innovative, not just a tweaked version of the old one with some pretty colours added.

Win 3.11 win95, win98. Having said that, most people including industry and commerce went directly from win 3.11 to XP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

You are forgetting about Windows NT family.

 

It used to be two families following Windows 3.11. Their was Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows Millennium Edition on one side for home use. On the other side was Windows NT 3,1, NT 3.5, NT 4.0 and finally Windows 2000 for professional use.

 

Basically Windows XP Brought those two separate operating systems together with a "Home" and "Professional" edition that continued up to Windows Vista and Windows 7. The biggest advantage of that was for the Home user as now they finally got the security and stability from the NT kernel

 

Therefore Industry and Commerce went from Windows 3.1 to Windows NT; Microsoft has been dumbing down Windows NT since the release of XP

Steve Cannell, on 01 Apr 2013 - 22:30, said:

I did explain in a reply to this thread on page 2 and page 3.

I guess not many noticed as they are so bent on their own bias against Windows 8 they don't really care.

 

The point is, other than Start8 and Fences by Stardock I have done nothing else. Just installed FSX deluxe, Acceleration and DX10.

I have most every addon, Reality XP, OPUS, ProATCX, ORBX, UT2, FSDT, EZDOK, TrackIR, etc... etc... all work without issues related to OS.

 

My Windows 8 (desktop) is for FSX primarily, but as well photo and video editing, PC gaming(iracing,Farcry3,Rocksmith,COD,Battlefield3) and an XBMC media player.

 

FSX has never run better.

Most important of all. I know it will continue to work great !!

How do I know ? Carbonite backup. (Worth saying again for those that missed it.)

 

No serious flightsimmer should be without it.

A very good example, about 6 weeks ago I got a very nasty piece of Malware. The type you really can't get rid of without a reinstall.

All I did is restore from a selection of mirror images, and within 4 hrs was back to a recent full working state.

FSX and all it's addons, settings, and tweaks, ready to go FLY !!

 

What could be better than this ?

 

No, I'm not suggesting people dump their Windows 7. Especially at the current price. :-(

Just passing along the positive experience I'm having with FSX and Windows 8 desktop.

 

Cheers

Steve

When you installed FSX in Windows 8 did you need to tweak it in the way many have come accustom to over the years or did it run well out the box with the SP's and your various add-ons installed? I know there's some basic tweaks that have to be done so can you be specific in how you set it up. The point here is you make it seem like W8 has a profound FSX performance advantage over W7. I can see this if you have less work to get it up and running in W8 versus W7 and it runs well without the hassle I've read about over the years. If that's not the case this is just smoke and mirrors. I'd love others with W8 to confirm this as well. It it's proven true I may buy a W8 machine specifically for FSX for a more hassle/bug free experience like I have with FS9.75.

vololiberista, on 02 Apr 2013 - 04:22, said:

Win 3.11 win95, win98. Having said that, most people including industry and commerce went directly from win 3.11 to XP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's a new one one me. Industry and Commerce went 3.11 to Windows NT for a true network solution. From there Windows Server 2000 took over and offered the concept of Active Directory and User group policies that revolutionized networking. In the Mid 2000's came VMWare and Citrix (not the original version that ran on top of Windows 2000) server virtualization solutions which is another revolution.

 

For home users the duds were W95, Windows ME, Vista, Windows 8 (8 not being a true dud but rather cumbersome alienating most users with PC's). The prized releases were W98, XP, 7.... These stats go back to circa 1994.

 

A very good example, about 6 weeks ago I got a very nasty piece of Malware.

 

Windows 8 is supposed to be more secure so I'm not sure how you got that Malware?  And how did you know that your Carbonite Backup was done before you got your Malware ... you'd have to identify when it happened or else you'd be restoring the Malware also?  Not trying to harp on you, but everything you've listed in Win8 is in Win7.

 

 

I'd love others with W8 to confirm this as well.

 

I did test on a Win8 and Win7 base -- FSX + Acceleration install (no add-ons and no FSX.CFG tweaks or any other tweaks).  I found NO difference in performance of FSX in Win8 vs Win7 (64bit).  Win8 (once you configure to work like Win7) is really not much different than Win7.  Win8 does have improved threading which can help out some games, but sadly it does NOT seem to help out FSX.  Win8 does use more memory ... it's dual identity crisis (i.e. desktop mode vs. Metro) does require a little more RAM due to more code to support the dual interfaces.

 

 

It looks like missed a word in my post. I meant to say desktops will not disappear.

 

There ya go ... that's definitely a different statement. 

 

Agree, desktop and mobile are not going away.  Agree that learning a mobile interface isn't hard at all.  But mobile efficiency is not as good as keyboard/mouse ... even with two thumbs, you'll never be faster than 8 fingers and two thumbs ... in theory you'll be at least 5X slower.  Voice recognition still isn't there yet ... this is an area I hoped Microsoft would have focused on given how Bad Siri is to use, but they've not provide anything that's better.  Eventually voice recognition will be the dominant form on user input, but that is many many many years away ... what many don't realize is that voice recognition needs to also understand a 3D environmental space AND be able to monitor human gestures in order to respond and recognize appropriately ... until that happens, voice recognition is yet another awkward user interface that works sometimes but rarely works all the time and never consistently. 

 

But my point was that mobile computing of today is a BIG compromise and is far far far from perfect from a technology perspective and a human interaction perspective (way behind on what can be accomplished on a desktop).  But what you're missing is that what makes these Mobile devices useful (like Maps) is not the device nor it's interface ... it's data connectivity ... that's the key.  Go to any location where you don't have connectivity and the mobile device is nothing more than dead weight ... even in highly populated areas my connectivity is hit and miss, in more remote areas it's positively dismal.

