Windows 8

Interesting, if you boot to DOS or the 8 DVD, what happens?

Make sure you have the latest bios flash, A07...seems I've been reading similar problems on other 660s machines when installing secondary video cards. I read it happens with EVGA GTX and NVidia cards, which seems strange because I thought they came with NVidia video cards.

And it doesn't appear that the bios supports selecting a primary video device either...

I wonder if you try to enter the bios if it will goe there during boot...did you try hitting F2 and seeing if it went into the bios setup even though it didn't show that option on the screen?

I would venture a guess that your secondary video card just isn't recognized by the computer at all until Windows boots and loads the drivers for it...whcih seems weird, because I thought nearly all video cards would display at least a CGA type screen even without video drivers....

Chris I'll try to boot into something and let you know, didnt come with a dvd (has that make your own back up's) .

Rich, It came with the latest bios, no go on the f2 or f12 thats one of the first things i tired when i fist noticed the problem, and it's a AMD card.

I suspect the Nvidia cards would do the same thing, Dell probably does something at the "Special" at the factory when they are building one with a preinstalled card & has yet to rectify the situation.

Chris, still blank booting into dvd or dos or linux live cd.

Hmm, surprise... Microsoft made a Windows Phone app for Win8 and it does not work with WP7.5 or below. It supposedly works with WP8, and the upcoming WP7.8. Meanwhile all of us WP7.5 users will need to use Zune software on desktop, until we get updated to 7.8, if we are lucky. Or if we upgrade to a WP8 device, which in Canada is a pita because our contracts are usually 3 years, unlike in the US. I have 13 months left :\

hmm, definately worth following up with then, or you'll have problems doing a recovery at some point in the future.

Direct experience suggests that if it isn't power related it's one of three things
VGA BIOS
PC BIOS
The GPU is having problems at low resolutions (try dropping the video down to its lowest setting in Windows itself, even force it down to 640x480)

If it is the latter, it needs replacing. If either of the former then it is probably worth a support request to Dell and the VGA OEM to see if you can get updates (and report the fault).



Edit:
One for you Yankee doodles: Windows 8 for $48 http://bfads.net/Ad/Tiger-Direct-2012/Page2

Ouch, coming from Nielsen himself... this is quite a boot to the groin:
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/windows-8.html

Only to power users...not to us dummies who like to be spoon fed...

In Computer Science circles, Nielsen is one of the biggest names in user interface design and the codification of how to create UI's for software developers. Nielsen's Heuristic's as they are known are pretty much mandatory reading for any software developer.

It is good fodder for Apple.

I ran test's with the pcie x16 slot, stress tested the cards components step by step everything passed,etc.

Has to be a bios thing, but dell has not put record of my pc in the its data base yet so i cant get the online chat help yet, and not a fan of calling.

Not really related.... but Another strange thing is, my cpu a Intel Pentium G645 (according to intel) is only suppose to be able to run memory at 1066mhz.

Yet everything software wise ive used say's its running @ 1600mhz which is the type of memory dell supplied.
The sales person i chatted with prior to purchase also verified it runs @ 1600mhz, cant figure out that one either.

I'm not sure I totally understand the relationship between the cpu speed/type and the max ram speed, but I noticed a lot of computers with the G645 processor run the memory at 1600mHz. Here is just one example: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4917912&CatId=2627

I would be curious Thcrw739 to see how your video card worked in another machine...if it showed the same delay on video display.

I had half written an explanation about QPI before realising that it does not appear to be QPI enabled

I therefore suspect that it is a cost thing. 1600 is not exactly top end any more and the slower clock speeds always become most expensive first. I suspect that OEM's just make use of economies of scale and fit a common memory for cost. Of course most BIOS/EFI logic is capable of running the RAM at 1600 even on a 1066 CPU (even if the interfaces don't allow it). Is it actually clocking at 1600?

Nice article to read.

He's right, for the most part, but there's a focus in the article that misses other aspects of the product (or as they say "the bigger picture" ).

Yes there is a lot of problems with the UI, especially for a large screen with no touch. However PCs are not the future, tablets are. Just as laptops replaced desktops as the mainstream computer for the general public, and almost defeated the desktop market into a niche, tablets are slowly doing the same to laptops. The industry generally agrees that they have already killed the netbook.

