VHD is not a VM. A VM emulates the whole (or most of) the hardware environment, while a VHD runs on real hardware. This makes a VM slower, while a VHD is just as fast as on real hardware, except sometimes the HDD performance as the VHD can get fragmented, especially with a dynamically expanding one.
Ofc it's not a vm itself, you can use it through VirtualBox, VmWare and originaly Virtual PC, but my point was that you do not have to install Windows 8 nativly to test it on your hardware as you can boot straight into it
Using 7989 as primary and havnet had any issues yet except for it refusing to run Angry Birds *btw. I have it installed on a 2011 MBPi7 *
Anyone got XP mode working on 7989 x64? Everything else works great so far, aside from a small issue I noticed with desktop gadgets, "Network Meter" sometimes doesn't draw properly and when it does it's missing some info... when I try to install XP Mode all it does is say it doesn't work on this version of windows (I tried setting compatibility to windows 7 as well)
I've just heard about Windows 8 today, from this forum. I had no idea Windows 8 exists. I just bought a SSD and installed Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 x64 on it, but I'm currently on my old Windows 7 Ultimate x64 installation. Now, I would like to go with Windows 8, but is it really worth it? I see a lot of people saying it is faster than this and that, but what exactly does faster mean? Is there any real benefit from moving from Windows 7 to 8 right now?
If you have enough hard drive space, you can have win7 & win8 dual boot, then you can see it for yourself. You don't have to move from win7 to win8.
Yeah, I have enough space, that's not an issue. I could also see how it feels on a virtual computer, but that's kind of irrelevant. I'm not going to waste time setting up all my stuff on Windows 7 and 8 and work on both of them for 6 months to realize in the end that there's no actual difference. That's why I'm asking all the people that have been using it for some time, what do they mean by "faster"? It's kind of vague... maybe it's faster because they don't have the previous system conditions, or maybe they just think it's faster. Also, besides "faster", is there anything new that is worth the attention?
You may not find it to be faster or noteworthy, but for the enthusiasts here there is plenty of new discoveries to be made. If you're geeky like that it's definitely worth it. If not, you might not notice anything "worth the attention" until the beta stage which will be very soon. I personally am experiencing better performance and reliability with build 7989. I am not happy with Windows 7 and going back to XP x64 is unthinkable because I have software that will only run on Vista or newer.
I currently have 7989 n dual boot on my laptop. one version i use everyday.... then other i use to play an test things with/on. Fantastic as for me.... an my 2GB lappy does some things faster than then my 4GB desktop.
You can try as you said on virtual machine or If you like dual boot but at the end of the day you will need to uninstall it because it is beta and will time out
Aha. Well, I'll probably stick with Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 x64 and have Windows 8 running on a VMware virtual computer and install most of the applications on both operating systems. I didn't have any issues with Windows 7 in 2 years and I'm doing all kinds of stuff on my computer, meaning I'm using all kinds of applications, but of course, stability depends a lot on the way one manages his OS and also on hardware resources.
I (regretably) have 7989 as my main OS. I wouldn't recommend it to anybody at this point; I can't run alot of Steam games, iTunes doesn't work, and more (which is really to be expected). Should have stayed with Windows 7 and ran 8 in a VM.
Well, I can confirm that. CS:S, CS, TF2, Portal, Portal2, L4D2 - every game i have works flawlessly here, too.
Alot of the older ones that utilize DosBox. Additionally, I can't log into my Games for Windows Live account; tells me password or email is incorrect.