 

 

I know of one rule regarding Windows, alternate releases usually are the best sellers/better quality. Look at XP, a great OS. Followed by Vista, a bust. Then Windows 7, awesome OS, followed by a flop, Windows 8.

 

This time around the next Windows Blue/9 will not follow that trend.  Windows Blue/9 will be more like an SP1 for Windows 8 but given a "new" name to try to make people think it's somehow different than the flop that was/is Windows 8.  That worked in the past for Microsoft, but today is a very different environment and people will see through it.

 

On the rumor mill (take this with a grain of salt), I do know a few devs that work for Microsoft and one current rumor is that Microsoft may pull out of "end user" operating system market completely and just focus on their enterprise solutions (web servers, sql servers, exchange servers, etc.).  It's an interesting rumor and might actually have some validity IF Windows Blue/9 ends up failing also.   Also, given how hard it is to "sell" an operating system these days when there are so many "Free" alternatives that get the job done, it's a rumor that I've filed away as "interesting".

 

Rob.

 

 

Agree, desktop and mobile are not going away.  Agree that learning a mobile interface isn't hard at all.  But mobile efficiency is not as good as keyboard/mouse ... even with two thumbs, you'll never be faster than 8 fingers and two thumbs ... in theory you'll be at least 5X slower.  Voice recognition still isn't there yet ... this is an area I hoped Microsoft would have focused on given how Bad Siri is to use, but they've not provide anything that's better.  Eventually voice recognition will be the dominant form on user input, but that is many many many years away ... what many don't realize is that voice recognition needs to also understand a 3D environmental space AND be able to monitor human gestures in order to respond and recognize appropriately ... until that happens, voice recognition is yet another awkward user interface that works sometimes but rarely works all the time and never consistently. 

 

But my point was that mobile computing of today is a BIG compromise and is far far far from perfect from a technology perspective and a human interaction perspective (way behind on what can be accomplished on a desktop).  But what you're missing is that what makes these Mobile devices useful (like Maps) is not the device nor it's interface ... it's data connectivity ... that's the key.  Go to any location where you don't have connectivity and the mobile device is nothing more than dead weight ... even in highly populated areas my connectivity is hit and miss, in more remote areas it's positively dismal.

 

You're focusing far too much on typing and tasks that require rely heavily on it. Touch screen devices, including tablets, aren't meant to replace a keyboard for the cases where one is definitely better. Coding and writing a novel do work better with a physical keyboard (at least for now). Where touch screen devices work great is on many other tasks that don't involve lots of typing. Quick email replies, taking notes during meetings and text messages do work just fine, however it's the tasks like using an iPhone as a remote for an AppleTV, taking photos with the phone and uploading them from anywhere, tracking time for consulting work, searching for a restaurant nearby, getting directions (you don't need a data connection with offline maps), and playing music, all through apps that are specifically designed for touch screens that make them better suited. A data connection does help, but is by no means required for a smartphone to be more than a "dead weight". More and more homes are being built with tablet based control systems for temperature, lighting and entertainment. Maybe this will one day be replaced with voice control, but for now a touch screen works great. Why not cut out the middle man (ie. the mouse) when selecting something directly (ie. tapping it with your finger) works better?

 

Where Microsoft is going wrong is trying to use a touch-centric interface on a desktop where it doesn't really fit. They should have at least provided an option to default to the traditional desktop for desktop machines and left the new Start Screen to devices with touch screens. Much like the Windows Media Center interface was only meant to be used when connected to a TV and was not set as the default.

My opinion:  Microsoft kept promoting its software until finally it was raised to a level of incompetence. 

 

My opinion:  Microsoft kept promoting its software until finally it was raised to a level of incompetence. 

 

It was like that from day one!!! MS's trademark feature is to release buggy software. They did it with DOS too! It was known as the "Dirty Operating System" It wasn't until DOS 6+ that they came close to a relatively stable working DOS system.

 

XP was released with 33,000 known bugs!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

This is why you will never find MS software in aircraft!

It was like that from day one!!! MS's trademark feature is to release buggy software. They did it with DOS too! It was known as the "Dirty Operating System" It wasn't until DOS 6+ that they came close to a relatively stable working DOS system.

 

XP was released with 33,000 known bugs!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

This is why you will never find MS software in aircraft!

 

The real reason you will never find MS software in aircraft is that it's not designed or intended for use in safety-critical systems,

The real reason you will never find MS software in aircraft is that it's not designed or intended for use in safety-critical systems,

True: But my point was that they could never do it even if they tried!

 

Quite how they had the cheek to make a flight "simulator" really surpasses me!!!!

Uh, oh..........

True: But my point was that they could never do it even if they tried!

 

Quite how they had the cheek to make a flight "simulator" really surpasses me!!!!

 

That's pure supposition.You can't possibly know if they could or not.

 

Also, you you have been happier rif Microsoft hadn't had the cheek to make a flight simulator?

.

Incidentally, what's the source of your "33,000 known bugs."

33,000 known bugs were reported at the time XP first came out. Though the sources are now forgotten in the mists of time.  FlyII were doing the same stuff as fs9 before fs9 i.e. MS sims are not necessarily the best.

With the reputation MS built up from day one no one in their right mind would have asked them to write software for real aviation.

This is why you will never find MS software in aircraft!

 

NASA ISS control room is full of XP operating computers. ISS itself is full of XP operating computers.