Tablets haven't replaced laptops yet, because everyone still thinks a tablet cannot do everything they need compared to their laptops. But they said the exact same thing about laptops not powerful enough compared to desktops just a decade ago.

With that in mind, Microsoft will be in big trouble if their main products Windows and Office suddenly are out of the mainstream market - tablets. This is the main reason they put the Modern UI as the primary interface in Windows 8. I will not be surprised if there will be an Office version on Modern UI in Windows 8, as there are already versions in Windows Phone.

So in a way you can say that Windows 8 is a crossover product that prepares the PC users for their future tablets that will use Windows. Meanwhile Windows RT is the direct ancestor of that future OS.

Why not make the Start page an optional app launcher, instead of "forcing" users to use it? Because if it was optional, less people will use it, and less people will consider Windows RT when they purchase their next tablet.

Meanwhile I think Microsoft has prolonged the laptop market by giving manufacturers and their customers a real practical reason to add touchscreens to their laptops. This will slow down the market migration to tablets somewhat.

You might agree with the author, and perhaps a lot of power users, to stick with Windows 7 until 9 is out, simply due to the UI issues. However, I say it's better to get started early and you will stay a power user instead of being a noob when 9 comes out.

The way I see it, at least it's relatively easy to switch between Start and Desktop, compared to switching between Windows 3.x and full DOS (many of my DOS games didn't run in a DOS box in Windows)

Edited by takwu 2012-11-20 1:35 PM

I don't disagree with you Takwu. While my views on how I find it as a performance piece are not well masked, but Nielsen is looking at it from the best aspects of psychology and 40+ years of UI design research.

The problem is that with 8, Microsoft are asking users to learn a system that is not complete, that bastardises two different worlds and does neither of them well. If Microsoft implemented an amazing touch interface and everything was consistent I am sure that he would sing their praises. Unfortunately they haven't and he isn't. This suggests that adopters who are not tech-savvy may very well become frustrated with a poor user experience, inconsistency and confusion. Ultimately and irrespective of what I think of it, that will hurt the Microsoft image and Windows brand. If they had done it right, they wouldn't.

The entire situation could be resolved simply with an install time shell choice, like Windows 95 had. The metro shell should encompass EVERYTHING and ALL functionality from the explorer shell, not 60% of it. OEM's should put out that shell on anything touch related – force the issue. CE platforms have had licensing terms that force OEM’s to do things since 1996. If Microsoft wants Metro on touch, force the issue.

Desktop users should be the ones who can pick and choose what they buy into. As you say, if tablets are to take over then Microsoft has nothing to worry about if their touch alternative is actually that good. The situation that we are in is a phobic response to criticism because something tells me that they really aren't all that confident in it.

Windows Phone 7/7.5/8.0 doesn't have the Windows Mobile UI and a 60% implemented Windows Phone UI after all. People seem to like the Windows Phone UI (quite rightly ignoring my own views on this point). So why does Windows NT now have this problem?

The iPad is OS X with a different shell. It isn't Mountain Lion with a plug-in, it doesn't need to be. Apple forced the Paradigm. So why is Windows NT now Explorer with a plug-in?

I've got it. I know why Microsoft is forcing the metro issue on Windows users. It's so obvious!

Windows Phone's UI paradigm is the same as Metro's, but WP really isn't selling. Microsoft is forcing the two platforms into the same UI sandbox to generate interface familiarity because they want people to use Windows Phone instead of Android. How can they do that? Make it the de facto paradigm much akin to "It's exactly like using Windows 95" was for the marketing for the Handheld PC; here we have it in reverse. If they force the interface hegemony onto people and through that risk a majority find they like it they will be more likely to buy WP devices because they are the same thing; even the apps and API are the same for developers (especially since WP8 migrated to NT).

Microsoft is trying to cross-feed sales by a process of ritual obliteration. They found something that was not the same as Apple and are going to attempt to force that onto their user monopoly in the hope that enough buy back into it or are forced into it in its wake.

Just watch, as soon as Windows 8 becomes standardised and awareness is high enough they'll start advertising Windows 8 & Windows Phone 8 as being complimentary, companion devices; just as they did with the H/PC. They even held down the Windows Phone version number so that they could normalise it with the NT release versioning/branding.