Windows 8.1 update today [Archive] - Beyond.ca - Car Forums

ipeefreely

04-08-2014, 08:38 PM

Just finished installing it an hour ago... nothing too crazy or anything that makes it easier to use for me... :dunno:

I guess the "big IE feature-add as well as some heavy-lifting internal changes to Windows boot structures and memory/resource awareness and management" are a good thing! :thumbsup:

Another article:blogs.technet (http://blogs.technet.com/b/askpfeplat/archive/2014/04/07/exploring-windows-8-1-update-start-screen-desktop-and-other-enhancements.aspx)

Nothing like a 2GB+ update Tuesday (with the Office 2013 updates)! :rofl:

diamondedge

04-08-2014, 08:38 PM

Heh. Media control already existed in previous versions...and the taskbar? Finally. Start screen stuff is a welcome change.

Dumbass17

04-08-2014, 09:32 PM

i hate windows 8
i had to install a start button on the taskbar immediately.
i dont think i've ever used the tiles or whatever they are called. they are a nuisance and i cannot be bothered to even try them out

anyone like them?:confused:

rage2

04-08-2014, 10:16 PM

I use desktop mode exclusively. I'm getting used to not having a start button, the search in metro mode works well.

I'd use Metro mode more if there were actually good apps. The store is so damn bare.

EK69

04-08-2014, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by rage2
I'd use Metro mode more if there were actually good apps. The store is so damn bare.

i know the store is bare and all, but in case you guys wanted to add shortcuts to whatever app you want in metro mode that normally aren't available to be "pinned" ..

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_8-desktop/add-a-shortcut-to-win-8-start-screen/3727e08e-6dec-45d9-aed8-b746f152ff7b

syscal

04-08-2014, 11:57 PM

I removed pretty much any metro app that was installed except I added Netflix and Hulu.

I regret the day I installed Win8 on my primary machine, but after setting everything up I just can't waste the time putting Win7 back on.

I suppose I'm getting used to it, but Metro IMO is a big waste I wish I could uninstall altogether.

We don't put Win8 at any of our clients, and the ones that have it at home run into issues with IE Metro since it runs in x64. I have to send them screencasts on how to open regular IE.

Did anyone else find it actually harder to find programs after the first 8.1 service pack?

As a reseller, MS has been pissing me off for a few years now. I can't wait for someone else to become an industry standard, but I'm thinking that's still a ways off.

Mar

04-09-2014, 12:41 AM

Is this free or do you have to pay for the upgrade?

syscal

04-09-2014, 12:51 AM

Originally posted by Mar
Is this free or do you have to pay for the upgrade?

it's just an update

Mar

04-09-2014, 01:09 AM

Originally posted by syscal

it's just an update
When they updated from 7 to 8 you had to pay, I don't see what the difference is here. I don't understand why you have to pay for some updates and not others, it doesn't make sense.

firebane

04-09-2014, 02:21 AM

Originally posted by Mar

When they updated from 7 to 8 you had to pay, I don't see what the difference is here. I don't understand why you have to pay for some updates and not others, it doesn't make sense.

From Windows 7 to Windows 8 is a upgrade not a update.

GTS4tw

04-09-2014, 05:49 AM

revelations

04-09-2014, 07:16 AM

Originally posted by syscal
I removed pretty much any metro app that was installed except I added Netflix and Hulu.

I regret the day I installed Win8 on my primary machine, but after setting everything up I just can't waste the time putting Win7 back on.

I suppose I'm getting used to it, but Metro IMO is a big waste I wish I could uninstall altogether.

We don't put Win8 at any of our clients, and the ones that have it at home run into issues with IE Metro since it runs in x64. I have to send them screencasts on how to open regular IE.

Did anyone else find it actually harder to find programs after the first 8.1 service pack?

As a reseller, MS has been pissing me off for a few years now. I can't wait for someone else to become an industry standard, but I'm thinking that's still a ways off.

Classic Shell is your messiah then. Prob the #1 must have hack for W8 right now.

ZEDGE

04-09-2014, 08:18 AM

This update address most of the complaints (from user feedback) and makes it more like traditional desktop windows, aka mouse and kb friendly.

syscal

04-09-2014, 08:31 AM

Originally posted by revelations

Classic Shell is your messiah then. Prob the #1 must have hack for W8 right now.

That's what everyone says, but I don't require a start menu to open programs. A more efficient window manager would be sweet, but the ones for Windows are always over-complicated and awkward.

If I could get something for Windows that works as well as Awesome (http://awesome.naquadah.org/) I'd never leave my desk!

Xtrema

04-09-2014, 08:37 AM

The fact that start menu is coming back that MS knew it fucked up.

It's one thing to fuck up tablets and phones where they don't and won't own in the near future. It's another to fuck with bread and butter.

Then again, I would bet businesses will run on Windows 7 until 2020 comes.

All Windows store are jokes for apps.

Supa Dexta

04-09-2014, 08:58 AM

Yeah the lack of apps is my biggest beef.

A little trash can symbol within a folder would be handy too. when you click a file it puts a check mark on it, so if I had a trash can, it would save me long pressing - I hate the long press for simple shit.

Mar

04-09-2014, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by firebane

From Windows 7 to Windows 8 is a upgrade not a update.
Their marketing has melted your mind, an upgrade and an update are the same thing. When Microsoft created Windows 8 they didn't do it from scratch, they took Windows 7 (simply referred to as their core product) and updated the code to run more efficiently and take advantage of new frameworks. Just because they made the interface different doesn't mean shit, it's still just an update. So I ask again, why do you have to pay for one update and not another? It makes no sense.

GTS4tw

04-09-2014, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by Mar

Their marketing has melted your mind, an upgrade and an update are the same thing. When Microsoft created Windows 8 they didn't do it from scratch, they took Windows 7 (simply referred to as their core product) and updated the code to run more efficiently and take advantage of new frameworks. Just because they made the interface different doesn't mean shit, it's still just an update. So I ask again, why do you have to pay for one update and not another? It makes no sense.

No doubt, its like cars, why would you have to pay for the new model year when you already own the same car? The greedy manufacturer just sticks a different looking body on the same chassis and calls it a new thing? They will fix my recalls for free, why is the new car not free? Holy moly I see why simple things are so confusing for you now....
:rofl:

Disoblige

04-09-2014, 10:35 AM

An upgrade is not the same as an update. I don't even know why this is even worth mentioning.

woodywoodford

04-09-2014, 10:36 AM

I love win8, but HATED it until getting Classic Shell. Now it feels exactly like Win7, with a slightly nicer start menu (ie. you can add custom fields, so have "All Programs", "Office", "Games", "Favorites", whatever) and slightly better personalization features (different wallpapers on dual monitors). Set up classic shell and you'll never see the metro screen again.

Why they ever thought what they did was a good idea for desktop pc's blows my mind.

faiz999

04-09-2014, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by woodywoodford
I love win8, but HATED it until getting Classic Shell. Now it feels exactly like Win7, with a slightly nicer start menu (ie. you can add custom fields, so have "All Programs", "Office", "Games", "Favorites", whatever) and slightly better personalization features (different wallpapers on dual monitors). Set up classic shell and you'll never see the metro screen again.

Why they ever thought what they did was a good idea for desktop pc's blows my mind.

lol had this exact convo with a buddy yesterday, as we installed win 8 on his comp.

i argued msft was trying really hard to make everyone jump into the tablet/ultrabook/touch screen era, but it failed miserably and then they just reverted back to their bread and butter.

Mibz

04-09-2014, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by Supa Dexta
Yeah the lack of apps is my biggest beef.

A little trash can symbol within a folder would be handy too. when you click a file it puts a check mark on it, so if I had a trash can, it would save me long pressing - I hate the long press for simple shit. So use your thumb to press the "right-click" button on the stylus and just tap.

My biggest beef is the lack of middle-click on the stylus. So much harder to browse the internet having to right-click -> "open in new tab" for everything.

bspot

04-09-2014, 12:19 PM

I put 8.1 on my desktop that I built, and after some time with it, I've decided I actually like it, I just wish there was way more for Metro apps.

I like the tile interface for the start button. I can launch the stuff I use 90% of the time way faster, and live tiles save me from launching some stuff.

I like the metro interface for stuff like the reader. I've been doing some courses from home and I like a nearly blank screen for reading PDFs besides the PDF itself.

I wish there would be stuff like Chrome or iTunes written for the metro interface. Even Office... it seems like you should at least have the option. For some tasks I just like the cleaner screen space.

It still feels clunky how you are constantly switching back and forth from the desktop view however. It's been really stable for me though, so far so good.

I've been running OSX the last 5 years and in many ways I'm really glad to have a Windows machine back in the house. OSX really started to piss me off in a lot of ways. I'd still get a MacBook Pro for a laptop though, as nothing beats their trackpad setup.

Mar

04-09-2014, 12:42 PM

Originally posted by GTS4tw

No doubt, its like cars, why would you have to pay for the new model year when you already own the same car? The greedy manufacturer just sticks a different looking body on the same chassis and calls it a new thing? They will fix my recalls for free, why is the new car not free? Holy moly I see why simple things are so confusing for you now....
:rofl:

Explain to me how the upgrade from 7 to 8 is different from the upgrade from 8 to 8.1.

- restyled user experience: check
- improved hardware efficiency: check
- additional driver support: check
- updated source code: check

What am I missing? Probably the only difference is they haven't finished enough sprints to complete an entire development cycle. They could have still easily called the update Windows 9 and charged people for it.

BigDL

04-09-2014, 12:55 PM

Start8 or classic Shell makes Win 8 feel like win 7 to me. Best part of Win 8 for me is having Hyper V on my computer for my test machines.

sabad66

04-09-2014, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by Mar

Explain to me how the upgrade from 7 to 8 is different from the upgrade from 8 to 8.1.

- restyled user experience: check
- improved hardware efficiency: check
- additional driver support: check
- updated source code: check

What am I missing? Probably the only difference is they haven't finished enough sprints to complete an entire development cycle. They could have still easily called the update Windows 9 and charged people for it.
The update is not significant enough to warrant being called an 'upgrade'. They certainly would NOT have gotten away with calling this Win9 because it's basically Win 8.1 with a few minor changes to make it easier on desktop/mouse users.

The naming scheme changes every version of windows. If this was XP or Vista, this would probably be called SP1. Seems they ditched the term 'service pack' so now it's simply called 'Update 1'.

ZEDGE

04-09-2014, 03:28 PM

Set up classic shell and you'll never see the metro screen again.

So its kinda like the new update then? ;)

Is anyone even downloading it? lol

Originally posted by Mar

Explain to me how the upgrade from 7 to 8 is different from the upgrade from 8 to 8.1.

- restyled user experience: check
- improved hardware efficiency: check
- additional driver support: check
- updated source code: check

What am I missing? Probably the only difference is they haven't finished enough sprints to complete an entire development cycle. They could have still easily called the update Windows 9 and charged people for it.

The different version number is enough to make sense to me. Its still Windows 8, not a new version. Just a service pack.

7 to 8 is a new version of windows, therefor you pay. Just like Vista to Windows 7, or Win 98 to Win ME, etc. Not really rocket science. :dunno:

Do you want to pay for it that badly? Send them a cheque.. ;)

snowcat

04-09-2014, 04:44 PM

The update yesterday does not include the new live tile start menu.

