[Register] No Windows 7 SP2 - Page 16  

Originally Posted by 3930K 

An 80yr old is a "normal windows user"

Also
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgKGOMV-5_I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlZgcAacIxU

for 2

Originally Posted by 3930K 

Same here.

I'm a 13 yo very open to change, while the majority of OCN is not.

Originally Posted by Giac 

But don't you see how you're just proving that this change was needed? Microsoft are leading the industry with the shared UI and Kernel base. I think they NEED to focus all development on Win 8 as they need to phase out the legacy stuff. "Forcing" it on people is really the only way.
I honestly don't think that programming their GUI to the "lowest common denominator" is an issue. Just look at how mobile operating systems have changed the way their desktop counterparts look, people are eating up the latest versions of OS X.

Originally Posted by Xeio 

That's true of any Windows features. I mean, we could be on XP service pack 13 or something...

Originally Posted by 47 Knucklehead 

As far as tablets being the future ... MAYBE you are right. But then again, people have been saying the electric car is the future, and they have been saying that for 105 years now. Since you are so good at predicting the future, mind telling me the winning lotto numbers for this week?

Originally Posted by ejb222 

Well for one, the percentage of tablet or mobile computing adopters vastly out weighs the electric car adopters...thus bringing more creditbility to the trend. 2. W8 is perfectly fine on a Desktop. It hasn't taken anything away from W7 that would make it unuseable on the DT. I'm not sure how W8 has killed the DT?

Originally Posted by Nivacs 

Microsoft will not use a Service pack to update the kernel (they haven't since 2000 SP2) because It can and will break at least some machines

Originally Posted by Warmonger 

A supposedly "inside source" at Microsoft said that. It's more then Vista SP2, but Vista did get extremely stable after SP2.

Originally Posted by tpi2007 


Doing that is a lot more time consuming than just slipstreaming a Service Pack.

Originally Posted by Stealth Pyros 


How? If you already have all the updates, it can't take you that long. There's also a library of all the updates on Microsoft's site that lets you download them all with ease. I guess I shouldn't even go into AutoPatcher as it's obvious people in here don't know how to slipstream updates themselves...

Originally Posted by Brutuz 


Yes, because everyone has the advanced learning capabilities of a toddler...What about the vast majority of the world? Most people over 30-40 are going to be confused.

Seriously, that's the dumbest argument I've ever seen...Yes, for the future those 3 year olds are going to be important to MS but right now? They still have to force the rest of us to Win8 and Metro, most people I'm friends with think it looks like a kids toy...And the parents own the PC, not the toddler, it doesn't matter if a toddler/child/younger teenager doesn't mind Windows 8 if their parent hates it enough to get a Windows 7 downgrade. It sure is smart of Microsoft to cater to the people who haven't got any income for at least 10 years.

I'm 19 years old, open to change when it benefits me; for example, if I went to the doctors and found out I had cancer...That's a change, why should I be open to it?

..What drugs are you on and where can I get some? iOS and OS X share kernel and code bases, as does Linux and Android, MS is the last of the 3 major OS players to do this and as usual, they're screwing up the implementation of what they've copied.

What Apple did was make iOS from the Darwin base (What OS X has as well), make a new UI with elements from OS X and then improve on it, as well as port ideas back and forth when they translate well, what MS is doing is bolting a slightly modified version of the UI from their phones/tablets (Or what should be on tablets, anyway) and telling us to suck it up... I think it will fail and MS will eventually have to do it the sane way.

Apple got it right here, they have the same basic OS but cut way down with a new touch optimized GUI, they then ported ideas from that to the desktop/laptops OS GUI when they translated well to the different input style, that's why people love it..It's literally nothing but improvements, MS is compromising and doing it the half-assed lazy way by having both share extremely similar styles.

