Windows 8 frightens me, and here’s why

Some people just hate change. It can’t be helped. Those people cling to old versions of their favorite software as long as they can. When support cycles end and upgrades are forced upon them, they work tirelessly to customize new releases to look just like the old ones. When that fails, they take to Internet message boards and complain endlessly. “Why did they move such and such?” they ask. “Why did they merge this menu and that one? Why does it ask for my permission when I try to do this? Why, why, why?”

Those people are the bane of developers and web designers everywhere. When they’re spoon-fed improvements with shiny silverware, they purse their lips and shake their heads and cry and moan until whatever they were offered splatters on the floor. They don’t care if things change for the better, and they can’t conceive that learning something anew might save them time in the long run. They want things exactly as they are now—forever.

I’m not one of those people; or at least, I like to think I’m not. For the most part, I love change. I seek out new software versions regularly, because I get bored with stagnant user interfaces and unchanging feature sets. I used to run beta apps a lot, but I cut back to keep my main work machine stable. Unlike some people I know, I tend to stick to the default settings in most applications I use. Not only does it save me a lot of frustration when customizations disappear or I have to change PCs, but it also gives me front-row seats to whatever new goodies developers add. I try to enjoy software the way its designers intended, not the way I think it ought to be used.

So, I love change, and I love trying new things. I should be ecstatic about Windows 8. It’s going to be new. It’s going to be very different, and it’s going to make me learn new things and sample new behaviors. Upgrading to Windows 8 will mean a few days, maybe weeks, of experimentation and discovery, and my computing habits might change for the better because of it.

The thing is, I’m not excited. I’m terrified. It’s like I’m a hot tub enthusiast, complete with a mustache and chest hair and 1970s hairdo, and Microsoft is about to toss me into a steaming hot spring at the bottom of a volcano. And the hot spring is full of sharks. And the sharks also have mustaches and chest hair. Windows 8 just feels like too much change all at once—too much change that’s too fundamental. And I’m not convinced that change will be for the better.

Yes, I’ve tried the Windows 8 Consumer Preview, and it’s an improvement over last year’s Developer Preview, no doubt about it. Everything works more smoothly. Everything seems to make just a little bit more sense. There’s a growing library of Metro apps, so it’s easier to get a feel for how the final product will behave on a day-to-day basis. And heck, some of those Metro apps look pretty good—here’s looking at you, NewsRepublic.

The problem is, Windows 8 still has that ugly schism between Metro and Desktop. You keep waltzing from one to the other and then back again, whether it’s to open an application, to move documents around the file system, or to perform any other task that isn’t neatly contained within a single interface. So far, it seems like Metro apps are geared solely toward content consumption, while all the productivity work still has to happen in the Desktop. And it’s terribly awkward.

That’s probably going to change, of course. I expect the library of Metro apps to grow once Windows 8 hits stores, and once that happens, we’ll likely see some productivity software designed for the new interface. But as new Metro apps start to supplant old Desktop ones, I’m going to have to deal with another big, big problem. And I fear it might be a dealbreaker.

Right now, my main PC has two 24″ displays sitting side by side. I usually have a web browser, text editor, and Office applications on my left monitor, and my IRC client, IM contacts list, IM windows, and music player on my right monitor. Things move around from time to time, naturally. Sometimes, I’ll be running Excel on my left monitor with a browser window on the right. Other times, I’ll have a browser on each display. Maybe one will be for reading TR, and maybe the other will have a YouTube music video playing. Today, for example, I’ve had I Want a New Drug by Huey Lewis and the News looping at my right.

I could do all of those things in Windows 8, but I’d have to do them in the Desktop interface. Metro, with its modal design and huge buttons and giant text, is almost comically ill-suited for heavy multitasking. Basic app-to-app switching is clunky and slow. Windowed multitasking is off the menu. The best you can do is run two apps side-by-side, with one squeezed along the edge of the display, and that’s a poor consolation prize.

Now, what happens when Metro gets all the cool new software, and Desktop gets relegated to legacy status? And what if Desktop and Metro continue to co-exist with equal attention from developers; where does that leave me? In either case, my multitasking experience is going to take a bullet in the leg. Unless I want to snub Metro software forever, I’ll have to dedicate one display to Metro, with one or two apps running concurrently, and the other display to the Desktop UI, with everything else I want to use. Things might end up stuck that way for the foreseeable future. Or, if developers choose to focus their efforts on Metro, I might have to abandon the Desktop—and multi-window multitasking—for good.

Both of those options would suck. They wouldn’t just suck; they would hobble my productivity. I wouldn’t be able to keep my eye on a whole suite of different apps at once, and juggling between more than a handful of programs would become a nightmare. As hard as I might try to accept change and to adopt Microsoft’s prescribed usage model, I doubt it would do any good.

“Ah, well,” you might say. “If you don’t like Windows 8, Cyril, you should just stick with Windows 7. Nobody’s going to force you to upgrade.”

That’s true. Sort of. Sticking with an obsolete operating system always starts off great, but then you begin to miss out on new things. After a few years, Microsoft pulls the plug, and you’re on your own with no software patches and no security updates. The sad thing is, I don’t want to keep using Windows 7 forever. As nice an operating system as it is, it’s not perfect, and many of Windows 8’s Desktop improvements actually seem awfully compelling. However, I won’t be able to enjoy them without dealing with all those Metro-related hassles.

In short, I’m going to be faced with an ugly compromise no matter what I do. And that’s why Windows 8 frightens me.

Comments closed
    • pedro
    • 7 years ago

    I simply have to know: Are Krogoth and Meadows the same person?

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      no. me and krogoth are the same person. meadows is a weirdo that loves ponies, and talks about being moist. clearly a weirdo.

    • gdonner
    • 7 years ago

    Windows 8 = brought to you by the makers of the ingenious ribbon toolbar!

    Derp.

    • BlockheadBrown
    • 7 years ago

    Good read.

    • anotherengineer
    • 7 years ago

    “and many of Windows 8’s Desktop improvements actually seem awfully compelling.”

    I’m terrified they won’t bring those improvments to Windows 7 in service packs, and they will abandon it like Vista when w8 is rtm.

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      why would they back port new features? they’ve said for a long time that xp sp2 won’t be repeated.

    • mfczap
    • 7 years ago

    So what’s stopping users from staying in Desktop mode most / all the time? Ignore Metro if you don’t like it.

    I look forward to having a tablet with a robust OS suitable for mobile use – and then connecting the same device to a monitor and keyboard in the office or home and having all the power of a desktop.

    I want to have my cake and to eat it to.

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      nothing. it’s a bunch of whining. it’s a fine desktop os.

      • fyo
      • 7 years ago

      I think Cyril already made the argument… “Now, what happens when Metro gets all the cool new software, and Desktop gets relegated to legacy status?”

      Realistically, though, I expect Metro to evolve. Right now, it’s a perfect fit for touch-interfaces on smallish displays. Having the exact same UI for every display size from 4″ phones to 20+” desktops just isn’t tenable. Given time, Metro will evolve into a multi-faceted UI that, while preserving the “Metro feel”, won’t force a small-display UI on a large display.

      Google started down that path with Ice Cream Sandwich, and I’d be surprised if Microsoft (and Apple) didn’t follow suit.

      It’s a GREAT time for GUIs right now. After suffering through little-to-no innovation since the first windowed UIs since Xerox introduced them in the 70s, we’re finally seeing massive experimentation on a multitude of fronts. (Yes, the GUIs did get slightly more functional, a lot prettier, and faster).

      Sadly, innovation in UIs never seems to “just happen”. Rather, changes appear dictated by new display sizes and input devices (the mouse being the instigator of the windowed GUI).

      What we’re seeing now feels fundamentally different in that paradigms developed for completely different circumstances (display sizes and input devices) are significantly influencing each other, upsetting the status quo. Finally.

      • rrr
      • 7 years ago

      Even without metro it still sucks, due to lack of start button.

    • deb0
    • 8 years ago

    The win8 desktop appears hedious and cumbersome. I’m sure there’e more under the hood, but I just don’t see how a tile set of ugly icons is any better than what Windows 7 employs.

    Microsoft seems increasingly out of touch with what pc users need and want today. Time will tell.

      • Firestarter
      • 8 years ago

      Well, not increasingly, seeing as they mostly hit home with Windows 7. That makes it all the more puzzling to me.

    • Chrispy_
    • 8 years ago

    [b<]You are right to be frightened. [/b<] Someone at Microsoft thinks that chasing a small slice of the already-crowded touchscreen mobile market is worth sacrificing desktop productivity for around the globe. As you say, [b<]Metro is comically ill-suited for multitasking[/b<], which is pretty much the definition of productivity these days. I am "idle" at the moment but I still have email, browser, music, excel and a terminal window open at the moment, my two widescreens are running four application windows and I shuffle them around as necessary with Windows key + cursors.

      • ludi
      • 7 years ago

      Considering my desktop at work is [i<]still[/i<] running WindowsXP, and that we skipped Vista and are grudgingly adopting Win7 on new machines, I don't think Windows8 is even on the corporate radar. And probably never will be, since we'll finally have a stable Win7 environment across the company in a few years' time and will only grudgingly switch to Windows OSX (see what I did there?) in another decade.

        • Chrispy_
        • 7 years ago

        It’s on my (corporate) radar and I cannot honestly see any reason whatsoever to force it on my users.

        The number of unanswered problems that moving to Metro would create is so long that I’d be retired by the time I finished typing it all.

        “Just no” is my comment for the moment, and yes – we’re still left with four XP machines that cannot run Windows7 because the software that those users rely on is old and incompatible. It’s important software with years of invested work and those users are not going to put up with a virtual machine just to abandon it just to get a transparent taskbar and a searchable start menu.

        This legacy problem is exactly why the move away from XP is so grudgingly done for companies and I don’t see why consumers should blindly follow Microsoft’s crazy user-recommended interface solutions.

    • WhatMeWorry
    • 8 years ago

    I find it ironical that while Apple introduces their retina display on their tablet and probably pretty soon on their laptops, Microsoft is creating a UI featuring big, monochromatic rectangles.

      • Meadows
      • 7 years ago

      How are the two related?

    • Laykun
    • 8 years ago

    Sounds like it’s time to switch to Ubuntu 🙂

    • gamoniac
    • 8 years ago

    Not directly related, but since there is a lot of discussion about MetroUI — I supposed one of the biggest weaknesses of touchscreen (compared to laptop) is the loss of keyboard and mouse (at least for me). I am not sure what solution they have to replace keyboard, but I would think that someone has suggested this idea of mouse replacement somewhere. Anyway, here is the idea that just popped in my head moments ago —

    Since fat fingers are not idea for precision pointing and stylus is a hassle that is easy to lose or drop, why don’t they just provide a dedicated pointer button that when selected, will show a pointer a few millimeters next to the user’s finger? Then, when a second finger is placed next to the first finger, a context menu will pop up (similar to right clicking).

    What do you think?

    • LoneWolf15
    • 8 years ago

    “Metro, with its modal design and huge buttons and giant text, is almost comically ill-suited for heavy multitasking.”

    Couldn’t agree more.

    This is my biggest problem with Win8 as a desktop OS. At work, heavy multitasking is required for me. Five browser windows each with ten tabs. Notepad++ with five tabs of its own. Outlook. Excel with 5-10 documents, and then a couple of Remote Desktop sessions. Probably a few more things in addition to that, but that’s for starters. I have two monitors; I could use 3-4 (which may eventually happen).

    This is near-impossible in Metro. Metro seems to be Microsoft’s assumption that the home user is more important than business, and that the home user only needs a couple apps open. The underpinnings of Windows 8 are great, and Metro is just fine for tablets and for smartphones. I think it absolutely SUCKS on the desktop at this point, and I’ve tried both the DP and the CP.

    I don’t think I’m a curmudgeon –I switched every system in my house to Windows 7 within 2 months of its release. I don’t plan to do this with Win8.

    • jstern
    • 8 years ago

    I never worry or complain much about Windows 8 because I just assume Metro will be disabled for the desktop, or have the option. If not I’ll just stick to 7. We saw from the 1st preview that the Start menu is definitely there, and the dislike for Metro is so beyond anything I’ve ever seen. So of course, I assume it’s not going to be enabled by default. I still have yet to read someone who would like it for non tablet use.

    • Theolendras
    • 8 years ago

    Is that me Cyril, but a third monitor would do a lot in multitasking scenario just to have metro on another screen without compromising you’re multitasking behavior you have now and get somehow the benefits without much of the drawback…

    • entropy13
    • 8 years ago

    And now Aero Glass UI is removed??? WTF???

    [url<]http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/18/creating-the-windows-8-user-experience.aspx[/url<]

      • Rand
      • 8 years ago

      At this point I honestly wouldn’t have thought they could make Win8 this bad had they intentionally set out to make the worst OS possible. It’s actually quite impressive in a twisted sense of the word.

        • yogibbear
        • 8 years ago

        If my work laptop ever comes with Windows 8 I will change jobs, seriously. Going to try everything to avoid using that malware.

          • Shouefref
          • 8 years ago

          Ah, to be able to switch jobs just to get rid of computers…
          It’s a dream.
          It’s not that computers didn’t improve the way we work. They did. And they improved work conditiions too. They gave us more possibilities.
          But that fact is they also give power to people who previously didn’t have power over us, and that sucks.

      • Voldenuit
      • 8 years ago

      Haha. Great read. It almost had me drinking the kool-aid until I remembered that wait, I [i<]do[/i<] need to run more than two applications at once, and wait, I don't spend all my time on the computer social networking. Obviously, I am a [s<]fringe[/s<] basket case.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 8 years ago

      I love the quotes about Windows 1 that make it sound like other people were incredibly short sighted. When infact Windows 1 sucked and it took until 3/3.1 to not suck and people to start using it.

      • Shouefref
      • 8 years ago

      Aero Glass was one of the most important factors of the failure of Vista.
      And then again: they treated computers as kind of fashion model.
      Imagine: the effect of relfextion on your screen.
      Nothing’s as annoying as reflexions on your screen.

      • Kaleid
      • 8 years ago

      Don’t really care for that…I still use XP (not the bluish though, classic grey) look in win7 because with Aero active I can’t change the background color in windows explorer. Too much white isn’t nice, nor great for the eyes.

      • bandannaman
      • 7 years ago

      w.r.t. Aero Glass, isn’t that just saying the eye candy and doodads are toned down? Not sure that’s WTF-worthy.

    • corwin155
    • 8 years ago

    what i didn’t like was that every app watches what your doing while the Hugh app (win8) that runs it all is watching you and the apps your using
    and reports it in email to what other nefarious app thats watching microsoft
    started with vista had grown sneaker in win7 finally came right out and said
    “yeah im watching you” in win 8

    • yogibbear
    • 8 years ago

    I want to know what people are thinking about in terms of adopting Windows 8 on the enterprise front and what will happen in 5 years time? Will huge companies do it? Will they get fed up and go to something else?

      • Rand
      • 8 years ago

      It’s clear enterprises will skip Win8 and it’s server variant, they’d do that anyways as many of them as just finishing jumping on Win7 and they typically tend to skip versions.
      Win9 will the really telling as to what happens there.

    • moresmarterthanspock
    • 8 years ago

    Bill Gates and Mark Shuttleworth made a deal with the devil, and their payment is due, and Unity and Metro are it. When you make a deal with the devil, you must pay dearly at some point. As you can tell, I loath a non-traditional desktop, and these new desktops are pure evil.

      • Joe Miller
      • 8 years ago

      +1, but Unity is definitely better. It is only to open or search. Unity has no intention to replace, it adds to the classic desktop.

      • Ricardo Dawkins
      • 8 years ago

      what a bunch of uber non-sense. Deal with the devil, really? ROFLMAO.

      • Vaughn
      • 7 years ago

      WTF are you going on about??

      Bill gates hasn’t had anything to do with MS in the past 10 years.

        • moresmarterthanspock
        • 7 years ago

        Yes, but Bill Gates made a deal with the devil when Microsoft was first founded, and since he was a co-founder of Microsoft, Lucifer is going after him first. I partly jest, but at the same time, you have to wonder why certain people are successful in this world. hmmm….

          • sweatshopking
          • 7 years ago

          wut? you’re a crazy man. spock is sad

    • spigzone
    • 8 years ago

    I had W7 RC up and running the day it came out and I never looked back. It was a massive improvement over XP in every way. I loved it from day one.

    I have zero interest in W8, it TAKES AWAY functionality and ease of operation. It can’t be appreciably faster, my computer’s response is already nearly instant (with SIII Samsung SSD).The only feature I’m remotely interested in is the W8 restore and reset feature and the advent of SSDs and excellent free cloning software considerably alleviates that and I’ve been on this SSD install for over a year and it’s still operating like the day I installed it.

    I also like a no clutter desktop. My desktop is the wallpaper picture. Period.

    W8 uptake is going to be slow and painful for Microsoft and any attempt to force users to W8 is going to reap a whirlwind of blowback.

    W7 is going to be around and supported for a long long time.

      • LoneWolf15
      • 8 years ago

      I won’t agree it’s a massive improvement in EVERY way, but in most ways.

      Classic search, IMHO, is miles better in XP. Right-click on a folder, click search, and for power users, it’s just better, with the granular options being easier to access.

      Standardizing user profiles in Win7 in an enterprise environment also sucks compared to XP; Microsoft made it far more difficult, and while they could make it easy with short work, they’ve made it obvious they aren’t that interested. Sucks for education or any single-computer-multi-user environment.

      Other than that, the OS is indeed a big improvement. These two drawbacks aren’t enough to make me go back to XP, but they have been a pain in my side from time to time.

      • moog
      • 8 years ago

      W8 is faster.

        • stupido
        • 8 years ago

        “wait” (W8) is by definition slower… 😛

    • halbhh2
    • 8 years ago

    Ok, the Win8 default theme (?) shown above is just ugly.

    But….why not just go to a retro theme on Win8?
    I’m guessing this will work out fine, and then we’ll remember how when we were kids, the futuristi was more like you talk to it, and don’t see it, until you need a holo image, etc.

    • tbone8ty
    • 8 years ago

    there will be a metro disable tweak made just like there was one made for the original win8 beta preview.

    • Madman
    • 8 years ago

    I tend to be very critical about such changes, but my objective opinion is that after some time things will settle down. Don’t get me wrong, Win 8 GUI is a smoking pile of burning crap, just the same as Unity is. But things will improve.

    It’s simple, once this smoking pile of crap gets into a way of peoples daily duties, it gets smoothened, just like rock gets smoothened by the water.

    Unity in 11.04 was supper crappy, it was stinking. However, for the 12.04, it’s approaching the usable status. I still think it’s still a lot worse than classical desktop, but it’s a lot more usable with HUD, and customisation options. So I’m trying to give Unity a try.

    Same with Windows, Win 9 might be more usable. Just like with Vista being piece of crap and Windows 7 being a productive, production oriented, slipstreamed OS.

    On the long run, there is a problem though, companies are lost with their sense of direction. Apple has turned tables upside down, and facebook/twitter/gmail/gdocs are also playing an important role. Companies are trying to rule the cloud, without even realising it’s not the ultimate, one and only solution for everything. This is why we are getting all the crap nowadays. Always online applications, stupid web interfaces, oversimplified GUI, dumbed down devices and privacy nightmares.

      • floodo1
      • 8 years ago

      linux is ALWAYS approaching usable status 🙂

    • FuturePastNow
    • 8 years ago

    Mark my words, Steven Sinofsky will be unemployed by 2014.

    • Krogoth
    • 8 years ago

    I just realized that Windows 8 is one large xanatos gambit on MS’s part. They have little to lose and much to gain from it.

    Let me elaborate on why.

    Desktops/Laptops are a stagnant market. Microsoft already controls the majority of the marketshare here and market itself has been oversaturated with several versions of Windows. There’s nothing fundamentally that can done at the UI and code-level that it revolutionize this segment until the market moves onto a whole new interface scheme (neural interface, laser-projected “touchscreens” etc) . That’s why there hasn’t been anything radical since NT 5.x family. The only thing that NT 6.x (Vista/7) brought to the masses is native x86-64 support and enforced security polices that were set in place during NT 5.x era.

    The unfortunate consequence of this is that there’s little reason for average joe to upgrade their decade or so old systems that are still running with XP. Businesses on the other hand just are finishing up their painful transition to Vista/7 bandwagon and are no position to make another move.

    The new hotness right now are portables such as tablets and smartphones. Apple saw their potential years ago and invested heavily into what was once a niche market. It has pay off massively as Apple is dominant player in this arena, while everybody else is trying to pay catch-up and “me-too!”

    Microsoft is currently last place among the big players and has already tried several times in getting more mindshare in the portables market with little or no success. They want to change this and hopefully be about to tackle Apple as their equals.

    How are they doing this? By carefully copying Apple’s strategies during the past decade and put in their little spin on them. Windows 8 invokes a ton of cues from Apple (2001-2006 era) that you have to blind not to notice them. Microsoft wants to encourage the same software ecology by strong-arming mainstream market into Windows 8. They give developers a reason to develop for the new Metro UI and new software ecology. That’s why there are making the bold move of removing the classical UI from Windows 8.

    In other words, Windows 8 was never meant for the current desktop/laptop market. It was built to be a portable OS from the get go.

    Why is Microsoft willing to alienate their existing desktop/laptop users? Because, they can afford to do it. WIndows 8 others nothing compelling to the desktop/laptop user from a code standpoint. It is really the third child of Longhorn family and previews painfully show its similarities to its older siblings once you get pass the Metro UI. There’s no reason to upgrade if you are a 7/Vista user on a desktop/laptop.

    On the other hand, Windows 8 is a solid alternate to Android and iOS for portable systems that addresses some of the problems that happen with Microsoft’s previous attempts. It looks like Microsoft has a decent chance at wrestling some marketshare from Apple in this segiment.

    In the worse case, they make Vista/7 a compelling option for those who are remain are still on XP. FYI, XP itself is about to go into full retirement. At the same time, they create large expectations among desktop/laptop users who see that “Windows 9” will address the flaws in the “Windows 8 experiment”.

    In the unlikely event that Windows 8 proves to be popular in the desktop/laptop market. Microsoft will not only secure their continuing dominance in the desktop/laptop market, but they will have finally establish a stronghold in the portable market.

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      why are you just realizing this? some people have been saying this for months. you crazy man you.

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 8 years ago

        Krogoth isn’t impressed with our predictions.

      • Malphas
      • 8 years ago

      Exactly, I said the same thing earlier. Really, even supposing Windows 8 is a huge flop there’s nowhere else for PC users to go, despite what raving *nix fanboys might say to the contrary. On the other hand, Microsoft desperate needs to gain some sort of foothold in the tablet space before they get shut out for good. Desktop PC and large “desktop replacement” style laptop users were never a major concern when designing Windows 8.

        • sschaem
        • 8 years ago

        So the solution to get on tablet is to introduce a desktop OS based around a full screen touch interface?

        The moaning is not about metro, but about metro being the central peice of a desktop/workstation OS.

        How many windows user said “I wish my screen would flash to a full screen showing purple and green tiles”

        Have you actually used Windows8 on a desktop setup? its RIDICULOUS.

        Its not about big or small users, why design a desktop OS based on touch and full screen only apps?

          • Krogoth
          • 8 years ago

          Because, tablets and other portables are what is selling in the mainstream market.

          Desktops are only still selling strong in one segment. The enterprise market and that is mostly from the on-going XP to 7 transition.

          Windows 8 offers nothing compelling to enterprise market to warrant another upgrade.

        • designerfx
        • 8 years ago

        they’re way too late, hybrid devices for smartphone-laptop-tablet hybrids are beginning to show up.

        Unless microsoft releases one yesterday, they just lost the market again.

      • Martian
      • 8 years ago

      [i<]"It looks like Microsoft has a decent chance at wrestling some marketshare from Apple in this segiment. "[/i<] No they don't. Metro shares the same weaknesses those ultra-portable, ultra-simple, non-multitasking crapwares have. If you want to gain market share you have to come up with something better or at least something new. Windows 8 is going to be an epic fail, worse than anything else before.

        • sweatshopking
        • 8 years ago

        have you used it on a tablet? the reviews are excellent..

          • Martian
          • 7 years ago

          Tablets are nothing compared to the whole market. Windows tablets will be expensive so they cannot compete against most of the Android tablets when it comes to pricing, they have to compete against the prestige of iDiot products for snobs, failure.

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            please explain why windows tablets will be expensive. netbooks are 200$. why would tablets suddenly be a fortune? you’re speculating, and doing it wrong.

      • ImSpartacus
      • 8 years ago

      So you’re not impressed with Cyril’s piece?

      • sschaem
      • 8 years ago

      MS cant afford to loose millions of windows users moving to Apple or linux from frustration.

      Thats a 350 million unit yearly market (not counting upgrades and software sales)

      And trading those sales to collect 30% of other developer revenue might not offset the loos long term.

      And what Stop MS from making the Metro paradigm for touch based devices instead of making it the central part of a desktop OS?
      Its fine to offer metro on the desktop so you can run mobile apps, but making it central to all operation doesn’t solve any problems MS is having being 4 years late to the mobile revolution.

      “We are loosing allot of mindshare to all those android and ios tablets and phone”
      “I have a solution, lets make our desktop OS work like a phone”
      “good idea!! this will solve everything and we are going to get all those user back!”

      So what MS is doing is trying to make you use your workstation with your fingers.. its not going to work.
      My monitor is not even reachable, so developing software based on touch for desktop is lame.

      MS is going to accelerate OSX adoption… check the stats comes jan 2013.

        • Krogoth
        • 8 years ago

        Windows 8 isn’t meant MS’s traditional bread and butter segments (Power users and enterprise market).

        It is meant for the mainstream crowd who are getting “portable systems” not desktops. Apple has been doing the same thing since iPod boom.

        Windows 8 doesn’t offer anything compelling to power users and enterprise aside from a new, but controversial UI. They will be able to weather out with Windows 7/Vista.

        By the time the next big hardware/software rolls out. Microsoft will be onto “Windows 9” which will address any shortcomings that they have experienced with Windows 8.

          • Meadows
          • 8 years ago

          Windows 8 supports power users. Microsoft haven’t removed any power user settings or customizations whatsoever (in fact, they improved a few), and depending on the usage patterns, Metro may never need to be invoked either.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            stop spreading reality. nobody believes you. And when did you become so rational, anyway? You’re the craziest man on here.

            • kc77
            • 8 years ago

            Oh it supports them, but it’s not geared towards them in any way. Hell if you haven’t figured it out by Vista/Win 7 you’re in for a world of hurt. Vista/Win 7 (might as well throw Office 2007 in there too) did more to obscure the features used most by power users or advanced users than any OS I’ve ever encountered and Windows 8 just finishes the job with Windows 9 picking your carcass over the last easily accessed features. It’s following the same road as iOS, Ubuntu, Android and Gnome 3.

            Metro no doubt will be the default. Can you get to a normal desktop? Sure you can but it will be obvious that’s not MS’s focus. Basically power users and gaming enthusiasts are a niche market. Translation: If you love hardware, buy discrete video cards, and frequent tech sites… that’s you.

            It’s been said a thousand times but it bares repeating. All 90% of the users need is a browser, maybe an email client, the ability to print, type a document or create a spreadsheet 2 or 3 times a year. That’s it. Anything else can be handled via an “App Store” or “Market”. “Gamers” who are apart of that 90% buy consoles, and even those (and the new ones coming) will be no more powerful than what can be done on an IPad 3 or a Galaxy S III.

            Basically if MS is your girlfriend Krogoth is telling you that she is just not that into you.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            First off, what features have disappeared that you’re so upset about? you’re aware of the new awesome right click menu in the bottom left? what EXACTLY are you upset about?

            • kc77
            • 8 years ago

            Upset?? LOL. I’m not upset. I really don’t care enough about MS to get upset about the things they do. I think it’s kind of funny actually. I’m also pretty sure I didn’t say anything about features being completely removed either. I said they’ve become more obscure and in so many ways some of the “features” they have added have either made the experience less enjoyable or make no sense at all.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            ok, what features have they made obscure?

            • kc77
            • 8 years ago

            Off the top of my head. The Network Center is a good example of making important things obscure. This screen is well almost useless if it wasn’t for the really important stuff placed on the left side in 8 pitch font within a section that’s…what? Maybe 300 pixels wide?

            The section that takes up the most is the glorified network annunciator panel that tells you something you already know. Otherwise you wouldn’t be there. Why exactly is this needed? If I was having network problems I would know way before I got to this section. Second the only people headed off to the Network Center would be people with at least some technical knowledge and those people would do an ip/ifconfig. So who is this screen for? The answer…. no one. All this screen does is piss off the advanced people and confuse the mildly technical people by telling you your network connection is broken and then miniaturizing the hotspots linking to the screens to fix it.

            • Meadows
            • 8 years ago

            Okay, that’s 1 feature, and they haven’t made it obscure, they just moved it a couple pixels to the left. That’s your argument?

            • kc77
            • 8 years ago

            I can see this will be futile. I think the changes are a little more than that. I think I wrote two paragraphs on that one change. But if you need a list, then you could just pull up the Control Panel itself, or we could spend a day within the Sound Volume controls alone and write a paper on why that change was stupid.

            • Meadows
            • 8 years ago

            I like the Sound options better than ever, and I access the Control Panel as a “List” sliding out from the Start Menu, so I never actually open a window for said panel itself. Even so, the Control Panel an improvement over, say, that of XP, and there are myriad other improvements elsewhere as well.

            About the only thing I do not like is forcing the EDID information by default.

            • PenGun
            • 7 years ago

            LOL. Windose power users. A true oxymoron, I don’t get to use the word often.

    • just brew it!
    • 8 years ago

    If you want desktop user interface churn, you might as well just cut over to Linux now so you don’t have to pay for the privilege. 😉

    • ronch
    • 8 years ago

    I’m not sure I like Windows 8, but I’m not terrified. Either it gets shoved down our throats or we look elsewhere. Of course there’s Linux, and if Win8 really sucks, maybe it’ll motivate game devs to port over to the penguin. Heck, maybe a serious effort to really polish a Linux distro for desktops would emerge to help people.

    • jackbomb
    • 8 years ago

    WinXP pissed me off on a weekly basis, which is why I upgraded to Vista the day it was released (and enjoyed it). Win7, on the other hand, has been a great XPerience. I’m fine with using it for the next 5+ years. 🙂

    • BloodSoul
    • 8 years ago

    Windows 8 may just be the push I need to really get into Linux! I try to look on the bright side of everything…

    • Walkintarget
    • 8 years ago

    I simply must try this Win8 out !! The gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands is just universal in its lambasting of this OS, and rightfully so after reading time and again the same complaints from the same type of power users that I fit in with.

    I must admit to loving and living with a Vista 32 rig up until a month ago. No, you cannot disagree with me – I bought so high up the hardware food chain that Vista ran extremely well. That PC served me well for almost 4 years (built in 2008 to celebrate me turning 40).

    I made the change to Win7, and short of a different look to the taskbar, its nearly identical to Vista. I really don’t have time to invest in a Win8 testbed, but it appears it really isn’t even worth trying it out based on the frustrated posts from users who have.

    • Anarchist
    • 8 years ago

    hell … I like changes too. But when it comes to OS, the changes that will excite me are changes that matter, like new file system, improved process management, new device driver model, change in kernel architecture, perhaps running each process in virtual machine, etc etc. That is why Linux is interesting and that is why BeOS was exciting. When they say new OS and all they do is try to change desktop OS into tablet OS that is change I will not be excited about, not that I care … since I don’t use windows.

    • smilingcrow
    • 8 years ago

    Why not have two subtly different flavours of Metro apps? The same app but a different behaviour depending on the O/S version. So when installed on Windows Phone or Windows RT they follow the guidelines as currently prescribed. But when installed on the full fat Win8 there are some subtle differences the main one being that the apps aren’t forced to be full screen only or in dual apps per screen mode. Sure it’s extra work but it’s not that much extra as developers are used to designing forms/windows that scale to multiple sizes. This way you can have more than 2 Metro apps on one monitor and adjust their sizes accordingly to fit your needs.

    There’s no way that this current limitation makes sense for higher resolution screens especially as the types of apps that make sense for the Metro style are generally utilities rather than full blown productivity applications. We don’t all run multiple monitors so this limitation is even more pronounced on single screen setups unless I have missed something!

    • sschaem
    • 8 years ago

    For people that dont like changes its often because something works perfectly for them already and they dont care to spend more time learning how the new kid think you should do it.

    But thats not the case with the windows8 outrage.

    Windows8 introduce this:

    “We replaced the steering wheel in cars with a dual joystick, we found that after training you will actually find it easier to use, plus we can use the same design for airplanes, we have proven this in our labs, people that flight airplane will find it simpler to switch between flying a plane and driving a car”

    “Can I still have the steering wheel in my car until I get use to the joystick?”

    “No, joysticks will be the only way to control all new airplanes and cars from now on, get use to it”

    I’m talking about the start menu for quick one click access to apps VS a full screen popup with purple and green kidy squares. BTW, I have seen ZERO cases where the metro full screen page is better then the start menu. Works great on a tablet, a total disaster on the desktop.

    I wouldn’t care if MS kept the start menu, but they offer no alternative for desktop users.

    So the issue with windows8, the changes are not for the better. I have windows8 on one of my machine that I use pretty much daily and after 3 month its still a joke. Every little thing you get your entire screen to show you some lame purple and green squares. I just wanted to open “paint”, and poof back to your desktop. How does that help VS opening an app with 2 click of a mouse ?
    Those constant full screen flashes are very disruptive.

    And the metro apps are horrible to use with a keyboard and mouse.. can I grab a full screen page to scroll it? no that would be to intuitive, you need to find a corner to go to, so a scroll bar appear so you can grab it to scroll , then go back with the mouse on the document to interact with it.
    And beware , dont move your mouse to any corners otherwise some UI popup over your document and you cant use the UI at that location anymore, you need to move the mouse away, and bring it back.. making sure it doesn’t trigger again the popup UI .

    People that cant stand Windows8 are not the crowd that dislike windows95 or Vista, its pretty much every single desktop users that try it for more then a day.

    Why would anyone embrace change for the worse ? Windows8 is a step backward.

    I think the result will be accelerated migration to IOS and OSX.
    Windows8 is driving windows user away and give good reasons for people that wanted to switch but didn’t want to learn of new desktop environment… MS just gave them the green light.

    Good news for MS, it would take very little to make windows8 a desktop friendly OS again.

    • DeadOfKnight
    • 8 years ago

    Hey Cyril, how much of a difference did start8 make?

    [url<]https://techreport.com/discussions.x/22591[/url<]

      • Rand
      • 8 years ago

      Start8 sucks, bad. There are several vastly superior, more functional and more configurable alternatives.
      I tried Start8 and found the Metro start screen far better.

    • not@home
    • 8 years ago

    I tried out Win 8 with Metro. It totally sucked. It really really put a damper on productivity. I can see what is going to happen. Consumers who want content consumption are going to like Win 8, everyone who works at their machines or multitasks will get the server version w/o Metro. Or they will just go elsewhere (OSX, Linux, etc.). MS will be able to charge more for the server version and those who are locked into MS by certain productivity apps will pay for it. I have used Linux before, I have no problem switching to that.

    • danny e.
    • 8 years ago

    Steve Jobs:
    ” .. we don’t use focus groups. Everyone designs things the way I want them designed.”

    Microsoft:
    “hey, if steve jobs can do it, so can we. Here, have a load of Metro on the desktop!”

    —————
    The problem is that Microsoft is no Steve Jobs. It worked for Apple because Jobs tended to get things right as far as usability… at least to the market he cared about – idiot market (i mean content consumer market).
    On the microsoft side, we have 90% of the desktop OS share. A large part of this number is the people who actually PRODUCE content. Not merely content consumers. We go to work, we program, we design. blah blah blah.

    Microsoft is trying to design things for the content consumers which would be fine if it wasn’t for the fact that their changes geared to the consumer actually hurts the content producers. It shouldn’t be so hard to do both but apparently they haven’t figured it out yet but insist on shipping things before they figure them out.

      • WaltC
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]The problem is that Microsoft is no Steve Jobs.[/quote<] No, the problem for Apple is that Steve Jobs is dead. No amount of martyr-hood can change that. Time to move on, don't you think?

        • danny e.
        • 8 years ago

        what? this thread has nothing to do with Apple other than that Microsoft seems to be attempting Jobs-like dictatorship without a Jobs-like visionary.

    • ron_nelson
    • 8 years ago

    I think what bugs me is that the latest kernel improvements will only show up in Win8, and my reluctance to move will put them out of my reach…

    • fredsnotdead
    • 8 years ago

    Welcome to the old farts’ club, Cyril.

    Most people don’t do any real work on their computers, and that I think is what is driving Win8. It isn’t for the people who use photoshop or write code. Everyone else can do what they need/want to in a browser window.

    Change for the sake of change always makes me unhappy — is it really better to put that menu item in another location? Why did you get it wrong the first time, and why do you think you did any better the second time?

      • Saribro
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]Most people don't do any real work on their computers[/quote<] Then what the hell do people do on their computers [u<]-at work-[/u<]?

        • paulWTAMU
        • 8 years ago

        Read Tech Report while waiting for an eternal conference call from hell to be over.

        • rpsgc
        • 8 years ago

        Work.

        He was talking about HOME computers. It was pretty obvious.

          • Saribro
          • 8 years ago

          It’s the same OS whether it’s a home or a work computer…

    • smilingcrow
    • 8 years ago

    Is Cyril’s fear based purely on speculation on what might happen? This is in regard to current desktop applications being ported over to Metro apps with no legacy application remaining or as Cyril said, “Now, what happens when Metro gets all the cool new software, and Desktop gets relegated to legacy status?”.

    Is MS actually suggesting this is the way to go for monolithic legacy applications such as Office, Adobe CS, Visual Studio etc?
    Surely the developers have to decide what the appropriate interface is for their app(lication) and if they get it wrong that is their fault and the market will punish them.
    For smaller applications or utilities that could potentially work well in legacy or Metro mode I wonder how difficult it will be to offer both versions. Most of the underlying functionality is the same with the difference being the interface. I presume the level of difficulty depends partially on what the software development restrictions are for Metro apps. Anyone know what those are?

    Metro is such a radical change that the chances of being right in version 1 are small. I’m not as scared of Metro as some but I am wary as it’s a difficult juggling act to pull off.

      • cynan
      • 8 years ago

      This.

      Does anyone really think that workhorse productivity applications such as Office, Adobe CS, CAD, etc, will actually be made for Metro? Though Metro will get browsers, I doubt that Mozilla, Google and MS will stop updating theirs for the desktop. And I’m sure you’ll still be able to get core media players such as Foobar, Winamp, Media Player Classic, etc for the desktop until forever as well. Sure, avoiding Metro may result in missing out on the latest “App” client for a piece of software you didn’t really need anyway…

      [i<]Metro is such a radical change that the chances of being right in version 1 are small.[/i<] And more to the point, software designers, especially those working on high cost, "serious" productivity software that many businesses depend on, will do all they can to avoid risking turning off current customer bases and resist Metro like the pox. Sure, the world [i<]could[/i<] turn on its head and we could be forced to create 50X1000 spreadsheets in the Metro interface, but its not likely.

    • burntham77
    • 8 years ago

    Some key points that stood out and summed things up nicely:

    “It’s terribly awkward.”
    “Metro, with its modal design and huge buttons and giant text, is almost comically ill-suited for heavy multitasking.”

    People say this is going to be another Vista, but Vista, despite some early driver issues and demanding more memory than Windows XP, was a very solid OS, and still is. It did not tinker with the most basic of functionalities, and actually improved on the Start Menu. The problem with Windows 8 is it seems to want to throw out the foundation of why we like Windows and give us some kind of touch-centric interface that belongs on a tablet, not a desktop.

    • mcnabney
    • 8 years ago

    Or you could just give Microsoft the finger, and migrate to an entirely different platform.

    That is my plan. Win7 will probably get me 3 more years. I anticipate a dockable tablet based on something not Microsoft will be perfectly capable of replacing the home PC by then. The next generation of consoles will be out and I will sadly buy a PS4 (the first console I would have bought since the Atari 2600) and kiss computer gaming (Apple, Amiga, and PC) goodbye. Microsoft might finally kill the goose that has been laying those golden eggs with this generation. Their monopoly protected them for a long time, but Windows isn’t really required anymore.

      • bcronce
      • 8 years ago

      Lawl.. PS4. Sony is the root of all Evil. Politically sabotaging our freedoms while installing rootkits and handing out user info to hackers like candy at a parade.

        • Goty
        • 8 years ago

        [quote<]Lawl.. [/quote<] Aaand I stopped reading.

          • rrr
          • 8 years ago

          He’s right. Sony has even worse history of underhanded tactics than MS.

            • mcnabney
            • 8 years ago

            Sony has rootkits and plain text user info on unsecured servers.
            I could write a thesis on Microsoft and barely scratch the surface.

            I chose PS4 because I sure am not going to Xbox and Nintendo doesn’t make anything I am interested in.

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      if sony even makes a ps4. the way that company is performing, i’m not sure it’s likely. i think a take over is on the way, or major asset sales.

        • Rand
        • 8 years ago

        I think it’s pretty clear there will be a PS4, whether there is a PS5 or even much of a Sony at all by that time isn’t nearly as certain however.

          • sweatshopking
          • 8 years ago

          6 billion a year loss, when the company is worth 18 billion, doesn’t leave a lot of room. the ps3 was supposed to last till like 2016.

    • lilbuddhaman
    • 8 years ago

    Sidethought: Does anyone think this is the first step towards putting ads in the OS, ala Xbox Live?

    Just looking at the similarities between the two interfaces (metro and Live’s home screen), I would certainly not be surprised in seeing MS *attempting* to peddle a “free” windows which is ad supported, or an app market that allows for free apps that are supported by ads that get thrown into that main collection of rectangles. (and MS collecting a small but significant cut).

    I know I know, “no one would put up with ads on their desktop”, but wouldn’t they?

      • Rand
      • 8 years ago

      That’s a foregone conclusion IMO, many of their existing Metro apps are largely catered around advertisements and a push to sell you movies/music/games etc rather then actually playing back movies/music and playing games.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 8 years ago

    I get your issues, its not that you don’t like metro, or that you love desktop. Its the fact that the two elements don’t really co-exist well. Windows is not touch friendly and metro steers like a semi with mouse and keyboard. Then the extended user experience is further muddled for each, metro is limited in how it can really break away and windows is loosing power user viability.

    • ninjapirate
    • 8 years ago

    I’m glad Windows 8 Metro exists because it’s nice to have a (consumer) platform where Intel and ARM are truly competing against each other. At the same time though I think people would be smart to just stick with Windows 7 and then watch what happens in the Android universe. Android will be getting a desktop mode soon and then there is “Ubuntu for Android”.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 8 years ago

      But Intel and ARM still won’t be competing against each other because Intel-based tablets aren’t limited to Metro apps where ARM is.

        • ninjapirate
        • 8 years ago

        Just because Intel can run desktop apps too doesn’t mean they aren’t in competition.

    • lilbuddhaman
    • 8 years ago

    Sticking with Win 7 (just like many many other people) will send a message to MS that their metro experiment was an ill conceived one.

    What I don’t understand is how they didn’t get that message going from Vista to 7, as a huge amount of “fluff” simply isn’t there in W7 and is better because of it.

    Win8/Metro will be awesome on tablets, and it’s great that there is crossover, but by users such as ourselves buying the desktop version, we are telling them that is the “right” direction to go.

    But lets be honest here, Win8 will not sell even 25% of what Win7 has sold. How many aging corporate computers are getting replaced/moved over to 7? How many of those newly upgraded machines do you think will get upgraded [i<]again[/i<] any time soon? How many of those who *do* want to upgrade will choose something with an unproven, untested thing like Metro? I'm exciting to hear about Win9, which will be exactly like Win8, but with desktop by default and Metro as an option.

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      nice speculation at the end! likely wrong, but nice anyway!

      you’re right about corporate users. enterprise isn’t likely to upgrade this cycle. MS knows that. that’s one of the reasons they’re probably making this change after win 7. they know most companies won’t buy it anyway.

        • superjawes
        • 8 years ago

        Yeah, I don’t think computing in general is quite where it needs to be for corporate users to pick it up just yet. Some will. Specifically companies who can and do switch between tablet and desktop PCs.

        The advantage is being able to switch seamlessly between a mobile and desk environment, taking your productivity with you and possibly connecting your mobile device to wherever you need to start work, like a presentation system in a conference room. For any of that to happen, though, you need a lot more adoption, integration, and investment, and aside from rolling out a tablet-friendly OS (oh hey, Windows 8) there’s not a lot Microsoft can do to speed that along.

    • Xenolith
    • 8 years ago

    I’m sure there will be things that bug me about win 8, but I expect the pluses to outweigh the minuses. There will be clever people that will find workarounds for the things that bug me. I doubt I will recommend Win 8 to those that aren’t tech savvy, however.

      • jbraslins
      • 8 years ago

      Hmm. I am thinking quite the opposite. If someone is not tech savvy and will be using their machine mainly for email, surfing and photos, then perhaps Windows 8 will be just right for them.

    • l33t-g4m3r
    • 8 years ago

    You’re right. Microsoft has overreached and landed nowhere, and if this is truly the future without turning back by win9, then I won’t be a part of it. Linux offers more choice, has better desktop multitasking, and supports more “apps” than windows8. There is no way I’m “upgrading” to an “app” based OS heavily reminiscent of MS Bob. Screw that. I am not a sucker that you can wring every penny from, I will not pay for my own enslavement. Windows has an ecosystem that you can’t just throw away for the sake of artificially locked-in apps, in the hopes that you can monetize and monopolize the market. You do this, you destroy everything. Everything. This is literally THE push needed to make users switch to an alternative, be it apple or linux, and I’ll take linux. I never thought I’d see the day when I could recommend mac over windows. This is a sad day indeed.

    PS. To anyone thinking linux isn’t ready, you need to try Mandriva. It’s damn close to being a decent desktop OS, and it can play games. There is a lot of potential in linux, you just need the right distro. The more people switch and throw money at it, the better things will get. This could easily be the push needed to make linux mainstream.

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      linx will have more apps than windows 8 for about an hour after launch.
      ” It’s damn close to being a decent desktop OS, and it can play games.”

      windows IS a decent desktop os, has been for a decade. you’re telling us to switch to something that’s a decade behind windows? even if you think that windows 8 is a step back, it’s still miles ahead of any linux distro out there, Mandriva included.

      As for games, you’re right. you want to F around for 6 hours making sure your system works, you can probably play some 3-4 year old games on it! hooray!

        • l33t-g4m3r
        • 8 years ago

        Wrong. Win8 isn’t windows anymore when Metro/WinRT “obsoletes” older windows programs. Sure there’s a legacy desktop mode, but it’s half-baked and only included as a transition into full app slavery. No, Linux is an improvement to that. You want to be an app slave? Be my guest. I’d rather “F around” for 6 hours. Here’s the thing, after you “F around” enough you get better at it, and it no longer takes you 6 hours. Win8 is already going to cost me untold hours “F-ing around” to learn, and even more because it’s useless and unproductive, so why should I fork over money for that? I’m not, plain and simple. I’d rather spend my time learning something useful.

          • sweatshopking
          • 8 years ago

          the legacy desktop mode isn’t ‘half-baked’. it’s improved upon 7. if you think 7 is half baked, then sure. but it’s not. it’s likely the best desktop in the world. it’s hardly unproductive and useless.

          i’m not debating that linux doesn’t have value. it does. it’s an excellent system. it just isn’t consumer friendly enough. until linux works out so many of it’s MANY, MANY issues, it’ll stay on the sidelines. it’s great for a great many uses.

          the 6 hours you spend are not universal. i’m tired of messing around in terminal when i use linux. So’s my mom. you can dream of the universal, free linux desktop, but it’s not coming today, and windows 8 will not bring it.

          edit: people just seem to dislike us, lol. we’re both -‘d and arguing opposites! that’s hilarious!

    • christopher3393
    • 8 years ago

    I wish that Microsoft would read this, consider it to represent the opinion of millions of users, and respond accordingly.

      • Peldor
      • 8 years ago

      They do. But their customer base is hundreds of millions of users.

        • dpaus
        • 8 years ago

        Including hundreds of millions of corporate/business users, for whom their PC is not a toy, it’s a crucial productivity tool. And Windows 8 is going to destroy that productivity, and infuriate and frustrate many, many millions of those customers.

        Or, ‘former customers’

          • OneArmedScissor
          • 8 years ago

          People keep saying that, but it could actually bring Windows tablets to those people. The rest of the computers don’t need a new OS.

      • XSaaber
      • 8 years ago

      Why please billions when you can please millions, but will it be a Vista or a 7?

    • volnaiskra
    • 8 years ago

    Going by Windows history, there’s no way Windows 8 can be good. Windows 9 will likely sort out many of the issues you speak of, but Windows 8 was always going to be a messy experiment.

    Microsoft need many tries to get something right, and this time they’re experimenting with arguably more things than ever, so it’s optimistic to think they might even get it right with version 9, rather than 10.

    Windows 95 was primitive; it evolved into 98, which was better. ME was rubbish, and 2000 mediocre; they finally made strides with XP. Vista was rubbish; they improved, cleaned and polished it until it became 7, which is great.

    What bothers me is that Windows 8 seems to be Microsoft’s panicked response to the ipad. Which is all well and good, but I get the feeling that desktop PCs are being dragged along into a fight that isn’t theirs.

    Desktop PCs are on the decline – there’s no doubt about that. But they’ll continue to be vital to many people for many years…they just won’t be the be all and end all anymore. Sadly, Microsoft seem to be condeming desktop power users in their mad rush to catch up with Apple and Google on the handheld device front.

      • ninjapirate
      • 8 years ago

      “and 2000 mediocre;”

      Um no, 2000 was the best Operating System they’ve ever put out.

        • crsh1976
        • 8 years ago

        I wouldn’t say “ze best” because that’s a little extreme, but I sure wouldn’t put ME and 2k in the same basket – they’re completely different beasts.

          • floodo1
          • 8 years ago

          yes but in the tick-tock example ME and 2k go together well. Me was rubbish and 2k was rad.

            • cygnus1
            • 8 years ago

            except they’re not related os’s by lineage and 2000 was never targeted at home users. there was no tickt tock between ME and 2000. ME came from the DOS based 16/32 bit 9x family, and 2000 came from the 32/64 bit NT family. very different software lineages. hell, they were developed simultaneously by different teams and came out the same year

        • bcronce
        • 8 years ago

        Best for its time. Relative to modern OSs, even a crappy modern OS, 2000 is horrible.

          • bcronce
          • 8 years ago

          Wow, some people have a boner for 2000. It doesn’t have any modern security or stability features. That was my whole point.

          It was a great OS in its time, but newer better things have come along.

          Soon people will be saying that the Athlon 64 is better than an AMD Bulldozer because the 64 was so good in its time that it’s still better than anything now.

        • deb0
        • 8 years ago

        Seriously! Win2000 was an excellent OS, but without question, Win7 delivers far more; in features and performance. Not even a fair fight.

      • ludi
      • 8 years ago

      You seem to have forgotten a few things in the lens of nostalgia. First, Win95 only looks primitive in hindsight. At the time it was an enormous improvement over Win3.1 in every possible way — interface, multitasking, plug-and-play support, etc. — and very advanced relative to the computing hardware available at the time. OSR 2.5 brought it very close to the standards of Win98, with Win98’s main claims being that it was stable on a broader range of hardware, had more UI polish, and introduced dual-monitor support for the first time.

      Similarly, Win2k was excellent for its time. NT4 and the 9x series had been dragging along on seperate development tracks for far too long, and Win2k not only merged them, it did so quite well considering the volume of legacy apps in existence which absolutely broke when run anywhere other than a “true” Win9x environment. System Restore, Security Center, and the Windows Driver Model were experimental and relatively broken in WinMe, but worked extremely well in Win2k.

      Meanwhile, the first version of XP was ridiculed for its cutesy, round-edged, bright-colored “Fischer Price” interface and panned heavily for being buggy. Service Pack 1 resolved most of the bugginess and Service Pack 2 completely streamlined XP, but meanwhile Service Pack 3 for Win2k got 2k onto nearly the same feature-set as XP, much like how Vista SP2 and Win7 are nearly indistinguishable.

      IMO the only versions of Windows from 95 on up that were genuinely broken were Win95 “a” in the upgrade form (it did not upgrade the previous Win3.1 install cleanly and thus was never stable) and WinMe (which basically served as a test bed for features intended for Win2k while trying to support all of the 9x legacy dreck, and thus was never stable). Other than Microsoft’s persistent unwillingness to fundamentally revise their security model prior to Vista, every OS release had its place in time and generally didn’t have any fatal issues that couldn’t be resolved by simply waiting for the inevitable Service Release or Service Pack 1 before upgrading.

        • volnaiskra
        • 8 years ago

        Nostalgia? I don’t know where you saw nostalgia in my comment. I clearly showed that I thought Windows 7 was the best of a mixed bunch, most of which were either atrocious or mediocre. Nostalgia is for fools. Nostalgia for a Microsoft product is for the criminally insane.

        Windows 95 doesn’t just look primitive compared to modern OS’es. It also looked primitive compared to 1995 Macintoshes. Almost everything was syphoned into the start menu, which was cumbersome and rigid, unlike the multifaceted and uber-searchable one of Windows 7. I don’t believe Microsoft should get any accolades for making something that was finally within the horizon of Mac OS. (I do however think they deserve praise for Windows 7 which, in my opinion, is better than OSX)

        Win2000: Yeah, it was decent for its time. But to me, it definitely did not feel 5 years better than Windows 95. It felt like what Windows 95 should have been, but 5 years too late.

        The cutesy Fischer Price look of XP was hokey, yet was a very important milestone for Microsoft, because it demonstrated perhaps for the first time that they were serious about making an OS that was for real people, and didn’t just look like something that was designed by geeks, for geeks. The fact that geeks sneered down their noses at it was a very good thing. It still wasn’t anywhere near as stylish as MacOS, but at least they were trying. And with that new look came a general improvement in UI and UX.

          • ludi
          • 8 years ago

          Back in the days of my high-school journalism class and subsequent work on the student newspaper, I had the misfortune of using and supporting MacOS in its 5, 6, and 7 variants…concurrently. As such I beg to differ with your memories. The context-driven menubar is a different way of organizing information and some may find it easier to understand than the Windows Start Menu, but it is not obviously better or more accessible, since it relies on a completely different UI model (in Windows, you start the application first, then you get whatever menu options it was designed to offer). What Macs had at that time was a native superiority in graphical rendering that gave them a nearly total lock on all the high-quality publications and graphics editing software, so if you wanted to be productive in that environment, a Mac was your first and only choice for many years.

          The “stylishness” you speak of looks just as harshly rectilinear and boring in hindsight as it does in the coexisting Windows releases.

          I’ll grant that the default Windows 95 layout and color scheme was inspired by a long and ill-advised study in late Soviet Bloc architecture, but a little customization fixed that, and the “Plus” pack (plus several dozen free or low-cost alternatives from third parties) introduced themes to those who cared enough to look for them.

      • jpostel
      • 8 years ago

      Disclaimer – I have worked for several enterprise software companies

      Agree with the sentiment, but your perspective seems to be the home user’s, rather than the corporate user’s. MS is making this move in large part because Apple has invaded the corporate space with the iPhone and iPad. MS has never really spent resources on the consumer space outside of gaming, so they are really playing defense on this. The consumer space is in full-on web/mobile enabled everything right now, whereas the corporate space, as a whole, lags by at least a couple of years. Most of the companies that I deal with are looking at application modernization, and mobile is increasingly part of those requirements. Panic is exactly what MS is feeling, and although I don’t agree with the way they are responding, I don’t think the response is unjustified. I have spoken with at least two *insurance companies* (notorious tech laggards with mainframes as primary mission critical platforms) that have stated their near term internal web application re-writes must enable and be tested on iPads (and maybe Android tabs).

      MS sees their best chance of success as a leveraging of their established dominance on the desktop and expanding into the mobile. Previous versions of Windows Mobile have shown that going the other way (desktop to mobile), from a UI perspective, is pretty crappy. I don’t really agree that the UI should be the same on both mobile and desktop mainly because the human interface methods are different. I just don’t see touchscreen PCs or even voice response PCs being widely adopted anytime soon, so a UI designed for small touchscreens does not really translate.

        • volnaiskra
        • 8 years ago

        Yep, I definitely have a home user’s perspective, so I may be biased here.

        I’m not sure I understand your point here, but I must say I doubt that Microsoft are as frightened of the corporate market as they are of the consumer market. Their dominance of the workplace is not under anywhere the amount of threat that their dominance of the personal computer is.

        The average person has 2+ computers in their life. Their work computer (which is almost definitely a Windows machine, and is likely to stay that way for a long time), and their home desktop/laptop/tablet/phone (which is more and more likely to be an Apple or Google product).

        If the ipad is encroaching onto the corporate space, the effect is tenfold in the consumer space. In 5 years, PCs will still form the crux of the workplace, but at home it’ll be a radically different landscape. If someone doesn’t game or work from home, I just don’t see why they’d bother to buy a computer at all in 5 years.

        Though they will only use 1 work machine, they’ll probably own, let’s say, 3 computing devices at home (laptop, smartphone, tablet) which means that Microsoft will only have a 25% market share per person.

    • Tristan
    • 8 years ago

    Win 8 is BS. All new concepts like animated tiles, isolaetd process, code contracts can be implemented into classic icon-based desktop. But M$ want to charge more money, so they designed new ecosystem for paid applications. This is whole reason to procreating this bastard UI.

      • volnaiskra
      • 8 years ago

      I disagree. I don’t think this is motivated by arrogance or greed. It’s motivated by fear. Over the past decade, they’ve let Apple and Google soar to new heights and become more and more central to people’s lives, while Microsoft has become increasingly irrelevant.

      Windows 8 is not Microsoft demanding more money from you. It’s Microsoft on their knees, pleading and begging your wife and your less tecchy friends to not abandon Windows for good.

    • Nutmeg
    • 8 years ago

    [url<]http://anongallery.org/img/4/2/windows-8.jpg[/url<]

      • volnaiskra
      • 8 years ago

      I spent 3 paragraphs saying just that, but alas, nowhere near as eloquently as you just did 😀

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      i’ve seen that before, but they leave out versions, like 2k to make the joke.

        • jensend
        • 8 years ago

        2k was not considered a consumer OS. Of course they’re leaving out NT4, Win 2k, Win 2k3, Win 2k8- that’s a parallel development line with very different goals.

          • rrr
          • 8 years ago

          Except since XP actual system cores were the same. MS just ditched 9x core as it was not designed to deal with multitasking/multi-user settings properly.

      • vascaino
      • 8 years ago

      [url<]http://i.imgur.com/BBNKg.jpg[/url<]

      • burntham77
      • 8 years ago

      Vista is awesome.

      • bthylafh
      • 8 years ago

      All the oh-so-clever wankers who want to make the Star Trek movies comparison apparently never used Windows 95 or Windows 3.1.

      Here’s a big fat hint: Windows 3.1? Crap, as were all previous versions. Windows 95? Frickin’ great. They also conveniently forget how bad the first edition of Win98 was out the gate, and that it was 98SE that was the best of the series.

      95 had its problems, sure, but unless you’d used 3.1 and 95 you just don’t know how much of a revelation it was.

      • Corrado
      • 8 years ago

      You forget how much outcry there was at the UI changes XP brought. And how absolutely shit and insecure XP was until SP2. Or how really, XP wasn’t that great as a whole on until SP2 came out. Or how the actual problem with Vista was that vendors *cough*nvidia*cough*, didn’t bother to rewrite their drivers to conform to the new security model until it was too late and shipped absolute trash unstable drivers for Vista. When MS tells you ‘Hey, we’re changing the WDM and moving stuff, heres the new specs you need to write your drivers to’ and nVidia says ‘mmmm… yeah we’ll just wait and see what happens’, thats not MS’s fault. People also bitched about ‘how much memory Vista used at idle’. It used caching. It freed that memory as soon as it was needed. No idea why people install 8-16GB of RAM and then complain when the OS uses it. You want it to just ignore it? 7 does the same thing, they just don’t report it as being in use like Vista did.

    • AGerbilWithAFootInTheGrav
    • 8 years ago

    Change – it’s not always good.

    In other words, since about Win 2k, there has been 0 usability improvement in the OS for a casual user, or even as a platform for work. Sure there are improvements in general management for networking etc… but as a single user – virtually nothing.

    Looks a little prettier, the menus go from here to there, but there is no usability impact, in other words while I could do stuff 10x faster from DOS to Win 3.1x and 2x as good from 3.1 to Win 95, with subsequent collosal speed and stability improvements in general, the pinnacle was Win 2k.

    This is where it stopped, as just as CPU’s today Win 2K was just good enough. Win XP which is really 2K.1 is still around after all those years, as well it is just too good, Vista was a step “back”?!? and Win 7 is basically at the same level as 2k/XP from users perspective.

    What it means is – will I be able to do stuff faster if I install Win 8 over Win 2k (or let’s use XP as 2k is now “obsolete”)? With a regular deskotp device – No.

    It is better suited for other formats, mainly tablets and smartphones, but for the regular deskop – nothing.

    Moreover there is not much to be gained on the desktop either, mouse and keyboard are great input devices, screens are nice and large. You are fast using it, can you imagine faster way of sending a message than pressing a button with the mouse, or pressing “enter” on the keyboard?

    I cannot it is as fast as I can think, which is fast enough, and productive enough. That is the issue for Windows, or any OS in particular. For powerful deskop devices with CPU’s from C2D onwards, it just does not matter.

    Sure it matters for other smaller form factors where the speed/touch interface is an issue, but here it does not, so what we can expect is convergence, and covergence is by default a trade-off, compromise between the “real” desktop user and the “others”, which we did not have to suffer in Win XP, or Win 7.

    It may not be a lot worse, but annoyingly so – I am afraid it will be. Even though, we should not be forced to move from 7 for a long while yet, or even better move to Linux, which I think Win 8 era will herald, you have the choice there to chose your “poison” so to speak, for free.

      • volnaiskra
      • 8 years ago

      Wow, we must use our computers VERY differently. I’ve been amazed by how much quicker I do everything in Windows 7. It makes the past versions seem like wading through glue.

      • Deanjo
      • 8 years ago

      Oh there has been some things that have been improved since W2K such as optical media burning, zip file support, easy network setup, etc. There are a lot of little things that you just don’t think about until you try to go back to a base W2k system and realize how much functionality is missing.

        • Zoomer
        • 8 years ago

        Windows zip file support is horrible. The first thing most power users do is to install a file archival program.
        Optical media support – same.
        Easy network setup – what? The only thing that really matters is LAN properties.

        The start menu search feature is brilliant, though. I never mouse to select start menu items anymore. It’s almost as if it’s a command line.

          • volnaiskra
          • 8 years ago

          Yep. The searchable start menu is a lifechanger for me. I never used the windows key for ANYTHING in the previous 15 years, yet now it’s almost the only way I access files and programs. I save so much time by no longer keep meticulous folder structures for everything or trying to remember where stuff is and how exactly it’s labelled.

      • smilingcrow
      • 8 years ago

      I loved Win2K but Win7 has a much more user friendly interface as well as improvements under the hood. The only thing I still miss from days gone by is a dual pane Explorer but I’m sure if I looked I could find a suitable replacement. Any recommendations?

      • bcronce
      • 8 years ago

      Linux doesn’t have users because of lack of [Windows/Common] app support. The UI is a minor thing when all is said and done.

      Not to mention, if users can’t handle Windows UI changing, imagine the 100 different UIs that Linux has.

      Linux is great and it is only getting better for game/app support, but it isn’t quite there yet. I see decent opensource video drivers, KickStarter Linux games and Steam coming to Linux as a HUGE push. I can’t wait to see what happens over the next decade.

      The next big issue will be getting enterprise to switch to Linux. Not only is the learning curve for Linux MUCH higher for IT, but many businesses refuse to even change from XP/IE6 yet alone moving to a whole new platform.

      Microsoft does do a lot of research and their engineers have really good ideas, but their OS seems to always suck in some way. I would love to see MS scale down to SQL/.Net/VisualStudio/HyperV (I personally think these are actually VERY good products), switch to Linux/*BSD/etc as their platforms and completely get out of the OS business.

        • Corrado
        • 8 years ago

        Linux has TOO MANY options. Paralysis by analysis, if you will. theres 20,000 simple text editors. Which one should I use? I better try a bunch and see which one is better. Which WM is best? Which Distro is best? Does this KDE native app render and work properly in Gnome? Theres not ENOUGH standard. If you go Ubuntu and STAY Ubuntu, its not much of an issue, but I think theres just far too much choice in the Linux world.

    • holophrastic
    • 8 years ago

    Don’t worry Cyril. You’re forgetting something quite unique to the windows platform: by the time you choose to upgrade from windows 7, let’s say within the first year, there will be a plethora of windows utilities to circumvent, disable, and change metro, and even more to change the desktop, and even more to lock out one over the other.

    It’s windows, finding a little utility that changes something is par for the course. It always has been. From winfarer, to stardock. From xmouse and powertoys to taskix and gridmove.

      • volnaiskra
      • 8 years ago

      Strong point. Although I have noticed that I use less 3rd-party apps and workarounds on Windows 7 than I did on any of the other versions (at least, not apps that tweak core OS functionality). That’s a good sign.

      But I don’t think this will repeat with Windows 8.

    • Bensam123
    • 8 years ago

    Yeah, I agree with this. I also like change, but sometimes MS takes things in a very wrong direction and then hammers it up your ass like Vlad impaling you on a nice new stake to adorn his front lawn with. The ribbon for instance…

    I personally wouldn’t worry too much about Windows 8. The same thing will happen with it as happened with Vista. A couple people are going to jump on it because it’s new and most of the people will sit back while MS touts how awesome it is till Windows 9 comes out, then people will upgrade (if it’s better).

    So, it’s more then likely that developers will keep developing for Windows 7 and slowly rollout changes for Windows 8. Maybe in some rare case everyone loves Metro, W7 will still last till W9 support wise. I’m not too worried about that though.

    • Hance
    • 8 years ago

    Everyother version of windows has sucked going back to Windows 3.1 days. Windows 7 works great and most people like it guess where that leaves Windows 8

    • Ifalna
    • 8 years ago

    “And the sharks also have mustaches and chest hair.” Damn I would be terrified too!

    On a more serious note: If Microsoft is too stupid or to stubborn to see that Metro SUCKS for desktops (It’s probably great for a touch interface) they’ll have to realize it the hard way. Win8 won’t be very popular on Desktop machines and if we’re lucky Metro will be a fluke that is gone from the new 9 Version at least for desktops.

    Honestly, I don’t really blame MS for that. I blame that stupid “Tablet post PC era” hype. I still can’t figure out why the hell anyone would really need such a toy but oh well.

      • Shouefref
      • 8 years ago

      I’ve seen quite a lot of big companies making big mistakes: banks, car manufactures… Even encyclopedia publishers!
      Or look at the music industry, or at Kodak.
      Sometimes they move too slow, sometimes too fast. And sometimes they just move in the wrong direction.
      Wanting to push Metro on desktop users is a move in the wrong direction.
      And it’s only because they’re panicking because of Apple’s success with the iPad (which I don’t want either, I just don’t have any use for tablet pc’s).

        • Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman
        • 8 years ago

        The only use of tablets for me is to read .CBR-format comicbooks and watch movies – something that el cheapo, no brand, Chinese made tablets can do. And that’s why I avoid expensive tablets.

        IMO, tablets would never replace PC and laptops. Not until they came with keyboard and mouse. Seriously, have you ever tried writing technical reports with touch screen? Gah.

          • riviera74
          • 8 years ago

          About the tablet: which ones would you recommend instead of the do-it-all iPad?

            • Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman
            • 8 years ago

            Since I just use tablet to read books and watch movies, any android tablet will do. 🙂

          • Corrado
          • 8 years ago

          You’re not supposed to write technical reports on a touch screen, just like you’re not supposed to drive in the snow with a Miata on summer tires. Sure, you can do it if you need to, but its not ideal and thats not what it was designed for.

          Its like using a butter knife to turn a flat head screw. It works, kinda, but its clunky and takes you longer than using a real screwdriver. But don’t say ‘This butter knife is awful’ because its not very good at turning a flat head screw, as thats not its intended purpose. Just like you wouldn’t really want to use a flat head screw driver to butter your toast.

            • Ifalna
            • 8 years ago

            Tablets = Netbooks 2.0. Lets see how we all think about them in 5 years.

            • Decelerate
            • 8 years ago

            I’m willing to be your counterparty on that. I don’t think the tablet will disappear or get marginalized anytime soon.

            Unless smartphones with 6-7″ screens become the norm.

      • Rand
      • 8 years ago

      I love tablets, for ultra mobile consumption on the go their fantastic. Basic internet browsing, movies, reading, some light gaming. Their terrific.
      Far more portable then a laptop and can be pulled out and used anywhere at a moments notice.

      Sure their not nearly and powerful or flexible as a laptop, let alone a desktop but within their own niche their vastly superior.

      That said, a tablet isn’t the be all and end all. It doesn’t and cannot replace a laptop/desktop. And using a UI designed for a tablet with a mouse is a terrible terrible experience. There is a reason no one is desperately yearning to navigate Android with a mouse.

    • Shouefref
    • 8 years ago

    I will always be convinced that people who don’t want an update are in their full right, and that people who loath that kind of people want to push their whishes onto others.
    It doesn’t matter at all whether the new thingy is better or not.
    It’s a matter of freedom.

