ASUS Maximus VI Extreme Z87 motherboard review
ASUS GeForce GTX 780 DirectCU II OC review
Fractal Design Arc Midi R2 review
Corsair Vengeance K70 review
MSI GeForce GTX 770 Lightning review
EVGA GeForce GTX 770 SC review
Plextor M5M 256GB mSATA SSD review
AMD A10 6800K review
SanDisk Extreme II 120 - 240 and 480 GB SSD review
ASUS Sabertooth Z87 motherboard review
More info on Windows Blue
Even though Windows 8 has only been on the market for a short time we already know Microsoft is hard at work on the next version of the OS. The project is codenamed "Windows Blue" and is expected to launch next summer bringing improvements and new features to Windows 8 as well as debuting a new yearly update cycle for Microsoft's OS.
There now seems to be a bit more info on the next version of Windows due to someone that posted on a Taiwanese forum. Members of that forum have identified the user as a Microsoft official so there might be some truth to what he's saying but of course you should take this with a grain of salt.
He is supposedly running an alpha version of the next Windows with the version number 9622. Surprisingly he calls this Windows 9 though judging from that version number ( currently Windows 8 is at 9200 ) we think he's actually talking about Windows Blue, which is supposed to retain the Windows 8 branding once it hits markets.
According to him this next version of Windows will keep the Metro visuals and Start Screen, so no surprises there. However, we are expecting some changes, with users being able to customize their Start Screen more easily with more resizable tiles a la Windows Phone 8.
Another tidbit of info on the UI front is that the Desktop will still be present but it will undergo even more flattening, so perhaps the taskbar will finally stop being translucent and the whole thing will be a bit more cohesive.
Lastly he mentions there will be an update to the kernel which will reach version 6.3. Windows Blue is supposed to bring a few deep changes to the OS and upgrading the kernel does indeed fit the bill.
More info on Far Cry 2 DRM - 10/16/2008 09:00 AM
A hot topic recently are the viral like DRM protections software houses insert into games. Ubisoft has confirmed that the PC its open-world shooter Far Cry 2, will use a slightly different configurati...
More Info on Lucid's flexibele multi-gpu-technologie - 08/23/2008 08:34 AM
At IDF Lucid technology (heavily invested by Intel) demonstrated it's
Ven0m
Maha Guru
Posts: 1038
Joined: 2005-08-12
Maha Guru
Posts: 1038
Joined: 2005-08-12
#4487943 Posted on: 12/27/2012 08:49 AM
I'm not sure what to think about such "disclosure" - basically anyone could make it up and post, as there are no details except for "version numbers", and all the general information could be told a year ago.
I'm not sure what to think about such "disclosure" - basically anyone could make it up and post, as there are no details except for "version numbers", and all the general information could be told a year ago.
PhazeDelta1
Ancient Guru
Posts: 9534
Joined: 2010-09-12
Ancient Guru
Posts: 9534
Joined: 2010-09-12
#4487947 Posted on: 12/27/2012 08:55 AM
I'm using an alpha version of Windows Green.
see what i did there???
I'm using an alpha version of Windows Green.
see what i did there???
Tat3
Ancient Guru
Posts: 11029
Joined: 2006-11-30
Ancient Guru
Posts: 11029
Joined: 2006-11-30
#4487982 Posted on: 12/27/2012 10:54 AM
Most of that sounds good, but I'm not sure about this one yet...
If they are going to sell upgrade to next OS for $15 or so then I suppose it might be fine, but I kinda liked this current theme and not upgrade every year a bit, but take few years and make bigger upgrade to OS. This yearly upgrade stuff reminds me about some other company who also makes operating systems for their own computers and phones, cant be bothered to remember what the name of that company was.
Most of that sounds good, but I'm not sure about this one yet...
debuting a new yearly update cycle for Microsoft's OS.
If they are going to sell upgrade to next OS for $15 or so then I suppose it might be fine, but I kinda liked this current theme and not upgrade every year a bit, but take few years and make bigger upgrade to OS. This yearly upgrade stuff reminds me about some other company who also makes operating systems for their own computers and phones, cant be bothered to remember what the name of that company was.
styka
Master Guru
Posts: 288
Joined: 2006-02-28
Master Guru
Posts: 288
Joined: 2006-02-28
#4487991 Posted on: 12/27/2012 11:10 AM
Most of that sounds good, but I'm not sure about this one yet...
If they are going to sell upgrade to next OS for $15 or so then I suppose it might be fine, but I kinda liked this current theme and not upgrade every year a bit, but take few years and make bigger upgrade to OS. This yearly upgrade stuff reminds me about some other company who also makes operating systems for their own computers and phones, cant be bothered to remember what the name of that company was.
Is it the Annoying Orange ??
Most of that sounds good, but I'm not sure about this one yet...
If they are going to sell upgrade to next OS for $15 or so then I suppose it might be fine, but I kinda liked this current theme and not upgrade every year a bit, but take few years and make bigger upgrade to OS. This yearly upgrade stuff reminds me about some other company who also makes operating systems for their own computers and phones, cant be bothered to remember what the name of that company was.
Is it the Annoying Orange ??
Sash
Ancient Guru
Posts: 7068
Joined: 2004-04-25
Ancient Guru
Posts: 7068
Joined: 2004-04-25
#4487996 Posted on: 12/27/2012 11:29 AM
if they fix the metro ui, i will get it
if they fix the metro ui, i will get it
scoter man1
Ancient Guru
Posts: 3443
Joined: 2008-12-09
Ancient Guru
Posts: 3443
Joined: 2008-12-09
#4488234 Posted on: 12/27/2012 07:34 PM
I really wish they'd drop the whole being good for both tablets and desktops at the same time thing.
I really wish they'd drop the whole being good for both tablets and desktops at the same time thing.
Loophole35
Maha Guru
Posts: 1927
Joined: 2011-09-21
Maha Guru
Posts: 1927
Joined: 2011-09-21
#4488241 Posted on: 12/27/2012 07:43 PM
If they are going to sell upgrade to next OS for $15 or so then I suppose it might be fine, but I kinda liked this current theme and not upgrade every year a bit, but take few years and make bigger upgrade to the OS.
Sounds kinda like what Apple does with their OS as of recently every year there is a new OSX out.
If they are going to sell upgrade to next OS for $15 or so then I suppose it might be fine, but I kinda liked this current theme and not upgrade every year a bit, but take few years and make bigger upgrade to the OS.
Sounds kinda like what Apple does with their OS as of recently every year there is a new OSX out.
deltatux
Moderator
Posts: 18944
Joined: 2009-01-25
Moderator
Posts: 18944
Joined: 2009-01-25
#4488249 Posted on: 12/27/2012 07:57 PM
After using Windows 8 for a while, there are things I love and hate about the "Metro UI" on my desktop. I like how I can have some of the Metro apps which are useful for things like mail, but I still think that Microsoft could have done this better and only activate the Start Screen if it detects a touch panel.
deltatux
After using Windows 8 for a while, there are things I love and hate about the "Metro UI" on my desktop. I like how I can have some of the Metro apps which are useful for things like mail, but I still think that Microsoft could have done this better and only activate the Start Screen if it detects a touch panel.
deltatux
ScoobyDooby
Ancient Guru
Posts: 5261
Joined: 2004-10-01
Ancient Guru
Posts: 5261
Joined: 2004-10-01
#4488277 Posted on: 12/27/2012 08:49 PM
After using Windows 8 for a while, there are things I love and hate about the "Metro UI" on my desktop. I like how I can have some of the Metro apps which are useful for things like mail, but I still think that Microsoft could have done this better and only activate the Start Screen if it detects a touch panel.
deltatux
Anyone who uses Windows 8 whether they like it or not I'm sure will admit MS could have done many things better... maybe people who like it may be a bit more tough to convince, but it seems fairly obvious to most computer users that I've spoken with at least. Sounds to me like most users have some beef with it big or small..
I personally don't use it because I find it clumsy and most of the "improvements" are unnecessary. Seems like MS finally has gotten to that point where they are making changes nobody asked for and trying to sell it like its new and impoved where its anything but.
Just hoping that the next iteration will feature some point to upgrade with some actual productive changes/updates to the os. Win 8 makes me feel the same way I do about Iphone 5.. which to me is not much of an upgrade over Iphone 4s.
After using Windows 8 for a while, there are things I love and hate about the "Metro UI" on my desktop. I like how I can have some of the Metro apps which are useful for things like mail, but I still think that Microsoft could have done this better and only activate the Start Screen if it detects a touch panel.
deltatux
Anyone who uses Windows 8 whether they like it or not I'm sure will admit MS could have done many things better... maybe people who like it may be a bit more tough to convince, but it seems fairly obvious to most computer users that I've spoken with at least. Sounds to me like most users have some beef with it big or small..
I personally don't use it because I find it clumsy and most of the "improvements" are unnecessary. Seems like MS finally has gotten to that point where they are making changes nobody asked for and trying to sell it like its new and impoved where its anything but.
Just hoping that the next iteration will feature some point to upgrade with some actual productive changes/updates to the os. Win 8 makes me feel the same way I do about Iphone 5.. which to me is not much of an upgrade over Iphone 4s.
deltatux
Moderator
Posts: 18944
Joined: 2009-01-25
Moderator
Posts: 18944
Joined: 2009-01-25
#4488285 Posted on: 12/27/2012 08:54 PM
I don't think a lot of people especially companies are going to like the idea of yearly upgrades. I still know a lot of companies having issues migrating to 7 and still stuck on XP because their in-house software just won't run on 7 properly without a significant re-write, especially if they are designed poorly.
deltatux
I don't think a lot of people especially companies are going to like the idea of yearly upgrades. I still know a lot of companies having issues migrating to 7 and still stuck on XP because their in-house software just won't run on 7 properly without a significant re-write, especially if they are designed poorly.
deltatux
ScoobyDooby
Ancient Guru
Posts: 5261
Joined: 2004-10-01
Ancient Guru
Posts: 5261
Joined: 2004-10-01
#4488288 Posted on: 12/27/2012 08:59 PM
I don't think a lot of people especially companies are going to like the idea of yearly upgrades. I still know a lot of companies having issues migrating to 7 and still stuck on XP because their in-house software just won't run on 7 properly without a significant re-write, especially if they are designed poorly.
deltatux
Indeed I am finding this all the time.. particularly when it comes to SQL and database/client incompatibility.. either you stick with Xp or you Upgrade to server 2008+ and windows 7.. this however can be extremely costly so companies tend to shy away from the expense. Yet at the same time their network environment and software ages day by day and sooner or later starts to degrade and can't handle the load.. see it all the time... and I am only talking SQL, not even mentioned the litany of other customized apps that companies could potentially be running..
I don't think a lot of people especially companies are going to like the idea of yearly upgrades. I still know a lot of companies having issues migrating to 7 and still stuck on XP because their in-house software just won't run on 7 properly without a significant re-write, especially if they are designed poorly.
deltatux
Indeed I am finding this all the time.. particularly when it comes to SQL and database/client incompatibility.. either you stick with Xp or you Upgrade to server 2008+ and windows 7.. this however can be extremely costly so companies tend to shy away from the expense. Yet at the same time their network environment and software ages day by day and sooner or later starts to degrade and can't handle the load.. see it all the time... and I am only talking SQL, not even mentioned the litany of other customized apps that companies could potentially be running..
WindtalkerCS
Master Guru
Posts: 386
Joined: 2004-05-12
Master Guru
Posts: 386
Joined: 2004-05-12
#4488289 Posted on: 12/27/2012 08:59 PM
I don't think a lot of people especially companies are going to like the idea of yearly upgrades. I still know a lot of companies having issues migrating to 7 and still stuck on XP because their in-house software just won't run on 7 properly without a significant re-write, especially if they are designed poorly.
deltatux
I can't speak for most companies but for my company I would definitely jump on board with yearly updates. The problem with OS's for me is that they are so spread out and so different that it takes forever to test everything and every work flow since there are so many changes. With yearly updates things would happen a bit slower, with less differences from version to version, less of an upset to the overall workflow. It would allow me to keep up to date without having to dedicate as much time as I do to OS upgrades.
I don't think a lot of people especially companies are going to like the idea of yearly upgrades. I still know a lot of companies having issues migrating to 7 and still stuck on XP because their in-house software just won't run on 7 properly without a significant re-write, especially if they are designed poorly.
deltatux
I can't speak for most companies but for my company I would definitely jump on board with yearly updates. The problem with OS's for me is that they are so spread out and so different that it takes forever to test everything and every work flow since there are so many changes. With yearly updates things would happen a bit slower, with less differences from version to version, less of an upset to the overall workflow. It would allow me to keep up to date without having to dedicate as much time as I do to OS upgrades.
deltatux
Moderator
Posts: 18944
Joined: 2009-01-25
Moderator
Posts: 18944
Joined: 2009-01-25
#4488291 Posted on: 12/27/2012 09:03 PM
Ya, from experience, it's the DB backend that causes an issue. Rarely is it running the actual front-end being the issue.
That might depend on how significant the changes Microsoft is going to make and depends on the company. There are many factors that will factor into a company's willingness to upgrade. They also have to factor in the cost.
Plus, if companies, especially upper management don't see any difference, they won't budget these yearly upgrades if they cost money because to them, if Microsoft keeps the Windows 8 branding, they'd be wondering why they need to pay for a minor upgrade and rather skip it. These corporate brass don't know that there will be changes underneath.
deltatux
Indeed I am finding this all the time.. particularly when it comes to SQL and database/client incompatibility.. either you stick with Xp or you Upgrade to server 2008+ and windows 7.. this however can be extremely costly so companies tend to shy away from the expense. Yet at the same time their network environment and software ages day by day and sooner or later starts to degrade and can't handle the load.. see it all the time... and I am only talking SQL, not even mentioned the litany of other customized apps that companies could potentially be running..
Ya, from experience, it's the DB backend that causes an issue. Rarely is it running the actual front-end being the issue.
I can't speak for most companies but for my company I would definitely jump on board with yearly updates. The problem with OS's for me is that they are so spread out and so different that it takes forever to test everything and every work flow since there are so many changes. With yearly updates things would happen a bit slower, with less differences from version to version, less of an upset to the overall workflow. It would allow me to keep up to date without having to dedicate as much time as I do to OS upgrades.
That might depend on how significant the changes Microsoft is going to make and depends on the company. There are many factors that will factor into a company's willingness to upgrade. They also have to factor in the cost.
Plus, if companies, especially upper management don't see any difference, they won't budget these yearly upgrades if they cost money because to them, if Microsoft keeps the Windows 8 branding, they'd be wondering why they need to pay for a minor upgrade and rather skip it. These corporate brass don't know that there will be changes underneath.
deltatux
Kaleid
Maha Guru
Posts: 2021
Joined: 2004-02-02
Maha Guru
Posts: 2021
Joined: 2004-02-02
#4488332 Posted on: 12/27/2012 09:52 PM
I don't think a lot of people especially companies are going to like the idea of yearly upgrades. I still know a lot of companies having issues migrating to 7 and still stuck on XP because their in-house software just won't run on 7 properly without a significant re-write, especially if they are designed poorly.
deltatux
Agreed, and it should be hellish for MS too, updating so many operative systems.
I don't think a lot of people especially companies are going to like the idea of yearly upgrades. I still know a lot of companies having issues migrating to 7 and still stuck on XP because their in-house software just won't run on 7 properly without a significant re-write, especially if they are designed poorly.
deltatux
Agreed, and it should be hellish for MS too, updating so many operative systems.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Ancient Guru
Posts: 11666
Joined: 2007-11-01
bah..