Win8 Compatibility

[EtherealN]

Aye, I'm no techno-wizard but I swear it's almost as if someone took a particularly large cracker and shoved it up Win 7's a$$ and lit the fuze........What resulted is Win 8, the performance is really that good.

 

Btw, if you want an explanation for the boot time difference: SuperFetch.

 

If you have used a Windows OS for a while, the SuperFetch function will have figured out what programs you commonly use. Thus it will start pre-loading those during your start such that when you do launch them, it already has the information in memory and the application will launch faster. (Think of it like this: if you fly DCS almost every day, at some point the OS will start loading DCS files to RAM as part of bootup, having them ready for you when you eventually end up loading into the simulator.)

 

Downside is - every time you boot up, the bootup will be slower. :P

 

When moving into a new OS (be it reinstall or upgrade), the new OS install will not have any such data stored and will not pre-load anything, resulting in a faster boot.

 

Thus, it is entirely possible that the effect you are seeing is not really about moving from Windows 7 to Windows 8 but rather about having a new OS - with the same benefit being possible from reinstalling Windows 7. (Or just turning off SuperFetch.) Obviously, since it only does this for applications you often use, the delay in boot time might very well be worth it unless you're on an effective and speedy SSD. But basically; don't be surprised if Windows 8 starts taking longer to boot up soon as well, when SuperFetch kicks in there.

[EtherealN]

It takes about 10s to load windows 7 for me, i.e. less than Bios post.

 

Yeah, that's a funny side-effect from my finally getting an SSD as well. Getting real annoyed at POST... 10 seconds of that, then 5 seconds until I get to the OS login screen, and once I slam the password in I'm instantly on the desktop. Someone needs to speed up this UEFI thing. :D

[cichlidfan]

...don't be surprised if Windows 8 starts taking longer to boot up soon as well, when SuperFetch kicks in there.

 

Aw EtherealN, your spoiling Viper's fun. ;)

[EtherealN]

Better he finds out now rather than later. :P

 

Though to be fair, I wouldn't be surprised if they have done some cleanup as far as boot process goes, especially considering that the same OS is also targeting tablets where people are more sensitive to startup times.

[Cedaway]

[PoleCat]

I understand the logic of waiting for a service pack. But as far as I can see so far with Windows 8, it is out of the box perceptibly faster, smoother and noticeably better than Windows 7 in start up, shut down and file copy among other things. This is nothing like Windows Vista.....

 

Out

[secret1962]

Does freetrack work in windows 8 ?

[EtherealN]

But as far as I can see so far with Windows 8, it is out of the box perceptibly faster, smoother and noticeably better than Windows 7 in start up, shut down and file copy among other things.

 

I'll hold judgement until there are actual hard numbers to go by. Human beings being able to "notice" something is no evidence at all.

 

Compare, for example, to when that TV channel went out on the street with an iPhone 4S and let people test it - but said it was an iPhone 5. Even people that had iPhone 4S themseleves said "wow, much faster than the 4S!"

 

Similar with Vista. Hilarity ensued when Microsoft invited a bunch of people to test the "next OS", the one "after Vista", and everyone was like - omg this is really good! Very convenient, very nice. (Except it was, of course, just regular pre-SP1 Vista with some decals changed, which the people didn't notice...)

[EtherealN]

 

God I hope they made that a small hiberfile. On my old OS install that thing was HUGE. Would take longer on a mechanical than just booting the OS normally. :P

 

I see that's from Tablets-planet though, know if there's any automatic tweaks in the system there? Since RAM budget tends to be a lot smaller you don't typically get as big of a hiberfile.

 

Would be interesting to see some full-on tests with analysis of what actually happens in the system.

[rextar]

Those are? Latest version reviews seem to differ.

 

I have 3 hours left on the download so I'm all ears :D

 

Am i missing something here ?

Can you download windows 8 for £25.00!!!!!!

[cichlidfan]

That's a lot less than the $69 I paid (even allowing for exchange rates) but I do have an actual disc.

[PoleCat]

I'll hold judgement until there are actual hard numbers to go by. Human beings being able to "notice" something is no evidence at all.

 

Compare, for example, to when that TV channel went out on the street with an iPhone 4S and let people test it - but said it was an iPhone 5. Even people that had iPhone 4S themseleves said "wow, much faster than the 4S!"

 

Similar with Vista. Hilarity ensued when Microsoft invited a bunch of people to test the "next OS", the one "after Vista", and everyone was like - omg this is really good! Very convenient, very nice. (Except it was, of course, just regular pre-SP1 Vista with some decals changed, which the people didn't notice...)

