WINDOWS XP USERS, LOOKS LIKE WE JUST GOT TOSSED INTO THE SEA.

Posts

Pages: first prev 123 next last
author=kentona
For whatever reason some people have hardware issues, which I would guess is the minority.
Windows 8 caused my fan in my laptop to overwork itself and then it died an ignoble death. The fan worked fine when it was windows 7

How old was the laptop? Maybe the fan was on it's last legs and bound to fail anyways?

My laptop used to get really hot, causing the fan to go into overdrive. Then I bought a cooling pad and it works amazingly well. It was like 10$ at a outlet store and I can have my computer on for the entire day and it's only about 1-2 degrees warmer. I never hear the fan anymore.
Blaming windows 8 for a fan failure is silly and ignorant, I hope you're joking.

If you have any kind of compatibilty issue that requires XP or older OS to run, simply run a virtual machine. You can create and run a VM in a free Virtual machine software like virtualbox. The only things you can risk using a Virtual machine is the data you put in it. So if you do become a victim of malware, only the virtual machine and it's data are affected (as long as you don't share your real disk with the Virtual machine) so it's quite safe
author=Phoenix90
Blaming windows 8 for a fan failure is silly and ignorant, I hope you're joking.

Actually, it's quite plausible - especially if it's an upgraded PC that didn't originate with Windows 8.

Windows 8 changed the way fan management works - if the update was applied before any other fan control software was updated, Windows 8 would take over control of your fan to its settings. Unfortunately, in the early versions (it was fixed sometime before 8.1), it applied it's fan speed changes as if your fan was spinning at half the speed it actually was (ie. if your fan was spinning at, let's say, 1400 RPM, Windows 8 thought it was only spinning at 700 RPM) if there was also another program attempting to control the fan (as there often is in laptops). It would then try to make the fan spin faster. This could burn the fan out. It was far more common in laptops than desktops because of the differences required in fan motors to fit space and power requirements.

(And looking it up, it looks like 8.1 caused a problem with fans as well on laptops due to requiring more CPU power than 8 did. I don't know if it was ever resolved.)
author=Phoenix90
Blaming windows 8 for a fan failure is silly and ignorant, I hope you're joking.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/CPU-Fan-Generating-More-Noise-After-Windows-8-1-Update-399134.shtml

I'd be careful about throwing around the word 'ignorant'.

I knew updating to Windows 8.1 would be a headache, I'm glad I never bothered. It's not like I need any of the so called fixes it provides.
If you do some research on the fan issue you'll find that you'll get accusations like OS killing the fan for all kinds of OS, here's a Windows 7 killed my fan flavor : http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windows/en-US/929c03eb-205d-42ac-8746-a5467c2fe0c8/windows-7-killed-my-laptop-fan?forum=w7itproperf

Fact is however that no amount of CPU load 0 or 100% should kill a fan and that a OS cannot kill a fan, they're designed to run at any speed (that they support, OS cannot set speeds higher than hardware supports) any time for any duration.
author=Phoenix90
Fact is however that no amount of CPU load 0 or 100% should kill a fan and that a OS cannot kill a fan, they're designed to run at any speed (that they support, OS cannot set speeds higher than hardware supports) any time for any duration.


This is an outright lie. Any time doing system programming will show you can cause the fan to spin at a faster speed. Fan motors can only do so many RPM before they burn out - that's a fact of any motor. If there's no safeties in place on the software, the software can spin the fan as fast as it wants. Betas for both OSes and graphic card drivers are notorious for doing this - hence the whole "you accept the risks of damage" clause of using them.
Software cannot set the fan voltage beyond what the PSU is able to deliver, fans are usually attached by a 12 volt cable, which their motor is designed to handle, but I'm going to stop here.
author=Phoenix90
Software cannot set the fan voltage beyond what the PSU is able to deliver, fans are usually attached by a 12 volt cable, which their motor is designed to handle, but I'm going to stop here.


Assuming a perfectly working and designed fan, yes. Given the parts actually used in most pre-built computers, no. There's a reason the problems are reported in systems that are pre-built.
I don't think fans are designed to run at max speed non stop, just like CPU's aren't meant to run at max speed. These kinds of things are governed for a reason. They aren't being killed by getting too much voltage in one shot or spinning beyond the max. It's the strain of too much work at their limit that makes them fail before the usual life expectancy. A car is designed to go up to 8000-9000 RPMS, but it will likely break if you drive it at max for a long time.
pianotm
The TM is for Totally Magical.
27719
author=Phoenix90
I

Fact is however that no amount of CPU load 0 or 100% should kill a fan and that a OS cannot kill a fan, they're designed to run at any speed (that they support, OS cannot set speeds higher than hardware supports) any time for any duration.