I use classic shell until the new start menu is released. I think the tiles are cool in the new menu. It's awesome.

http://techreport.com/news/26292/here-the-new-windows-8-1-start-menu-in-action

firebane

04-09-2014, 05:05 PM

ZEDGE

04-09-2014, 05:09 PM

Mar

04-09-2014, 05:10 PM

Originally posted by sabad66

The update is not significant enough to warrant being called an 'upgrade'. They certainly would NOT have gotten away with calling this Win9 because it's basically Win 8.1 with a few minor changes to make it easier on desktop/mouse users.

The naming scheme changes every version of windows. If this was XP or Vista, this would probably be called SP1. Seems they ditched the term 'service pack' so now it's simply called 'Update 1'.
All I got from this is that they needed to fix some security holes but enough time hasn't passed for them to charge people for it.

Originally posted by ZEDGE

The different version number is enough to make sense to me. Its still Windows 8, not a new version. Just a service pack.

7 to 8 is a new version of windows, therefor you pay. Just like Vista to Windows 7, or Win 98 to Win ME, etc. Not really rocket science. :dunno:
That's my point, I do regular software releases to my customers and I can name a version 7.999 or I can name it version 8. Hell, I can name it version 9, it doesn't matter what I name it. My point is, someone arbitrarily decided this release is going to be called 8.1 while they could have just as easily name it version 9 and charged people $200 for it. Microsoft is always making updates to their software but randomly, at some point in time decided by upper management, they'll decide, "Okay, this release is going to be considered a 'new version' and we're going to charge people for it." There's nothing to distinguish it from the version before it and the version before that.

For anyone that doesn't know, versions are always getting incremented, there isn't just a version 7 and version 8, there are probably 50 versions in between there and they get released as service packs. So if you're on the latest Windows 7, you're probably on version 7.78 or whatever they deem it to be and you got all those 50 updates for free. But ooooooooohhhhhhh, this one specific update which someone named version 8 you have to pay for........that's nonsense. Why this update? Why not the last one or the one before that? It's randomly decided based on nothing. Microsoft suckers people into paying for this specific update.

ZEDGE

04-09-2014, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by Mar

All I got from this is that they needed to fix some security holes but enough time hasn't passed for them to charge people for it.

That's my point, I do regular software releases to my customers and I can name a version 7.999 or I can name it version 8. Hell, I can name it version 9, it doesn't matter what I name it. My point is, someone arbitrarily decided this release is going to be called 8.1 while they could have just as easily name it version 9 and charged people $200 for it. Microsoft is always making updates to their software but randomly, at some point in time decided by upper management, they'll decide, "Okay, this release is going to be considered a 'new version' and we're going to charge people for it." There's nothing to distinguish it from the version before it and the version before that.

For anyone that doesn't know, versions are always getting incremented, there isn't just a version 7 and version 8, there are probably 50 versions in between there and they get released as service packs. So if you're on the latest Windows 7, you're probably on version 7.78 or whatever they deem it to be and you got all those 50 updates for free. But ooooooooohhhhhhh, this one specific update which someone named version 8 you have to pay for........that's nonsense. Why this update? Why not the last one or the one before that? It's randomly decided based on nothing. Microsoft suckers people into paying for this specific update.

I still don't quite understand what your issue is. Are you unhappy this is a free update, do you want to pay?

There is much more than security holes being fixed here, there are pretty significant UI changes, even more to come still.

Mar

04-09-2014, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by ZEDGE

I still don't quite understand what your issue is. Are you unhappy this is a free update, do you want to pay?

There is much more than security holes being fixed here, there are pretty significant UI changes, even more to come still.
No, just confused, I realize now I may have derailed too much. Not really the point of the thread, I'll let it go as it doesn't really matter. It just doesn't make any sense to me, kind of the same way the Xbox confuses me. Microsoft has always had a perfectly good gaming machine......it's called a computer. Then they go and make a console for........gaming......with a computer inside. I don't get it, does this confuse anyone else? Anyway, I guess it doesn't matter.

syscal

04-09-2014, 06:20 PM

Originally posted by Mar

No, just confused, I realize now I may have derailed too much. Not really the point of the thread, I'll let it go as it doesn't really matter. It just doesn't make any sense to me, kind of the same way the Xbox confuses me. Microsoft has always had a perfectly good gaming machine......it's called a computer. Then they go and make a console for........gaming......with a computer inside. I don't get it, does this confuse anyone else? Anyway, I guess it doesn't matter.