 

Over think things much? ;)

 

It is simply better and more feature rich. Factually speaking if you take windows 7 improve it, you have.....Windows 8. There are perceptible differences in speed and performance as well as many improved features as I have already mentioned. It is not just about noticing no, but it is about better, faster start up, faster shut down, better file copies, improved multimedia performance and more GUI options among other things. Besides this my opinions are rendered only after having installed and used Windows 8 on 5 PC's and 2 laptops for several months after having used Windows 7 on all of these machines. I build sell and support PC's for a living so I don't think my findings are illusory. I know performance improvements when I see them. You will see them as well...perhaps later after you determine which of those iPhones feels faster to you.:P

 

Out

Edited October 30, 2012 by PoleCat

[EtherealN]

It is not just about noticing no, but it is about better.

 

...which is what I want numbers on. ;)

 

You know, reviews and stuff. Does it actually boot faster? Is it actually better at filecopies.

 

This is an OS we're talking about, not a game that had some features added. Need more than impressions to make a solid judgement on that, specifically because "impressions" are worthless.

[159th_Viper]

Am i missing something here ?

Can you download windows 8 for £25.00!!!!!!

 

Yes - Direct from the Microsoft website here:

 

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-GB/windows/download-shop

 

Once downloaded you can either burn an .iso disc or let it configure an external USB installation memory stick. I have done both so I've got a disc and USB for future install purposes.

 

Get it - it's like chalk and cheese. Even my DCS loading times are twice as fast and it just seems a lot smoother than 7 with better framerates to boot.

[PoleCat]

...which is what I want numbers on. ;)

 

You know, reviews and stuff. Does it actually boot faster? Is it actually better at filecopies.

 

This is an OS we're talking about, not a game that had some features added. Need more than impressions to make a solid judgement on that, specifically because "impressions" are worthless.

 

Yes I know it is an OS. It is also not an earth shattering approach to actually use it and see. It is what most IT professionals and enthusiasts do. Restoring your old Windows 7 installation is fairly simple if you want to try it. Yes it does boot faster and yes file copies are improved. These things are self evident once you use it.

 

Out

Edited October 30, 2012 by PoleCat

[EtherealN]

Yes I know it is an OS. It is also not an earth shattering approach to actually use it and see. It is what most IT professionals and enthusiasts do. Restoring your old Windows 7 installation is fairly simple if you want to try it. Yes it does boot faster and yes file copies are improved. These things are self evident once you use it.

 

You clearly don't understand the extreme fallibility of human observational skills. "Self evident" doesn't cut it. Numbers do. Yes, I could have taken an RTM image back before the release and "try it", but the point is that I am equally fallible when it comes to expectation effects etcetera.

 

Simple fact of the human psyche: if you expect something, you will see it, whether it is there or not. Examples provided earlier. (See how often people have placebo changes in FM's etcetera in DCS for another example. ;) )

 

So simply trying it out woulkd not be enough for me, I'd have to also conduct a bunch of comparative tests to ensure that I'm not tricking myself or being tricked by the human psyche. And I don't have time for that. For this reason I am patiently waiting for review sites etcetera to come up with said figures - we've seen tomshardware do a gig on game performance (where it was mixed but not really gamechanging in either direction, earlier in this thread). Now we just need someone to do some in-depth work on productivity as well.

 

...and after we have those numbers, I'll have what I need to judge whether the upgrade is worth the money, and whether the perceived changes are, in fact, real. I expect a mix in that department.

[EtherealN]

Here we go, found some tests:

 

Very nice, especially for mechanical drive users, right there. (SSD users will probably get a similar ratio of improvement, possibly even a slightly higher ratio, but boot-times there are so low already I don't know if it's worth it. Up to each person.)

 

No gain in synthetic gaming test, but we've gone through that earlier in the thread with "real" game tests, where it was a mixed bag of sometimes better, sometimes worse. Good possibility that driver maturity plays a major role here though, so this might change with time.

 

Minor improvements in this browser performance test.

 

Similar picture here, though depends on which browser is being used. (Also worth noting how rotten IE10 Metro is here, but I suspect few people here will use that very much.)

 

Couple percent gained in this media test as well.

 

Win7 seems better off at SSD handling, though not by all that much.

 

File copy speeds are almost entirely unchanged. (Though I hear the interface is better now.)

 

Identical copy performance when involving large amounts of small files.