Umm...dude, you can set anything higher than hardware supports. We call it overclocking. Smdh

Edit: I don't goof off when it comes to cooling. I've created paperweights by not paying reasonable attention to my computer's cooling needs. I have freon coolers for the CPUs of all of my computers, except my laptops, which don't have enough room for them. For those, I use cooling pads, like Link says.
kentona
I am tired of Earth. These people. I am tired of being caught in the tangle of their lives.
20742
as for my issue, it was a lightly used laptop, one of those $399 dealies so not exactly top-of-the-line. The fan worked fine in win7. Once win8 was installed (a few months after win8 came out - I got the $40 upgrade deal) the fan was running constantly at a significantly higher RPM all the time, even after a fresh boot and idle. This burned out the fan's motor.

When you attempt to boot the machine, the BIOS warns that the fan is kaput and then shuts down.

One of these days I will crack it open to investigate. I just haven't bothered because I have a desktop and tablet and my wife has a desktop and tablet, and I have a laptop at work, and this laptop was a gift and we never used it anyway, so I just haven't really had the motivation to explore the issue.

It could very well be that I got a crummy fan and that it was about to die, but I did not imagine the insane increase in fan rpm after win8 was installed (it was fucking loud and annoying)
I use Windows 8.1 on my laptop and XP on my desktop (which is coming up on its seventh birthday), and I can say that 8.1 is not a very good system for running older games on, even ones from GOG. They run alright, but my XP machine runs them significantly better. I don't know what the exact issue is, but 8.1 is the only reason I can imagine games like Seven Kingdoms (which requires about 2mb of ram and a 233hz processor) run terribly.

I don't want to update my desktop to 8.1 because it would require a clean install, and I don't want to format. That makes me sad.
Rave
Even newspapers have those nowadays.
290
Some months ago I wouldn't recommend 8, but now since Microcrap is adding Start Menu back (dunno if it already happened or is it scheduled for next update), I can somewhat recommend using it, but only if you use one of new makers (XP onwards). 2k/2k3 doesn't work well on 8 from what I heard (in most cases, some people allegedly got it to work, but even then it didn't work so great).

If you still are using RM2k3/2k, then you need to stick with Windows 7, as it is last known version of Windows that 2k3 works well with.
author=Kaempfer
I don't know what the exact issue is, but 8.1 is the only reason I can imagine games like Seven Kingdoms (which requires about 2mb of ram and a 233hz processor) run terribly.
It's the same reason a high end PC might have trouble running PS2 or Wii games. Even though the hardware specs are way higher, it has to emulate something and that takes even more power than the original console had. I used to wonder why my old 386 couldn't even run NES emulators smoothly. "This has to have more power than an actual NES console!"

Are you talking about running old games directly on Win8, or running them through a virtual machine or emulator like Dosbox? I run games in Dosbox and sometimes they are slow or choppy, but there are hidden settings that adjust the speed of the games.

author=Rave
Some months ago I wouldn't recommend 8, but now since Microcrap is adding Start Menu back (dunno if it already happened or is it scheduled for next update), I can somewhat recommend using it, but only if you use one of new makers (XP onwards). 2k/2k3 doesn't work well on 8 from what I heard (in most cases, some people allegedly got it to work, but even then it didn't work so great).

If you still are using RM2k3/2k, then you need to stick with Windows 7, as it is last known version of Windows that 2k3 works well with.
Part of the reason people avoid using Windows 8 is because these kinds of opinions form and they don't think to look at what solutions might be out there. I haven't seen MS's version of the start menu but I heard it wasn't as full featured as one would want. The new start menu is part of 8.1 which is already released.

I bet the biggest issue Win8 haters will bring up is lack of start menu. There has been a solution to that since the very beginning, I posted it on page 1 of this topic. I've had it for a full year now. Windows 8 can have FULL START MENU FUNCTIONALITY AND THEN SOME. It's third party software, but has no issues or bugs that I've seen. But you don't hear about that, only that Win8 has no Start menu and should be avoided. So instead of looking it up themselves, the people who are hearing that believe it and tell others. Not that I would expect anything different from the average person, who is computer illiterate in the first place. I've worked in tech support for a long time so I can say that with confidence.

Like if a few people report that 2k3 doesn't work, suddenly it's being spread around that Windows 8 can't run 2k3 at all. You say "in most cases" and "from what I heard" which are all basically folk tales. I would be interested to see an actual controlled test of different Windows 8 users trying out 2k3. It's easy to see a bunch of people complaining that 2k3 doesn't work and think the worst. But you have to realize that there are people with Win8 that have no issue running 2k3 who will never report it. People don't make topics to say "2k3 is running so smoothly on my new Win8 machine!!"

I feel like I have to be a Win8 defender because I was just like the nay-sayers until I actually got Win8 and saw how awesome and XP-y it can be. I honestly forget sometimes that I have Win8 and that I used to hate it.

Btw, I still make and play games in 2k3 on Win8 with no issue.
Rave
Even newspapers have those nowadays.
290
author=Link_2112
Part of the reason people avoid using Windows 8 is because these kinds of opinions form and they don't think to look at what solutions might be out there. I haven't seen MS's version of the start menu but I heard it wasn't as full featured as one would want. The new start menu is part of 8.1 which is already released.
Seems quite feature-complete to me
author=Link_2112
I bet the biggest issue Win8 haters will bring up is lack of start menu. There has been a solution to that since the very beginning, I posted it on page 1 of this topic. I've had it for a full year now. Windows 8 can have FULL START MENU FUNCTIONALITY AND THEN SOME. It's third party software, but has no issues or bugs that I've seen.
I bet it work great for people with Windows in English. But how about Greek/Japanese/Russian/Polish systems? Do I really have to put up with start menu IN ENGLISH on my Polish machine? Does Ivan has to deal with start menu in ENGLISH on his Russian machine? Does Hiro have to deal with start menu IN ENGLISH on his Japanese machine?
author=Rave
author=Link_2112
I bet the biggest issue Win8 haters will bring up is lack of start menu. There has been a solution to that since the very beginning, I posted it on page 1 of this topic. I've had it for a full year now. Windows 8 can have FULL START MENU FUNCTIONALITY AND THEN SOME. It's third party software, but has no issues or bugs that I've seen.
I bet it work great for people with Windows in English. But how about Greek/Japanese/Russian/Polish systems? Do I really have to put up with start menu IN ENGLISH on my Polish machine? Does Ivan has to deal with start menu in ENGLISH on his Russian machine? Does Hiro have to deal with start menu IN ENGLISH on his Japanese machine?


If a localization existed before, then they have a localized version of the Start Menu. That's about the long and short of it.
pianotm
The TM is for Totally Magical.
27719
And yet, nobody says what makes 7 and 8 so much better than XP. I'm reading a lot of sales information.

How are they better? All any of you are talking about is how to make them more like XP. I'm running Windows 7 on this laptop. It's on my gaming machine I'm running XP.

I have seen nothing that makes this system better than XP. It requires more memory for individual functions. You can't tell me it doesn't. I check, every time I boot up on all of my computers to make sure my memory is running at optimal efficiency. 7 automatically crashes the system when using too much memory (that's blue screen). XP doesn't do that. On the screen it will tell you why it switched on blue screen, so it's not like I don't know why my screen's blue.

The worst thing about Windows Vista, 7 and 8? The absolute onslaught that XP users must endure from people who insist they upgrade. Is Microsoft paying you people? Then you're not giving me a single valid reason. All, absolutely all any of you have said, at all is that I can make them look like XP. I can dress them up like older operating systems. You're saying that the problems people are reporting aren't as bad as they sound, that you should run the system and you probably won't have the same problems.

I love Link_2112's comment that 8 is missing a classic feature but that's okay, because we can get someone else's software to make a complete product. I'm not stupid, or at least not as stupid as you people seem to think I am. I've had sales training and know perfectly well that were I a salesman, I'd be fired for saying something like that to a prospective customer. Nothing shoots a product in the foot like telling someone that not only is a feature missing but if you want it, you will have to do possibly more work and theoretically spend more money by going to another company to get the product you want. The customer's response EVERY SINGLE TIME WILL BE "Well, why don't I just get the product that already has what I want?" XP has it. I already know I don't want 7 because, I have it. If you want to start a cult around an inferior product, have at it. I won't be joining you.

author=Kaempfer
I use Windows 8.1 on my laptop and XP on my desktop (which is coming up on its seventh birthday), and I can say that 8.1 is not a very good system for running older games on, even ones from GOG. They run alright, but my XP machine runs them significantly better. I don't know what the exact issue is, but 8.1 is the only reason I can imagine games like Seven Kingdoms (which requires about 2mb of ram and a 233hz processor) run terribly.

I don't want to update my desktop to 8.1 because it would require a clean install, and I don't want to format. That makes me sad.


Your issue is clocking. Those old games were made to run on the most sophisticated systems of the time, which are now obsolete. Your current systems are the equivalent of trying to run a Model T with a Corvette engine. It can be done, but you have to do some modifying. To get your old games to run properly, you need to find a way to slow your CPU down. DOSBox does this for you when running your old PC games. The question is, do console emulators? I don't know. I do know that Project64 lets me control my CPU speed when running my N64 games. It doesn't seem to be an issue on my NES and Super NES emulators, or on my Genesis emulator.
As a constant user of both Windows XP (the laptop I'm currently using) and Windows 7 (both desktops I own), Windows 7 just... feels better. Like, way way better. It's a UX thing.

