Will Windows 8 Extend the Life of Your Netbook? Discussion

Netbook owners certainly took note during Microsoft President of Windows Steven Sinofsky's Windows 8 unveiling at the BUILD conference. Early on in the presentation, Sinofsky whipped out his three-year old Lenovo netbook, the very same unit he exhibited at the dev conference three years prior, and showed the crowd of eager Microsoft developers his first generation device running Windows 8. He then extolled the virtures of Windows 8's tiny footprint, and reassured developers that the new OS is feature rich, but was not built bulky layer by bulky layer.

Read the full content of this Article: Will Windows 8 Extend the Life of Your Netbook?

Related Articles:

• Microsoft Gives Sneak Peek at Windows 8 Browsing, Photo Sharing, Tools

 

This OS is amazing for netbooks and Ultrabooks

But for, let's say, a hardcore gaming laptop with the top-of-the-line specs? How little of resources would the OS use, and would it be efficiently allocated?

I guess what I'm trying to say is....

W7 = Feels like a full, strong OS. Like a Linebacker in football terms.
W8 = Seems to be lite version of the OS. Like a speedy little wide receiver.

Now I'm not saying that W8 is not a fully-fledged OS...that has yet to be seen. But as of now, it just seems not completely "powerful". That it will find much more traction with netbooks, tablets, ultraportables and the upcoming Ultrabooks.

Mr. Mysterious

 

Love the idea of keeping system req's lower. Allows for easier transition/upgrade, without having to invest in hardware at the same time.


Too bad about the battery life though. Hopefully it'll be optimized before final release.

 

Dear MS,

While you spent the last decade ignoring the malware crisis, cooking up the atrocity that was vista and then fixing it with win 7, several of us jumped ship to GNU/Linux. What we found is that even the heaviest Linux distros fly on netbooks while the lightest distros are modernizing hardware that's almost a decade old. Oh yeah, and it was free to do so.

Thanks, though, for thinking of us after the fact,

v1k

 

Im sorry but win7 is better.
I love to tweak and mess with things, linux you cant.
And it is just really lol.
its a mash up of mac os x and a little of windows.
everything is made for windows because is better for gaming and really using a computer.
linux is OKAY if you just browse the net i suppose...
Also the malware thing is due to a untech savoy user.
if you know how to use a computer you shouldnt be getting any virus, and even so get a anti virus and call it a day

 

First of all, the issue is not whether or not win7 is better than Linux. The issue I was indirectly addressing is whether or not we should celebrate win8's potential for running well on netbooks given the general recognition that winxp, vista and 7 have been generally recognized as sluggish resource hogs on netbook platforms which is really not my premise so much as it is the premise of the original article's argument for win8.

Second, I'm not a Linux fanboy as you seem to assume. I don't know what it would mean to say that Linux is better than win7 or vice versa especially since there are 100s of different Linux distros out there. More importantly, I think it's valid to argue that one OS is better for a particular purpose or task. If you notice my sig, I keep a win7 partition open on my MSI for certain tasks whereas, on my atom platforms, I run Linux exclusively because it scales so well to the hardware.

This is just false. The reason you can't tweak and mess with things is because you don't yet know how. Just as an example I will point out that you can build a linux distribution from scratch, handpicking all the components so that the install is exactly tailored to your hardware and uses. If that is not the ultimate tweak, I don't know what is.

Linux is "just really lol." Good argument.

I'm assuming you are talking not about the Linux kernel but about the desktop environment. There are multiple desktop environments (Gnome 3, Gnome 2, KDE, Unity, XFCE, LXDE, Openbox, Icewm, Fluxbox, E17, etc.) so characterizing them all as a "mash up" of windows and OSX is a bit like saying that all automobiles are just a mash up of Ford and Chevy.

Second, you seem to think that Linux just copies windows and OSX. While this may be true superficially, on a deeper level OSX and Windows have been copying bits and parts of the compositing engine native to Linux. Have a look at this demonstration of compiz and ask yourself if windows or Mac has even begun to catch up with what was possible in Linux in 2007.

Compiz Demo 2007

You would only say that everything is made for windows if you've never looked at the Debian repositories, for example, that contain thousands upon thousands of native linux applications. Secondly, you can run Windows applications in Wine if you're not happy with the open source equivalent.

Windows is better for gaming if you are talking about the newest and most graphically intensive games. This isn't the fault of Linux but rather the fault of the game developers and gpu manufacturers that offer poor support for Linux.

But lastly, netbooks are explicitly not for gaming but for basic computing. So your point about windows being great for gaming is irrelevant to the original issue. You know, the issue that you failed to address in the first place? It's also fallacious to equate gaming with computing in general.

This is true. But again I was addressing a specific issue which was MS's extremely slow response to malware crisis that hit win95, win98 and, to some degree, even winxp in the early 00s. We all know how to secure our computers nowadays but that is largely because of the fact that MS left us to do it on our own for so many years. The question with win8 is whether or not all these new features will introduce more security issues.

 

Back on topic:

Win8 requires a touch-screen. Will this take off? Are we going to see the prices for touch-screen displays fall to acceptable levels, or are we going to see W8 stagnate because the machines are too expensive (partly due to the touch screen components)? I prefer the former.

Also, I've gotten used to seeing a pristine screen on my laptops....I'm not sure how well I would adjust to seeing a fingerprint-laden screen with cheetos, chocolate and other icky stuff on a laptop (or Ultrabook) in the future. Whenever someone even thinks they can touch my screen, I verbally emasculate them until they are crying

Mr. Mysterious

 

Win 8 doesn't "require" a touch screen but it was clearly developed with touchscreen devices in mind (mainly slate tablets). It will be interesting to see if MS has multiple versions with more complex builds for "serious" PCs that don't need the smallest possible OS footprint ... or if we'll see a new generation of software development that works wonders on streamlined operating systems.

 

Looking forward to seeing Windows 8 run on a N570 netbook with 2GB RAM and SSD. My 10" HP 210 Mini seems future-proof at this point.

First Impressions - HP 210 Mini netbook

 

The Metro UI feels like using a tablet with a mouse and keyboard. Which is basically what you are doing.

I hope MS puts some more effort into the traditional Windows side of the UI.

 

A serious question. What are the chances we'll be able to install Windows 8 on an HP TouchPad or a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 which I own both?

 

If they have the hardware to support W8, I don't see why not...unless they run on different architecture or are configured not to take on computer OSes (which I really can't imagine to be the case).

Mr. Mysterious

 

Well that would be more on Microsoft since the hardware is already out. I would love to run W8 on my TouchPad.

 

I think there is more than a few who would like to do that with their Touchpad. There are even a few thread over at XDA of people asking the same thing. I know Qualcomm was showing off a few quad core and I think dual core ARM tablets with W8 on so it is possible, but that is more up to MS if allow us, or if they start selling license for W8 ARM edition.

 

I would say its definitely possible. Windows 7 and linux help me keep 3+ year old laptops and a near 5 year old desktop alive and working well. So windows 8 may be able to do this.

But as for windows 8 being on anything more then a netbook/ultra portable/tablet is beyond my comprehension. I wouldnt want android as an OS for a normal desktop or laptop, but its great for a tablet or cell phone. I feel the same way about windows 8.

The one thing I do like about windows 8 is the full platform is on everything from your tablet to your desktop so while out and about you dont lose functionality going to your tablet. So lets say Im coding up an application on my massive desktop or laptop and need to go somewhere I can load up the application on my tablet and continue to develop.

If there was a way to make windows 8 not use the tile system and be able to fully function with the traditional desktop UI I would probably go back to a windows system. That way I could have my traditional GUI on my laptop and pull out the tablet and maximize my use with tiles and still retain 100% functionality no matter the device.

One can dream...

 

From the looks of it it seems as if they are basing it off there windows 7 phone design, I'm assuming that it gets pretty good battery life

 

I was under the impression that Windows 8 is still very much Windows NT Based. I don't see why screwing around with the UI would significantly impact battery life. ARM support however should bring better battery life since ARM has generally been better than x86 at power consumption.

 

I'm actually looking forward to this. I have an old Penium III tablet running on Ubuntu, and would definitely try this out as it it supposed to be less demanding than Windows 7.

 

To answer the titular question, "I doubt it."

I generally don't buy MS OS upgrades. The last one I bought was the MS-DOS 6.22 to Windows 95 upgrade for my desktop computer (it was still called "Gateway 2000" back then!).

By the time Windows 8 hits Service Pack 1, my notebook will be so old that I likely won't care to spend $ to upgrade its OS. I'll prefer to save the $ toward a new machine, or some other expense.

That has been the rule with my desktop machines as well. They die before the next MS OS releases, or I just don't care to spend more money on them.

In the case of a new notebook, it will come with the MS OS-du-jour pre-installed. So that is likely the way I will first purchase Windows 8.

 

Playing with Windows 8 preview. Here's some of the changes I hope after two days.

1. Battery life is terrible compared with windows 7 on my XPS 15 the fan is running almost all the time.
2. An ability to stay with either the desk top or the Metro and not be forced back and forth. It's confusing to us elderly and almost impossible to explain to new senior users.
3. An ability if you are using the Metro to more easily navigate between screens (on non-touch computers), close windows and close programs.
4. Easier access to shut-down, restart. Alt F4 only works sometimes on the desktop.

Still some glitches. I'm hoping for many more revisions, more simplicity and most importantly on a battery operated computer less power use.

 

the metro thing shouldn't be enabled for laptop/desktop especially those without touch screen capabilities..

 

I think I will move to Windows 8 soon, but still don't know if it is stable or not.

Anyway, I don't think that an operating system can extend your laptop's life.