 

Full article is available here: http://www.techspot.com/review/561-windows8-vs-windows7/

 

See PoleCat, this wasn't too hard. We now have data supporting the faster boot times (also for hibernation and shutdown etcetera, see the full article). We have corroborations to previously linked tests that indicate it's pretty much the same as far as game performance goes - couple percent better in some, couple percent worse in some others. Also looking good for multimedia and web browsing (except for Internet Explorer). And finally the file copying is pretty much a wash - less than a percent on large files, unmeasurable on multiple smalls. There I guess the better interface might tilt it in Win 8's favor. SSD handling seems worrisome, but the differences here aren't huge. (And of course, for those that don't have an SSD, this is irrelevant.)

[HiJack]

Good post there EtherealN! Really gives a clear view on the differences on the two so far. No need to stress the MS shop yet ;)

[Namenlos Ein]

Good post there EtherealN! Really gives a clear view on the differences on the two so far. No need to stress the MS shop yet ;)

Until Windows 8 SP1.

 

http://www.lockergnome.com/windows/2012/09/17/windows-8-why-you-should-wait-until-service-pack-1-to-upgrade/

[Cedaway]

I made it. I bought W8...

But I can't install! Each time it says me 'impossible to install, rolling back to old system' stuff (in french)

 

I guess it's due to my dual boot GRUB Ubuntu + W7.

 

Sooooo, got the choice:

1) Consider my W7 installation runs fine and shouldn't touch it until I feel the need to.

2) Take a day or 2 off to completely remove GRUB, ubuntu partition, re-format, reinstall and tune the heck...

 

Guess what? Old sentence comes to me: 'If it runs fine, don't touch it'. I think the W8 installation will be delayed.

 

EDIT = @HiJack: I think the 'good price' update is not going over 01 january 13. check for yourself if it does apply to your country too.

Edited October 31, 2012 by Cedaway

[PoleCat]

Here we go, found some tests:

 

Very nice, especially for mechanical drive users, right there. (SSD users will probably get a similar ratio of improvement, possibly even a slightly higher ratio, but boot-times there are so low already I don't know if it's worth it. Up to each person.)

 

No gain in synthetic gaming test, but we've gone through that earlier in the thread with "real" game tests, where it was a mixed bag of sometimes better, sometimes worse. Good possibility that driver maturity plays a major role here though, so this might change with time.

 

Minor improvements in this browser performance test.

 

Similar picture here, though depends on which browser is being used. (Also worth noting how rotten IE10 Metro is here, but I suspect few people here will use that very much.)

 

Couple percent gained in this media test as well.

 

Win7 seems better off at SSD handling, though not by all that much.

 

File copy speeds are almost entirely unchanged. (Though I hear the interface is better now.)

 

Identical copy performance when involving large amounts of small files.

 

Full article is available here: http://www.techspot.com/review/561-windows8-vs-windows7/

 

See PoleCat, this wasn't too hard. We now have data supporting the faster boot times (also for hibernation and shutdown etcetera, see the full article). We have corroborations to previously linked tests that indicate it's pretty much the same as far as game performance goes - couple percent better in some, couple percent worse in some others. Also looking good for multimedia and web browsing (except for Internet Explorer). And finally the file copying is pretty much a wash - less than a percent on large files, unmeasurable on multiple smalls. There I guess the better interface might tilt it in Win 8's favor. SSD handling seems worrisome, but the differences here aren't huge. (And of course, for those that don't have an SSD, this is irrelevant.)

 

And these results show that all in all Windows 8 is better, surprise! Most of this data was readily available to the public months ago during the beta phase of Windows 8 in the form of other reviews and other benchmarks. I assumed you knew this already. Also as far as these benchmarks go, do you believe there are no others that will show you different results? How about two months from now? The numbers are a snapshot in time and are always good but using the product tells the whole story. In a word Windows 8 is better than Windows 7. It would likely fail if it wasn't and it won't. Hardware and software companies have just started to develop Windows 8 drivers and software so readers of these comparisons need to take this into account.Over time you can expect Windows 8 performance to widen the margins where it is better and close the gap where it does not quite line up. Windows 7 on the other hand while an excellent product is now the previous MS OS...........;)

 

Out

Edited October 31, 2012 by PoleCat

[Steel Jaw]

Hmm, as a simmer/gamer, I am not seeing any rationale to move to W8 from W7/64 anytime soon.

[EtherealN]

Polecat, I don't understand your argument.

 

No, "using the product" does not tell the whole story. There's tonnes of urban myths going about where the user experience has corroborated them - until it was shown in hard number that no, it's wrong. Quick example: how many were 100% convinced there had been radical changes to the Ka-50 FM in BS2? Heard the same then - just use it, you'll see it flies completely differently, etcetera etcetera.

 

And I already did say I might get it, but not yet, most likely alongside my next computer purchase whenever that happens.

 

But "user experience" is worthless except as descriptive of what one person felt when using the product, and as you know people can use an iPhone 4S that they think is an iPhone 5 (because they were told so) and feel that "omg this is so much faster than my 4S". And people could go from their Vista machines fuming about how horrible Vista is, then go into a Microsoft experiment booth where they're allowed to test the "next version of Windows" and they'll be like "awesome, really good, very nice, so much snappier than Vista"...

 

...except in that booth they were using the same Vista they had on their own computer, just with some decals and names switched out...

 

So no. "Experience" is not even close to enough. I've had enough cases where I've been dead certain about an experience and had it shattered when I sit down and test it to know this.

 

(Also, yes there were benchies out during beta, but that is... beta. This test is the RTM.)

 

I agree with Mower, especially considering that I switched to SSD recently. (Less than a week ago, actually.) Booting in 4 seconds instead of 5 seconds isn't enough to merit much, especially when we see worries on handling large amounts of small files on SSD. (And I also reboot my machine only when Windows Update requests it. Aside from that it's on 24/7.) So given that gaming benchmarks here and in previous links are a wash between the OSes, copying improvements are pretty much just limited to the nice new interface, and Win8 is a bit quicker in handling media encoding (which I never do), pretty much the only thing that remains is a 5 to 10 percent improvement in browser performance.

 

That's not worth it. So I'll wait until it becomes worth it.

 

Me not making the same value judgement isn't an attack on your character, you know. ;)

[PoleCat]

Polecat, I don't understand your argument.

 

No, "using the product" does not tell the whole story. There's tonnes of urban myths going about where the user experience has corroborated them - until it was shown in hard number that no, it's wrong. Quick example: how many were 100% convinced there had been radical changes to the Ka-50 FM in BS2? Heard the same then - just use it, you'll see it flies completely differently, etcetera etcetera.

 

And I already did say I might get it, but not yet, most likely alongside my next computer purchase whenever that happens.

 

But "user experience" is worthless except as descriptive of what one person felt when using the product, and as you know people can use an iPhone 4S that they think is an iPhone 5 (because they were told so) and feel that "omg this is so much faster than my 4S". And people could go from their Vista machines fuming about how horrible Vista is, then go into a Microsoft experiment booth where they're allowed to test the "next version of Windows" and they'll be like "awesome, really good, very nice, so much snappier than Vista"...

 

...except in that booth they were using the same Vista they had on their own computer, just with some decals and names switched out...

 

So no. "Experience" is not even close to enough. I've had enough cases where I've been dead certain about an experience and had it shattered when I sit down and test it to know this.

 

(Also, yes there were benchies out during beta, but that is... beta. This test is the RTM.)

 

I agree with Mower, especially considering that I switched to SSD recently. (Less than a week ago, actually.) Booting in 4 seconds instead of 5 seconds isn't enough to merit much, especially when we see worries on handling large amounts of small files on SSD. (And I also reboot my machine only when Windows Update requests it. Aside from that it's on 24/7.) So given that gaming benchmarks here and in previous links are a wash between the OSes, copying improvements are pretty much just limited to the nice new interface, and Win8 is a bit quicker in handling media encoding (which I never do), pretty much the only thing that remains is a 5 to 10 percent improvement in browser performance.

 

That's not worth it. So I'll wait until it becomes worth it.

 

Me not making the same value judgement isn't an attack on your character, you know. ;)

 

I am not taking your posts as an attack on my character. Ok , perhaps I should have said the "rest" of the story and not the "whole" story. Whether Windows 8 is worth it is a matter of opinion yes. Weather it is an improvement over Windows 7 is not.

 

That is all I am trying to say.

 

A bit more in depth on file management (old but relevant and informational) http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/08/23/improving-our-file-management-basics-copy-move-rename-and-delete.aspx

 

Out

Edited October 31, 2012 by PoleCat

[EtherealN]

Well, I haven't argued against that they have improved things.

 

What I have argued against is whether they have improved things enough to make it worth a transition (especially as an early adopter with all the associated risks). Personally, the temporary discount isn't worth it since in my usercase there's pretty much nothing that is improved that actually impacts me - the only thing would appear to be web browsing. I'm gratified that the bootup improvements were real though, and if I hadn't recently switched to an SSD that might actually have sold me on it. But as is... no.

 

But whenever I do end up getting a new system, it'll probably have Windows 8 on it. As for when that happens... I usually kept to a 2 year cycle, but I suspect this Sandy system will be able to stay in service for a while longer than "normal". That means it will probably slot in perfectly for Win8 SP1 and mean I make the transition when the OS has received the necessary polish. (Same thing happened with Vista, bought a system around SP1 when things were set straight, and same back with XP (which was a DISASTER before it's first SP). )