Talk:Features new to Windows 8/Archive 1

Regarding Protogon
Prior to this page's creation, the section regarding Protogon was removed by user Jasper Deng with the reason, "Please adhere to MOS. The reader is not a subject in an article."

I'm sorry, but I do not know what this abbreviation means. Do not assume that everyone will understand ambiguous abbreviations and please do not remove a section unless you are willing start a discussion about it. The cryptic reason given is not inherently understandable. Please, rephrase and elaborate.

Thanks, Neillithan (talk) 14:16, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * MOS stands for Manual of style. Text should not be removed, but instead edited to conform to the style. If someone's edit does not improve the article, you can undo it.  Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:13, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Most important new feature for me: free pinball
A table of Pinball FX 2 is included in Windows 8 for free. http://www.joystiq.com/2012/02/29/pinball-fx-2-included-in-windows-8-consumer-preview/ --Fluffystar (talk) 18:42, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Third-party app that does not belong as a feature of Windows 8 itself.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:26, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, Space Cadet pinball was also developed by a third party (Maxis) and is listed under List of features removed in Windows Vista Fluffystar (talk) 19:42, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The difference is that that pinball program was something you could add/remove in "Add/remove features", but this is not the case with Windows 8.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:46, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Then we need an additional list of apps that come with Windows 8. --Fluffystar (talk) 11:08, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

New features
The following have been removed from the article: PowerShell 3, WMI 3, IE10, SMB3, Kerberos 5, new PowerShell interfaces to management tools. These are but a few of the new features that are not currently in the article - I'm not inclined to re-add them, but am adding this note so that others have some tips what to search for. Socrates2008 ( Talk ) 11:41, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Page soon to be outdated
Some of the information probably needs to be updated due to changes done through software updates. (For example, allowing IE10 Metro version full flash support. I'm not changing that one because I really don't know enough about article writing to make the edit according to form.) Additionally, a major update called Windows 8.1 has been confirmed and will add quite a lot of features. It hasn't been released yet, though, so the info about these aspects in the article is not yet outdated. Sources: 84.190.81.137 (talk) 18:35, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * http://blogs.windows.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2013/05/30/continuing-the-windows-8-vision-with-windows-8-1.aspx
 * http://blogs.windows.com/windows/b/business/archive/2013/06/03/modern-business-in-mind-windows-8-1-at-teched-2013.aspx
 * Soon to be outdated really needs to become 'outdated'. This article deals with things that are new, and the features of 8.1 aren't 'new' yet, just announced. It's interesting though, because of the prominence placed onto the 8.1, I'm wondering whether we need to have a subsection entitled "Features new to Windows 8.1", rather than jamming them into the body of the article. drewmunn talk 18:53, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: Titlebar text in the middle of windows
That's not really much of a notable feature in comparison to everything else in this article, it's just fancruft in my opinion. The Up arrow is borderline on that too (and should really be bunched in with the stuff about the updates to File Explorer), but unlike the titlebar text, that button actually does something important, and was notably absent on Vista and 7. ViperSnake151  Talk  20:17, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 15:15, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree; it is no new feature, merely a trivial relocation of an existing feature. I'll also add that having a separate section for returning features doesn't work out, when the article is already structured based on which part of the OS was changed. - Josh (talk | contribs) 16:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. I was thinking the same thing. Still, it is nice to see Dogmaticeclectic working a little more cooperatively. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 18:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Per the consensus established here, I've removed (self-reverted the addition of) the entire remaining section; however, I added back the new text where the features were mentioned before, since I still think the fact that these features are returning ones should be mentioned (especially considering that both additions are reliably sourced). Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 18:41, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Features new to Windows 8.1
Any thoughts on whether the Windows 8.1 features can be moved to Features new to Windows 8.1?? Georgia guy (talk) 18:42, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. We discussed this in Windows 8 talk page. With the recommendations of User:Dogmaticeclectic, User:ViperSnake151, User:87Fan, User:Jasper Deng and myself, the consensus was to move the contents here. So, I did it today. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 19:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
 * And where exactly can I locate a list of features that are new to Windows 8.1? --128.69.219.161 (talk) 07:09, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree, this is not a good solution and makes it extremely hard to get a grasp of the changes to Windows 8.1. Why not list the changes to 8.1 below changes to Windows 8? Or do it as it is done for Mac OSX. user931 19:14, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. This is deliberate. Wikipedia is not a change log or a list of indiscriminate items. You are not supposed to be able to locate a list of features that are new to Windows 8.1 all together. There are millions of places on the Internet that make such trivia lists. Visit them if you wish, instead of Wikipedia. I am not saying such lists are bad; it is just what we don't. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 03:25, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * And yet Android version history gets to do that. ViperSnake151   Talk  06:24, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. I expected an "Other stuff exist" discussion from anyone but you, dear ViperSnake. If anything, articles like Android version history sully your good work. But History of Firefox is a nice example of how things should be. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 10:17, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Who are you to say how wikipedia should or shouldn't be? Or that you are not supposed to be able to locate a list of features?! Wikipedia is a place for information and sometimes it is very usefull to present information in a list, you find it all over wikipedia. For me you have deliberately damaged the changes part to Windows 8.1 user931 20:54, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * History of Firefox is a good example of sorting features based on which update brought them. It follows the advice of WP:NOTCHANGELOG because it integrates the changes into the history section/sub-article instead of a features section/sub-article. - Josh (talk | contribs) 15:38, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello. That is a byproduct of Mozilla applying changes based on a coherent plan in advance. They know what they want. But the main reason is that the article is written in prose and only focuses on major changes in an organized well-written fashion. They didn't make a list that puts "Start button" and "MiraCast" together. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 00:49, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I still fail to understand why we can't have a list of important new features, like many Windows service packs and platform updates do. And why remove any mention of Direct3D 11.2, DXGI 1.3 and WDDM 1.3 - does it really qualify as "change log"? --128.69.219.161 (talk) 19:31, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. Although I normally don't engage in "other stuff exists" discussion, I am curious now: What other articles are you talking about? I checked a few myself: Windows XP article has only a paragraph about "Service Pack 2". Changes that come with Service Pack 2 are merged with Features new to Windows XP in this very same fashion. (Mind you, Service Pack 2 had more changes than Windows 8.1 has.)


