Political Crossfire Forums

Got a steal of a deal on Ebay for a laptop that came with 8.1 loaded. I thought something may have been wrong with it initially because it would hang randomly and some of the programs would crash immediately after opening. Ran 10 hours of prime95 testing on cpu/memory with no errors. Ran some vidcard tests as well (apu processor) with no errors there either.

Linux seemed to be running perfectly fine as well so I loaded Windows 7 onto a partition and installed/updated and not a single f**k problem. I am going to go ahead and create a backup disk of 8.1 in case I need to reinstall it for some bizarre reason but safe to say 8.1 is the new Vista and still blows chunks.

Also, 8.1 is just extremely frustrating to use as a technical person. The placement of everything is just so damn retarded. I refuse to use it =P

oh it was this laptop btw:

http://www.walmart.com/ip/34206231?wmls ... 52&veh=sem

got it for $295. looks brand new - not even a smudge on it.

I'm not having problems with it being unstable. I just hate the fact that it feels like a Fisher-Price computer. As if it's some kind of a toy instead of an actual computer. As far as stability it's always been rock solid and also starts up quickly and is pretty snappy.

Its possible its some of the bloatware in win8 but I dunno. Its a Dell and I uninstalled all of the bloat I found. I guess I can try reinstalling win8 without the dell shit but I don't see the point since win7 and Linux run flawlessly. I don't see how its possible its an issue with the hardware when it runs fine with 2 other operating systems.

I think it's hilarious that you guys have convictions about Windows. "I just hate the fact that it feels like a Fisher-Price computer," lol. You're using an OS literally designed for the lowest common denominator, that has been awful for well over a decade.

Again, it's not monolithic. A Chevy cavalier is still a cavalier. 7 and 8 on the other hand are entirely different. It's probably more accurate to compare the cavalier with a Cadillac CTS. Both made by GM, but otherwise totally unrelated. Windows just gets a bad rap because it's generic; it's the most common operating system. Personally I feel that Windows 7 is frankly superior to any other operating system out there. The only one that comes close is OS X. Linux is of course in the mix, but it lacks mainstream ease of use and of course software support. I've been running Windows 7 on my NAS for nearly a year without even so much as a reboot. It's rock solid. It also powers all of our workstations at the office with nary a problem. I think Microsoft was scared of its success, and feared it getting entrenched the same way windows XP did, which is why they went as wild as they did with 8, at least in part.

I think people have problems with windows because they buy off-the-shelf PCs with crappy components and bloatware. Microsoft needs to protect its brand better. Apple on the other hand, can specifically choose optimized software and hardware.

Explain the differences between Windows 7 and 8, from the perspective of a consumer, without referring to Metro.

If you have to negate the most glaring difference from the start, you already know you've lost.
That would be like comparing a white and red pizza without mentioning sauce or toppings. The most important part of any operating system is the interface. So why are we not allowed to talk about the interface? It's 80% of everything that's wrong with the operating system. What else am I supposed to talk about? The fact that ARM support is built into the kernel, which fragments it across X86 and ARM? The entire flawed design concept behind putting a tablet OS on the desktop in the first place?

Metro is exactly the thing the consumers have rejected.