Jump to content

Windows 7 Vs Windows 8?


stayinwonderland
 Share

Recommended Posts

There is a soon to be out new version for Windows 8 = Windows 8.1 http://www.techradar.com/news/software/operating-systems/windows-blue-update-to-build-on-and-improve-windows-8-1131737

 

Perhaps this new version will address all this issues between windows 8 and Arch Vis software that many people mention.

 

A little off topic, but does Max 2012 works well with Windows 7 64bit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have had no problems on Windows 8...but as said above Windows 7 works perfectly and requires no re-learning.

 

I do think it is inevitable that anyone wishing to keep up with technology will eventually have to learn how to function in the new versions of Windows or be left behind, so it really is up to each person to gauge when it would be best to introduce that hurdle to their workflow. I personally use Windows 7 at work and Windows 8 at home and on my tablets so that I can acclimate in a non-critical environment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think it is inevitable that anyone wishing to keep up with technology will eventually have to learn how to function in the new versions of Windows or be left behind

 

Just like Windows Vista?! How many people stuck with good old XP and went straight to Windows 7, skipping merrily past the car crash that was Vista? I can see history repeating itself here to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just like Windows Vista?! How many people stuck with good old XP and went straight to Windows 7, skipping merrily past the car crash that was Vista? I can see history repeating itself here to be honest.

 

I used Vista for a long time and only had problems with it early on. In fact there were very few differences between Vista and 7 once 7 was launched. XP Pro 64 was a car crash compared to Vista 64 if you ask me.

 

And history is repeating itself. Microsoft stumbles a little at launch with a drastically different OS, the mob get's angry and begins their campaign to make sure that every individual on earth is well aware of the issues with the new OS. In the meantime and without much fanfare Microsoft and partner developers fix the issues and the mob continues to reiterate how bad the new OS was when it launched while ignoring that the situation is improving. Years later the mob will continue to downplay the "bad" version of the OS while being perfectly content using the result of it that simply has a new version number slapped on the box.

 

Windows 7 did introduce some nice, new features, but most of the core credit for Windows 7's awesomeness belongs to Vista, the early criticism, and to developers and users that were willing to keep pushing forward rather than falling back to the safety net of XP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting to hear from a Vista user, I did skip it.

 

However I do hear what you are saying regarding the product development of Windows after its release, but I always feel the software (no matter who / what is released) should be 100% ready, and we shouldn't have to rely or expect service packs a few months after release in order for the product to work properly. Don't get me wrong, Microsoft isn't the only company to do this, Autodesk are terrible for releasing software, then several updates and service packs in the following months to bring their software to the level at which it should have been at release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting to hear from a Vista user, I did skip it.

 

However I do hear what you are saying regarding the product development of Windows after its release, but I always feel the software (no matter who / what is released) should be 100% ready, and we shouldn't have to rely or expect service packs a few months after release in order for the product to work properly. Don't get me wrong, Microsoft isn't the only company to do this, Autodesk are terrible for releasing software, then several updates and service packs in the following months to bring their software to the level at which it should have been at release.

 

I agree that it would be nice for software to be 100% complete and bug-free before it is released, but this is a result of the world we live in now.

 

Developers are able to take many more risks without quite as much consequence in an ecosystem that allows updating. It also means less time testing before it can be in customers hands since the customers are much more likely to be pushing their product harder and farther than anything they could have the foresight to test for.

 

Just taking a quick glance at the most successful software and games in general and you will see that a lot of it is available in open beta, and sometimes even at alpha. It is making the products better faster at the cost of some (usually momentary) inconveniences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But at the same time developers run the risk of alienating customers with buggy software. As they say, "you only get one chance to make a first impression".

 

I think half the problem lies in the development cycle of software products. We're in a trend now where customers expect a yearly release, and so developers push unfinished and untested products into the market place. This I feel is very much the case with Max, where over the years there have been a few questionable releases where nothing new has been developed and instead it felt like an x.5 release rather than the big jump to a new release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But at the same time developers run the risk of alienating customers with buggy software. As they say, "you only get one chance to make a first impression".

 

I think half the problem lies in the development cycle of software products. We're in a trend now where customers expect a yearly release, and so developers push unfinished and untested products into the market place. This I feel is very much the case with Max, where over the years there have been a few questionable releases where nothing new has been developed and instead it felt like an x.5 release rather than the big jump to a new release.

 

Autodesk is far beyond first impressions. They are an industry standard now because in a time long past they put products out there that were impressive enough to gobble up the majority of the market share. For them, it is no longer about impressing newcomers as much as it is about keeping their long time customers hooked on a direct intravenous line into their bank accounts through subscriptions. They keep their products half-baked with the promise always lingering for a better software tomorrow, and the catch is that you can only access the features that are still in the oven if you are on subscription. On top of this, they are pretty good at keeping a thumb on the competition.

 

Microsoft does not really compare in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...