On top of that, Windows 7 is, on the same system capable of supporting it, more stable. If you're getting errors, it's because a) you don't have enough memory in your computer (and thus you're way behind the computing curve cause Windows 7 really doesn't require much of anything) or b) there's a fault in your RAM (this is fairly common on older computers and even newer prebuilts). What most people don't realize is that the hardware breaks down with use - if you have a computer that came with XP installed (which hasn't happened in seven or eight years), chances are your hardware is starting to fail.

The cult around an inferior product is people still clinging to Windows XP on the view you've just argued. "Oh, it's the same so why would I upgrade?" It's not the same. It's... just better.

1) It has emulation for other Windows OSes built in. Windows XP can't support things that require a newer operating system (and they exist; if you haven't run into them, you're either extremely lucky or don't use your computer more than lightly)
2) Encryption is built into Windows 7. It doesn't exist without using third party software in Windows XP.
3) Built in VPN support. Holy shit, this was a nice feature.
4) Chances are if you're still using Windows XP, you have a 32-bit system. 64-bit was introduced late into XP's life cycle. If you want a computer that's still capable of properly running modern software, you need a 64-bit processor and operating system. While you're updating to a 64-bit OS, Windows 7 is a good step.
5) The Start Menu. Holy crap, so much easier to use on Windows 7, and it doesn't take up ten miles of screen space.
6) The Ribbon interface. Again, UI not taking up ten miles of screen space.
7) Built in DirectX11 support.
8) A taskbar that intelligently groups similar windows instead of turning them into tiny tabs. Beautiful if you have more than a half dozen programs running at once.

PS: If you're really having memory trouble with Windows 7, turn off Aero. It's the major hog of memory on the system. The system requirements plummet without it. Either that, or you're running a 64-bit Windows 7 on a 32-bit system (holy shit - fix that now) - in fact, given your description, this is the most likely scenario: a processor/OS mismatch; 32-bit can run on a 64-bit processor, but 64-bit cannot run on a 32-bit processor.

Windows 8 isn't missing the Start Menu anymore. It was. Users complained. They put it back in. Problem solved and need for reading comprehension proven. =P

e: 9) Windows XP's Extended Support period just ended (unless you're a corporate user with XP Embedded, which most users are not). Standard support for Windows 7 continues until January of next year, with Extended Support lasting until 2020.
pianotm
The TM is for Totally Magical.
27719
No, this is a ProBook 4530s...I guess two years old now, 2 gigs mem, according to the documentation, "Made for Windows 7!", 100 gigs of hard space. I only use this computer to surf the net. Absolutely everything I do is done on my gaming machine, whether writing my book, writing fanfic, or making RM games. I have nothing but problems with 7 in this computer. I feel it was installed wrong. I have the Windows 7 program, but I'm afraid that would require a reformat and I just haven't had the time to put into finding everything I want to save and protect. Furthermore, I can't download upgrades because the system keeps crashing. All in all, I've really grown disgusted with the system.

e: Need for reading comprehension NOT proven. I didn't miss it, and it didn't excuse the fact that an excuse was being made for 8 before the revision. Also, how would I fix the 32 bit versus 64 bit problem if that is the case? I put my computers together as I can, and laptops are the only ones I buy prebuilt. Money is an issue. I wouldn't expect that problem to exist with a prebuilt.
author=pianotm
I only use this computer to surf the net.

Then you definitely need to be running something newer than XP or else have a hell of a protection suite on it. XP hasn't technically been internet safe for a couple years now without a protection suite behind it (when the mainstream support for it ended, so did it's safety).

Two years old with 2 gigs of memory, sounds like a potential memory fault (seriously, to know exactly what's going on, I'd have to see the entire error code, and there's two of them that pop up on a Windows 7 blue screen). As it's a laptop, even more likely - I just looked up the specs on what the machine, but I can't find one that fits the specs you gave, a 4530s should have 4 gigs of RAM by factory specs and didn't come with a 100gb drive standard (smallest ever jammed into a 4530s that I can find recorded is a 120, which, including overhead, does fit the 100 number roughly).

If you think the OS was installed wrong, it's not the OS' fault you're experiencing errors. Also, running the install program to "repair" an install shouldn't require a reformat.

If it is a 32-bit/64-bit issue, the only solutions are either a) change the processor to a 64-bit processor or b) change the operating system to a 32-bit OS. But given the model number you've given, you're running a 64-bit processor; errors are extremely hard to diagnose given so very little information with a bias for a dislike of the system. =P
Pages: first prev 123 next last