
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Only the best for Microsoft's corporate clients. The rest of us, apparently, can go fly a kite.
It's not like that. Corporations have more people than servers, so they have more windows clients (xp, 7) than servers (2003, 2008)
e.g. my company has roughly 10x more clients.
No? I figured that Server 2012 would also be used for workstations... I don't have much experience on the Windows end of things.
Thanks for the correction then, and good to know that our corporate pals are also getting the short end of the stick this time.
Edited 2012-11-11 22:53 UTC
Don't be so quick to judge; it is entirely possible that Jones was testing on unsupported or older hardware. When I tried the Windows 8 Release Preview several months ago, it was on a machine with an older Radeon onboard video processor. Windows 8 not only didn't recognize the hardware or provide a driver, it also wouldn't let me install the Windows 7 driver. This made the machine agonizingly slow, as most of the GUI in Windows 8 requires video acceleration.
Installing a modern Radeon HD 6570 card instantly solved the issue, and for the short time I used it, Windows 8 on supported hardware blew the pants off of Vista, the factory installed OS.
Member since:
2006-05-23
I tried the Windows 8 RTM trial version...
It was bad. Pure, unmitigated bad. The interface sucks, the bugs suck, the web/ad integration sucks, it's confusing and slow and ugly and borderline unusable. It reminds me more of MeeGo than of Windows.
I've never been a Microsoft fan, but I thought Windows 7 was great. This is an an unbelievable step backwards in terms of usability.
But the Server 2012 trial? Much more friendly and usable.
Only the best for Microsoft's corporate clients. The rest of us, apparently, can go fly a kite.