Omg Mar. Go take a nap or something.

cyra1ax

04-09-2014, 07:33 PM

Originally posted by snowcat
The update yesterday does not include the new live tile start menu.

I use classic shell until the new start menu is released. I think the tiles are cool in the new menu. It's awesome.

http://techreport.com/news/26292/here-the-new-windows-8-1-start-menu-in-action

That actually looks REALLY good. Might have to get an "evaluation" copy to try out on my desktop once it launches. Would work wonders for my non-touch Windows 8 laptop too. It actually looks better than the two start menu alternatives, Classic Shell and Start8.

Metro mode is an absolute nuisance and just a terrible experience without a touch screen IMO. It's obviously not geared towards the mouse+kb crowd and it shows. That being said, put a touch screen into the picture and things change dramatically. I recently got a Sony Vaio Flip that comes with a touch screen and absolutely love using Metro mode. Only thing I wished was that more programs were written for Metro mode, like iTunes(probably will never happen) or Microsoft Office. Honestly, I'm surprised there isn't a Metro mode for Office, there's just a button in the menu that says "Optimize for touch" or something to that effect.

As a whole, I think Windows 8 is a better operating system than Windows 7, however the way that Microsoft decided to do things will probably relegate Windows 8 to the same sort of status that Vista had. There's already too much negative stigma associated with Windows 8(some deserved, while some issues have been resolved) and I think that Microsoft won't be able to change that until they begin work on Windows 9.

Xtrema

04-09-2014, 08:38 PM

Ok guys, Mar do have a point (to a degree) that versioning is arbitrary.

NT is 3.x and 4.x
2000 to 2003 is 5.x
Vista/2008 and beyond including all Windows 8 is 6.x

So kernel wise, we only gone thru 4 major versions in almost 20 years.

But cash flow wise, consumer and business market is very different.

Business usually pay some sort of yearly maintenance so there is cash flow to support all the cost of support an operating system. So versioning and paying for them isn't that critical as there is already established cash flow.

Consumer usually just pay once and like XP, run on it for almost 10 years and enjoy free support for most of those years. So it's critical to artificially change versions to get consumers to buy new hardware and new OS in short cycle is critical for cash flow.

That said, 7 is a huge performance improvement over Vista. 8 is a minor performance improvement over 7 but suppose to be the next great UI. But as expected, it's a slightly better MS Bob. 8.1 is free and basically start of MS of apologetic tour and undoing of Modern UI.

syscal

04-09-2014, 09:28 PM

And only the most elite of computer users are willing to fork out bucks for a minor hardware and/or software update every few months *cough mac fanboys cough*

Xtrema

04-09-2014, 09:48 PM

rage2

04-09-2014, 09:56 PM

Originally posted by syscal
And only the most elite of computer users are willing to fork out bucks for a minor hardware and/or software update every few months *cough mac fanboys cough*

Originally posted by Xtrema
Microsoft now wants to do the same thing, yearly OS releases, instead of 3 years.

3 years is already aggressive as business cycle goes.
Tying release cycles to revenue is so 2000. It's all about recurring revenue now. On the corp side, we're not allowed to buy Microsoft licenses anymore, we have to pay monthly under SPLA because we're a service provider. We were forced to give up all our owned licenses and converted to monthly units. On the consumer side, Office 365 has rolled out as a subscription based service. Everything will follow in the next few years, including OS's.

syscal

04-09-2014, 10:00 PM

Originally posted by rage2
Tying release cycles to revenue is so 2000. It's all about recurring revenue now. On the corp side, we're not allowed to buy Microsoft licenses anymore, we have to pay monthly under SPLA because we're a service provider. We were forced to give up all our owned licenses and converted to monthly units. On the consumer side, Office 365 has rolled out as a subscription based service. Everything will follow in the next few years, including OS's.

