May 7, 2013 at 6:11am UTC
It was almost inevitable when you look back at Windows releases
If you look at consumer targetted releases:
3.1 - good
95 - crap
98 - good
ME - crap
XP - good
Vista - crap
7 - good
8 - crap
It's a cycle of good-crap. Windows 8 was always going to be crap, with a good release following it.
Note: I've left out NT and 2000 because they were primarily targetted at Businesses. NT crap, 2000 good though :P
May 7, 2013 at 7:34am UTC
@Zaita that is true. I never really noticed those patterns about Windows OS's until MiiNiPaa responded on my oppinion based on windows 8.
Last edited on
May 7, 2013 at 7:42am UTC
May 7, 2013 at 12:36pm UTC
Hahah, what a stupid, misinformed article. Windows 8.1 (aka. Windows Blue) isn't going to be doing a "U-Turn", they are going to be improving what they already have and adding some new features based on feedback. Par for the course for point releases.
May 7, 2013 at 1:53pm UTC
I hadn't heard anything about windows blue until just now O:
edit: until they make it possible to open metro style apps on more than one monitor at the same time I won't be using metro style apps for anything.
Last edited on
May 7, 2013 at 1:57pm UTC
May 7, 2013 at 3:29pm UTC
Keep in mind, still in beta.
May 7, 2013 at 11:02pm UTC
haha Windows blue:P for the blue screen lovers:D
May 8, 2013 at 1:10am UTC
That's funny, because my Ubuntu installs on my desktop and laptop are both slower and more unstable than my Windows 8 installs.
May 8, 2013 at 1:42am UTC
I've never have good luck with Ubuntu. It's always been pretty slow and poor response time. But as long as I don't leave the terminal or Gedit it's not bad.
May 8, 2013 at 6:11am UTC
Ubuntu slower than Windows on the same hardware?
May 8, 2013 at 7:33am UTC
Multi-monitor support is something I REALLY REALLY wish was better. And multi-video card support too. Windows 7 is terrible at running multiple video cards =\