Originally Posted by KusH
A. I doubt they will force Metro as the only solution.
B. Why upgrade then, if that's the case?
C. I agree, and have stated that this should be done previously.
D. If XP does everything for you then why did you even upgrade after that? Yea you're right you can get linux for free, but good luck getting that playing the newest games or using the latest production tools for businesses.
If you're going to upgrade, then you'll be purchasing the latest OS most likely. I don't see why you're complaining about change when you seem perfectly content with XP, then I suggest you stay with XP. But then don't whine when it's not updated any more or not supported any more because you felt that it works perfectly fine for your needs.
A. Just telling you what Steve and Steve both have said.
B. Exactly...or pay for an OS on a tablet when I can get one with Android and free apps out the wazoo at no additional cost?
D. Anything gaming that is not a) DirectX 10 or higher, or b) .NET 3.0 and higher...is pretty much Linux-able. Anything OpenGL is Linux compatible. Almost 100% compatibility with DirectX 9.0c as far as I've read. Wine and Transgaming Cedega pretty much take care of that. I've also been told that Adobe CS5 is usable under Wine, but I don't know how new that is.
Like I said, I don't plan on upgrading. There is nothing I do on a PC, other than web browse and email and IM, that I would do on a tablet...period. Hence, I can get a $59 tablet from Big Lots, upgrade it from Android 1.5 to 2.1, get Dolphin Mini, Yahoo! Messenger, Pidgin, etc., and do whatever I want with it. And it cost me in total: $59.
And, I'm not complaining about XP or change. I'm complaining about cost vs what you get in addition. It was the same with Vista. That was just integration of some .NET libraries into the OS, a different desktop theme, and moving functionality into different menus.
So now, Windows 8 gives you "pins" or whatever...are they really that revolutionary? I think you'll find they're essentially still shortcuts under the hood.
Just because Microsoft renames something doesn't make it innovation. Just because they add touchscreen to a PC doesn't make that revolutionary. And just because Microsoft touts 1000s of changes doesn't mean they are worth the upgrade cost.
I guess the real difference between someone like you and me is that you place value on having the "latest" and being "in-tune" with whatever their "cutting-edge" technology is.
I don't. I like stability and usefulness and proven quality, rather than having what could become the future.
I'm not afraid of new things. I'm afraid of their shortcomings, the BS hype that often comes with them now, and the repercussions going headfirst into what isn't totally known causes in the long-term.
30 years ago, when I got into computers, you didn't have this dilemma so much. If you bought a PC and it didn't work, you took it back to K-Mart and got a refund or a new one. Not 5 hours on the phone with some tech guy that can't half-way speak your language because he's the most cost-effective employee who tells you what you already knew.
Sorry if I seem a bit skeptical about trusting a company like Microsoft, but after Windows 95, ME, and Vista, I tend not to believe all the smoke and mirrors they propagandize in their blogs, at conventions, and in their advertising.
Prove to me Windows 8 will do everything they say...the first time...and I won't have any migration issues...then, I'll think about paying over $1k to upgrade my machines.
See...like any other business, Microsoft has to earn my trust...not just expect to get it.