Nah, XP to Vista was a massive transition internally and while it could have been done by a SP it would be massive; from VIsta on though we've only really had minor changes as evidenced by the NT kernel versions. (XP was 5.1, Vista was 6.0, 8 is 6.2)

Tablets as we know it will never fully take over, they don't have enough performance to replace everything a desktop does (Nor will they ever) and they're awkward to use as part of how they're designed for certain tasks; the only way a tablet will fully take over (Or well, something other than a laptop) is when you can wear it as glasses, even then, we won't be using Metro and will need another type of UI to play to the strengths of thought control. Tablets will have a decent marketshare but won't kill anything else off, nor really push traditional PCs to a niche either. Remember how the laptop was going to kill the desktop? And then the original tablets? And then smartphones? And now tablets, again?

It has no chance, there's people who will stick to laptops and desktops for many reasons or who will merely have both. Read above for some of the reasons.
Where's the jump lists in Windows 8s Start Screen? It's made it fairly less productive for me at least.

That's their fault, Linux does that all the time. Hell, I think even OS X does. They definitely did kernel updates in the Vista SPs, a lot of improvements (iirc) were kernel based.

Vista was stable after SP1; even then it was stable beforehand assuming you didn't run certain companies drivers or were lucky.

Originally Posted by tpi2007 


"If you already have all the updates" ? Well, if you have a fully updated Windows installation you have them installed, but how does that make it any easier to slipstream them into a Windows .ISO ? Unless you download one by one. Is there a page on Microsoft's site that has all the patches since SP1 that you can download at once ? Or you have to download them one by one, and eventually from different pages (each month has a Security Bulletin) ? That is what I'm talking about, it can be done, but it takes a lot more time than if Microsoft were to take the time it needs to do it once and benefit the whole community that would not have to waste that time.

I wasn't familiar with AutoPatcher, and the fact the site seems like it's half dead, they even removed the main page because it contained outdated information, was a deterrent at first and maybe why people don't know it more. I digged in and apparently it seems like it can do part of this job pretty well, so yes, I do think that you should not be presumptuous and do talk about AutoPatcher. I know how to slipstream a service pack - I once slipstreamed Windows XP SP3 onto a Windows XP RTM .ISO I ripped from my installation DVD, but I had no idea AutoPatcher existed, essentially because I haven't had the need.

Rep+ for mentioning AutoPatcher!

Originally Posted by IcedEarth 

So just to conclude this thread.
We hate Windows 7 because there aren't enough problems.
We hate Windows 8 because there are too many problems.
Then computer enthusiasts wonder why companies don't care for our opinion anymore.
We asked for Dark Souls, all we did is have temper tantrums every time they released some information about.
They simply cannot win with us. We're the spoiled brat in the corner who just likes to complain for the sake of complaining.

Originally Posted by Stealth Pyros 


Didn't mean to come across as a prick in my tone; I just don't see the big deal with not having a SP2. It's really not that much effort to download and slipstream all the updates. It might take you 20-30 minutes, but it's going to accomplish the same end result: you can install 7 across hundreds of systems without having to worry about updates (aside from newer updates that weren't available of course). Even if SP2 were to come out, you'd have extra updates to download anyways. AutoPatcher isn't dead at all, they're already working on it for Windows 8 I believe. You can even slipstream THAT onto an ISO and have it automatically launch after Windows is installed and booted; IMO that's the better approach as I prefer a faster Windows installation. You typically have to install and download all kinds of other programs and set up other stuff when you do a fresh install of Windows; might as well have AutoPatcher doing its thing in the background while you do all that. I'd also just have AutoPatcher download all the updates onto a shared drive that all the other systems can just grab the updates from. That way you're not eating up bandwidth downloading with AutoPatcher across all the systems.

Originally Posted by tpi2007 

They have ? Where ? Give me a link.
Does the base Windows 8 version come with Media Center bundled ?
If it does, does that include the DVD codec or is that a separate purchase ?
How much will the base version of Windows 8 cost ?
Does the temporary Windows 8 Pro promotion that allows you to download the Media Center pack contain the DVD codec or you have to pay for it ?
How much will the Media Center Pack and the DVD codec cost ?
I did find this, suggesting that the DVD codec and Media Center are indeed separate packs: