The computers get faster and the software gets slower. Tale as old as time.
* as old as unix time
Not sure why it would be unexpected? 8.1 was not a good OS from a UI perspective, but it was the last version before Microsoft went all in on making Windows a service and not a product you paid to use.
They still had the incentive to make the OS better and faster. I remember videos from Microsoft at the time showing how fast Windows 8 could get to the desktop compared to 7. They don’t really even try to work on stuff like that anymore.
I basically jumped from XP to 8.1 and I was amazed at how much of an improvement 8.1 was on a technical level. Yes, the UI was horrendous, and any usability expert should have been able to tell you it was a terrible idea, but apparently they weren’t listened to. Luckily there was Classic Shell that restored a proper Start Menu, so I never had to use the horrible touch interface.
8.1 was the last good Windows (with caveats). When support ended I went back to Linux, because 10 and 11 are enshittified to all hell.
Windows 8 also had to run on atom CPUs with dire CPU performance and even more dire memory configs. So even once it was booted it needed to be relatively slim and quick. I actually preferred it at the time because it was faster than 7.
I miss the Intel Atom, not because I wanted to use it, but because of the positive impact it had on big tech and software bloat. I wish we could bring it back, but it seems nowadays, even Chromebooks have 16 GB of RAM and an i5.
Current RAM shortage will bring good old days back :)
For Linux maybe, MS is part of the data center funding circle jerk and doesn’t want you to compute anywhere they can’t scrape it for training data.
Yes, but computers are still made and computers need ram
Windows 8 was where Microsoft went all-in on optimizing Windows to run on low-power tablets to compete with the iPad. It’s mostly remembered for the terrible tablet-first full-screen “start menu”, but also continued the work to trim away all the Vista bloat that had started with Windows 7 (where the motivation was to make it work on netbooks so they could finally stop shipping XP)
all the Vista bloat that had started with Windows 7
The fuck?? Vista predates Win7, that sentence makes no sense
Windows 7 was based on Vista, and started the job of trimming away Vista’s bloat, which 8 continued.
Aha, well it’s a very ambiguous phrasing that is used.
Ambiguous, yes; very ambiguous, though, sounds like you’re preemptively dodging any blame for misreading :P
Seems like every hardware upgrade just makes software worse because they can just brute force it.
Optimization?
What’s that?
Saw this video on YouTube a few days ago, it’s really interesting. Seemed like XP, 7 and (somehow 8.1) ran pretty good. Here’s the video for anyone wanting to see it :P https://youtu.be/7VZJO-hOT4c
Tho while 8 may be more performant, it’s also less usable imo. Would like to see how this stacks up with different OSs!
Windows 8.1 was great. My favourite iteration of Windows ever.
Yes officer, this comment right here.
[Screaming in linux]
I have fond memories of Windows XP working well.
Do not have fond memories of the multi-dvd game installations, but I still have my library of physical games. :)
Nothing sucked more than buying a used game only for it to ask for disc 5 to be inserted to continue, when it only came with 4!
Oh, true, but back then game companies would sell you those single disks you needed. My copy of Baldur’s Gate 2 was missing one that I was able to replace for a few bucks.
In hindsight, I kinda miss the awesome customer service that used to exist.
There’s a circle in hell for game publishers that only wrote “disc 1” on a CD or DVD (or floppy, back in the day) and not “disc 1 of 3”. I think it’s the one where they have to wade forever in shit.
Multi dvd? Those are from 2007 and later, iirc. Multiple cds were common by 2000 already, tho
And before that, there were games that spanned multiple floppies. Plus, floppies were less reliable, so there was a higher chance one of the disks would fail to read, leading to the Retry, Fail, Abort menu.
They were only 1.44MB so a 50GB game would take like 40k floppies.
At first: Stop posting Tomshardware! They just bulk repost ad-enriched low quality clickbait content without validating anything (cough 9700X3D). Just post the original video.
As the video creator said in it’s disclaimer, the test is probably not accurate:
- I’m having serious doubts about the test setup. The laptops are all on a carpet directly facing a wall. There is a 0% chance that this is using proper air circulation and this will likely effect heat dissipation.
- Some tests (e.g. Video editing, Battery life) are extremly hardware dependent and shouldn’t be used in a OS comparison.
Okay but can’t we just post an article?
Why does everything need to be a video? I am more sick of Everything needs to be a video then I am of This meeting could’ve be an email.
I think their main issue lies with Tomshardware, not the medium of an article
i still like 7 better
7 was peak