Agreed, we do SPLA and VSPP and are starting to replace our old License + Software Assurance with Office365 where we can with clients. Monthly whenever possible for any product is low risk and the profit isn't bad.

syscal

04-09-2014, 10:02 PM

Originally posted by Xtrema

Microsoft now wants to do the same thing, yearly OS releases, instead of 3 years.

3 years is already aggressive as business cycle goes.

This will only work for consumers. I have no plans on moving our clients off Win7. There's just no reason to.

Mar

04-09-2014, 10:46 PM

Originally posted by Xtrema
Ok guys, Mar do have a point (to a degree) that versioning is arbitrary.

NT is 3.x and 4.x
2000 to 2003 is 5.x
Vista/2008 and beyond including all Windows 8 is 6.x

So kernel wise, we only gone thru 4 major versions in almost 20 years.

But cash flow wise, consumer and business market is very different.

Business usually pay some sort of yearly maintenance so there is cash flow to support all the cost of support an operating system. So versioning and paying for them isn't that critical as there is already established cash flow.

Consumer usually just pay once and like XP, run on it for almost 10 years and enjoy free support for most of those years. So it's critical to artificially change versions to get consumers to buy new hardware and new OS in short cycle is critical for cash flow.

That said, 7 is a huge performance improvement over Vista. 8 is a minor performance improvement over 7 but suppose to be the next great UI. But as expected, it's a slightly better MS Bob. 8.1 is free and basically start of MS of apologetic tour and undoing of Modern UI.
Exactly what I was getting at.

Originally posted by Xtrema

Microsoft now wants to do the same thing, yearly OS releases, instead of 3 years.

3 years is already aggressive as business cycle goes.
Canonical does it every 6 months and they give it away for free.

Xtrema

04-11-2014, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by Mar

Canonical does it every 6 months and they give it away for free.

Different business model. You can't charge on open source software. They just want to support the open source community and be on the ground level then charges on for services on top.

eblend

04-11-2014, 12:50 PM

Think a few people in this post are confused with this new update and it seems like some still talking about the original 8.1 update, versus this new update on top of 8.1

Regardless, got the update installed on 3 of my win 8.1 devices yesterday and so far I like it a lot. Minimizing to the task bar is probably the best feature as it bring the desktop and metro apps closer together. I got used to using the metro interface while using my dell venue 8 pro on my recent japan trip, and actually like some of them, so its so much easier to use now than before, where it felt like there were 2, completely separate worlds.

I also initially didn't like Windows 8 but they have improved it a ton now. Using windows 7 just feels old now. I run 8.1 at work (I am testing it....) and got the patch installed just yesterday, but all our users are still on 7, so whenever I have to go to anyone else's computer for whatever reason, I start to get lost haha. Thanks god windows XP is out of the windows almost 1.5 years ago, using XP now feels like I am back to Win 3.1

When I was in Japan I used the metro interface pretty much exclusively as it is much easier on a touch device, and it made me understand why Microsoft released it, and I actually liked it, lack of apps is a concern that's for sure though. I also noticed, and I haven't tested this fully yet, but when I installed this update onto my venue 8, the power button in the start menu, right click capabilities, and minimize to desktop all were unavailable still, I think if you don't have the keyboard or a mouse those features don't show up and you are still on the old all touch interface. Anyone got a tablet device that can confirm this for me? The update is definitely installed, just looks no different than it did before on an all touch device. Going to plug in a USB keyboard and mouse into it tonight to see if those interface changes pop up. My dell laptop also has a touchscreen and definitely has the interface changes, so it may be a pure touch screen device only that doesn't get these changes.