 * As for Direct3D 11.2, DXGI 1.3 and WDDM 1.3, we can add them, if you have a source.


 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 00:49, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Windows Vista and Windows 7, which make much more sense than these incomprehensible "feature lists" in full prose above.
 * As for D3D and DXGI/WDDM, you just need to stop acting like the Wikipedia link police and try to actually verify the references before you remove them. --95.25.193.108 (talk) 10:23, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * See Windows 8 for the section that corresponds to the evidence you've given for older releases. Information is available both there and here on the matter, but it does't need it's own article just for 8.1 changes. drewmunn talk 11:16, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * You do realize that we are discussing the approach taken in very same section you cite above, do you? --95.25.193.108 (talk) 12:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. Thanks, drew, for responding to the first part. As for the second part, 95.25.193.108, I could equally argue that maybe you need to stop acting like a WikiCriminal that breaks the rules and actually supply a source. Being a cop is better than being a robber. But that wouldn't be my reason. The real reason is that I have previously been a victim of lying and so I have deep respect for sources. Frankly, if you are expecting others to do all the good things for you in Wikipedia, it is not going to happen. No pain, no gain. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 01:15, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Not providing links for valid information is not criminal, officer. If you were a Wikipedia editor sufficiently knowledgeable in the matter, you would try to verify and correct them in the first place. --95.25.193.108 (talk) 12:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. Contents without a source may be challenged and removed. Also, the burden of source lies with the person who adds or reinstates the contents. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 14:28, 26 September 2013 (UTC)