Shaman
Well-known member
It took them 10 years to move off of OS-2.
Windows 8 anyone?
- Thread starter mimico_polak
- Start date
It took them 10 years to move off of OS-2.
Lets call them conservative...
It was OS/2. Let's call them masochists.
The distinction probably grew in importance over time as increasingly sophisticated functions became available remotely online. I guess the old flash games may have been some of the first intances of cloud computing, but making the distinction at that time would have been pointless. No one would have spec'ed a computer based on it's ability to perform such simple function at the time.
The buzzword is more useful for the general public I'd imagine, especially as consumer offerings have grown. With online photo editing, word processing, file storage and so on, the distinction became important as these were functions that previously required a good chunk of computer resources. Isn't it easier to have a word for what you're doing, than not?
Personally "Cloud" means having the information readily available in MULTIPLE locations. A good example of this is CDN (Content Delivery Network). If the information is only available in one location, it is not up in the cloud. When i say multiple location, i don't mean you can access it in multiple locations (Computer, friends computer, mobile phone) but the information itself is not on a single server. e.g. Server 1 of gmail goes down but service still works as usual and is transparent to the user as server2,3,4,5,etc will also have the information readily available, therefore service is not interrupted. Yes it has been like this for awhile but they were usually for enterprises rather than consumers.
We already had a term for that: distributed. IT (probably IT maketing, not engineers) loves to invent new names for old things just to make sure that you are completely confused at all times and buy the newest piece of **** coming down the pipe.
What came immediately to mind, for me, was the SETI@Home project, started in 1999.
Sounds to me like he's talking about redundancy. Neither redundancy nor distributed computing are the same as cloud computing, AFAICT.
Im not talking about Cloud computing, I'm talking about cloud in the ways manufactures have been using the term.
Splash
Well-known member
Shaman
Well-known member
Any of those graphs I can show you the polar opposite from Tom's Hardware and other sources. What's more, there is virtually no difference (either on YOUR article or MY article) between the two. Some completely inconsequential benchmarks are thrown in the mix (like boot time, who boots anymore?) to make Win8 look better, but anyway you cut it.. even if it WAS 5% faster, it's still not faster. Because you can't detect 5% at all.
What you can detect is that you have to deal with three main user interfaces with different dialogues - Modern, WinXX and .Net. You can't really avoid using any of those three, because Microsoft put some features into Modern that aren't in WinXX anymore, because they took them out. So SUBJECTIVELY, Windows 8 is a freaking nightmare to use for those of us who want our OS to stay out of our way and not try to confuse us with multiple interfaces.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-8-gaming-performance,3331-13.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/561-windows8-vs-windows7/page5.html
http://arstechnica.com/information-...r-benches-measuring-windows-8s-performance/2/
What do they all say... I'll save you the time... for the most part, performance is similar to Windows 7.
Oh, and by the way... since you referenced a Ziff Davis report, how much do you want to bet me that Microsoft helped them cherry-pick the tests they knew that had improved, like encoding in THEIR formats using THEIR compiler on THEIR test data? Because that's the way it's been for 25 years with Ziff and Microsoft...
What you can detect is that you have to deal with three main user interfaces with different dialogues - Modern, WinXX and .Net. You can't really avoid using any of those three, because Microsoft put some features into Modern that aren't in WinXX anymore, because they took them out. So SUBJECTIVELY, Windows 8 is a freaking nightmare to use for those of us who want our OS to stay out of our way and not try to confuse us with multiple interfaces.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-8-gaming-performance,3331-13.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/561-windows8-vs-windows7/page5.html
http://arstechnica.com/information-...r-benches-measuring-windows-8s-performance/2/
What do they all say... I'll save you the time... for the most part, performance is similar to Windows 7.
Oh, and by the way... since you referenced a Ziff Davis report, how much do you want to bet me that Microsoft helped them cherry-pick the tests they knew that had improved, like encoding in THEIR formats using THEIR compiler on THEIR test data? Because that's the way it's been for 25 years with Ziff and Microsoft...
Last edited:
From an article i read.
A fresh install of Windows 8 (x86) uses around 10.6 GB of disk space, and Windows 8 (x64) requires around 13 GB of free space.
Poser
Well-known member
Whoa...was gonna think about installing it on my Macbook. Guess the external will have to do.
So how much is a full copy now ?
PSY
Banned
Being a bit of a masochist? Dude, I may not like OS-X at all but at least it has a UI that makes sense. It looks like m$ just followed Space-Coke Mark into insanity.. Didn't they learn from the Unity mess? What's gonna kill w8 on the desktop market is that nobody's gonna be buying it for their companies and people usually use at home what they use at work. I'm glad that m$ released this joke of an operating system. It will popularize the alternatives and seriously bite into its monopoly. In eager anticipation of its success Steam devs cooked up a viable Linux port
PSY
Banned
Being a bit of a masochist? Dude, I may not like OS-X at all but at least it has a UI that makes sense. It looks like m$ just followed Space-Coke Mark into insanity.. Didn't they learn from the Unity mess? What's gonna kill w8 on the desktop market is that nobody's gonna be buying it for their companies and people usually use at home what they use at work. I'm glad that m$ released this joke of an operating system. It will popularize the alternatives and seriously bite into its monopoly. In eager anticipation of its success Steam devs cooked up a viable Linux port
Well why don't the Linux ppl take the best of MS and Apple and make an amazing interface for user experience.
Also Linux needs to work easily when plugged in.
It is still too techie for most.
Feel free to post info on how I can run Linux inside of Win7 or how I can dual boot Linux and Win7. I would want an easy to use interface of Linux (no command line stuff).
Show me what you got