    • Hawkins
    • 8 years ago

    Another option: Upgrade to Win8, and only run Desktop Mode apps, which is the same app situation as sticking with Win7, except you get to upgrade and stay in the current cycle.

      • Duck
      • 8 years ago

      Yeah, I don’t see what all the fuss is about. I’ve yet to try Windows 8 though.

        • Ari Atari
        • 8 years ago

        You should try it. At first it seems all fine and dandy, then the annoyances sink in. I want to like windows 8; I just can’t.

          • sweatshopking
          • 8 years ago

          i’ve been using it for months, and don’t have any major issues.

            • Ari Atari
            • 8 years ago

            It’s all minor issues that I have, they just all annoy me so much, like the hot corners not working properly when you have multiple monitors. There are many things I like about windows 8, like the new task manager, but I feel like if I upgrade I’ll end up regretting it.

            • Washer
            • 8 years ago

            Why did you choose Microsoft to be a fanboy of? Seems like an odd choice but your trolling has always been unusual if not always well executed.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            i’m not a fanboy of microsoft, i’m really not. I just find some of the stuff they made to be the best.

            I don’t own a console, but my bro has an xbox 360, and my buddies have ps3’s. we are always having issues with the ps3’s, and not with the 360’s. the xbox generally seems to have more features (since sony removed linux support) and it functions, imo, better as a streaming device.

            I have android stuff, and used to have iOS stuff, but none of it worked as well as the wp7 stuff. I really loved android, and was super gungho when it first came out for an open source mobile os. My cousin worked for telus and i used to tell her all the time to stop selling so many damn iphones and sell more android devices cause i liked it so much. But it had so many issues, and it wasn’t stable. Then wp7 came out, and it was miles better than the competition in my opinion. I liked metro, it NEVER crashes, and i loved the wireless sync. It was a clear leader as i saw it.

            I have dual (or triple) booted linux for close to a decade on all of my machines, and i’ve done some hackintoshes too, but they’re just not a realistic replacement for windows. I like some of the advances osx makes in terms of design, but it has some things that really annoy me, besides the complete lack of game support. i don’t consider linux a decent replacement for most people, not unless they ONLY facebook and email. Even then, they get tired of it, as they literally can’t do anything else without a lot of effort. i LIKE linux, personally, i just don’t think it’s a solid desktop OS. As for windows 8, i like metro, but i’m not convinced on the new start menu. I think it could use some tweaking. That being said, i almost never use it. days go buy without me touching it. the changes they’ve made to explorer and other areas make windows much better for day to day usage on the desktop. nm the performance improvements. i LOVE posting -> desktop in about 4 seconds. it’s awesome. I love the microsoft login. some guys don’t, but i do. having a consistent experience with my computer, with the skydrive sync, has made it WAY easier to do stuff. i can do school work on my tower or my laptop and switch back and forth no problem. i just think it’s better. there are issues, like ari atari said, the multimonitor needs work, though. it’s not perfect, and tbh, i think 8 will suffer as a final product. I don’t think it’s horrible, and i generally think these guys are drama/drag queens, but it’s not perfect.

            The only thing i might be a fanboy of is bill. my daughters village is starving, and canada is slashing our aid budget. hiv and malaria are huge problems, and people are turning their backs. I DO NOT think that private wealth is a complete replacement for democratic public support, but since the DPS is disappearing, it’s all we’ve got. I want these problems solved, and nobody else is inclined. not anyone with real power, anyway.

            I’m not a fanboy, and i really think they make some boneheaded decisions, but i like their stuff well enough, and since it’s the best chance i’ve got (besides our own struggling NGO, ‘Alice’s Village’) at helping my daughters family, i’ll keep supporting them.

            • clone
            • 8 years ago

            no fanboy, shareholder 🙂

      • mcnabney
      • 8 years ago

      You don’t think MS will make it difficult to NOT shift to Metro-only?

      Remember, Metro apps are sold through MS and that means they get a cut of everything – just like Apple.

      • burntham77
      • 8 years ago

      The problem with that is you still have to deal with that Metro interfacing shoving itself in your face whenever you want to do anything like search for a program or change a setting.

        • Peldor
        • 8 years ago

        Trivial workarounds are available if Metro chaps your hide that much.

      • Rand
      • 8 years ago

      That would be great if Microsoft weren’t seemingly intent on making it as difficult as possible to stay in the desktop, and weren’t inserting the Metro UI into many desktop tools and applets.

    • Malphas
    • 8 years ago

    The fact is though the Windows UI has changed very little since Windows 95, and it’s grown outdated and inefficient, even on desktop. The changes made in Windows 7 (which were also despised and condemned as a mistake by a chunk of people during the preview phase) have improved things a lot, but a drastic overhaul is still needed which fully takes into account all the factors that have changed in the last seventeen years.

    Microsoft has essentially no chance of getting it right first time, and it’s fairly obvious their main concern here is trying to win marketshare in tablets and other form factors, where their position is weakest. Considering tablets are a fast growing sector, and still up for grabs whilst PC’s have basically reached saturation point with almost complete Windows dominance and no serious competition it’s pretty obvious why Microsoft have switched focus. So with that in mind I’m not too bothered about Windows 8 and Metro, yeah it’s a bit of a mess from what we’ve seen so far, and I’ll probably skip this Windows iteration personally, but after a mass of user and developer feedback over several years and a lot of tweaking I would expect Windows 9 to be a massive improvement and much more suitable for desktop users.

      • Shouefref
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]The fact is though the Windows UI has changed very little since Windows 95, and it's grown outdated and inefficient, [/quote<] Give me one good reason why that's so. Smartphones and tablets don't count.

        • BestJinjo
        • 8 years ago

        He states something is outdated and inefficient and provides no evidence or support for that notion. Yet, then he claims a drastic overhaul is needed based on “these factors” (what factors?). What has changed in the last 17 years? Windows has gotten better in much the same way as 911 from Porsche has gradually improved. Windows 8 is not improving on a 911, but designing an entirely new car when consumers want a slightly better 911 because they like how a 911 feels to drive and looks.

        Frankly, Metro looks cartoonish, like something out of Nintendo Wii. Tiles haven’t taken off in the smartphone/tablet arena where they actually simplify things. Who thought that tiles would be better for productivity on large computer screens?

        • Malphas
        • 8 years ago

        Well there’s the fact the Start Menu was designed back when we had 800×600 resolution monitors, limited multitasking, limited Internet connectivity, etc. and now we use our computers completely differently.

          • modulusshift
          • 8 years ago

          Yeah, differently, but not that differently. Look, if you were right here, Google would have taken the market by storm with Chrome OS a year or two back.
          And what do all of those factors have to do with the start menu, seriously? I don’t use the start menu to multitask, I use the desktop. And, as the OP states, Metro is ruining that, not improving it. The start menu can simply be made larger, if that’s really necessary. I don’t think it’s that bad. And I really, really don’t want to mix up my notifications tray with my app menu. That’s just messed up.
          Now, I’ll admit, I haven’t used Win8 yet, and I’m going to give it a fair chance in use before I decide whether I like it or not. But Microsoft has done another great job of biasing me against a product before I use it. I’m going to install it in my new build, which I should be assembling next month.

          • LoneWolf15
          • 8 years ago

          You do realize the Start Menu has been changed considerably from Windows XP to Vista/Win7, right? And that the significant changes to the Taskbar (made in Win7) also resolve most complaints people would have with the Start Menu by allowing you to pin your most frequently used programs and work with them easily?

          Heck, the Search box on the start menu now means that people who have at least a basic knowledge of what they want to do don’t have to delve that deep into the start menu.

          I don’t think the Start Menu can get a lot more efficient –but that said, is it possible to create something more efficient than the Win7 Start Menu/taskbar combination? Sometimes, a redesign isn’t always a good thing, and you go with what works.

      • rrr
      • 8 years ago

      That’s nonsense. Compare Start Menu and Taskbar from Windows 7 to that from Windows 95. You’d be astonished.

    • cygnus1
    • 8 years ago

    Wait for the Release Preview coming next month. There was a post on the Building Windows 8 blog that seems to have been removed that talked all about the multi-monitor and desktop improvements they’ve made since the Consumer Preview based on feedback from users. Like the fact that the Start screen/metro stuff can be on any monitor, the task bar will support multiple modes of multi-monitor support, and usage of the hot screen corners has been massively improved for multi-monitor.

    I honestly think the previews have done MS a disservice because of their focus on Metro. I understand it’s their baby and they’re going to push it hard, but based on that blog post Metro has been severely de-emphasized and made to better co-exist with the desktop and real productivity work.

    After the Developer Preview I was pretty skittish about Windows 8, but now not so much. The improvements they mentioned in the blog post will pretty much kill the need for apps like UltraMon that make multi-monitor use more usable. I think Windows 8 is shaping up really nicely now.

      • Rand
      • 8 years ago

      [url=http://www.neowin.net/news/huge-multi-monitor-enhancements-coming-in-windows-8<]Neowin[/url<] provides a pretty good synopsis of the article, including a video demonstrating the changes. It does look quite good, though I disagree that it deemphasizes Metro in any way, that's very clearly still the primary focus. It does at least (hopefully) make Metro usable on a multi-monitor system.

    • way2strong
    • 8 years ago

    [quote<]I seek out new software[/quote<] ...and new civilizations?

    • Rand
    • 8 years ago

    You have another option if you want windowed multitasking. OSX, or even a Linux distro.
    That’s another painful and dramatic change, especially if you’ve always been exclusively a Windows user but if may become your only viable option.

    To a large extent, you’re no longer the type of customer Microsoft has any interest in and their software isn’t targeted or even designed with any consideration towards users like you (or me) anymore.

      • cygnus1
      • 8 years ago

      Windows 8 isn’t going to be the big shock everybody thinks it is. Wait for the release preview.

        • mcnabney
        • 8 years ago

        Yes it is. They ripped Mediacenter out of Premium and relegated it as a paid add-in for Ultimate/Pro.

          • WaltC
          • 8 years ago

          I thought that what they’ve announced is that they are ripping DVD support out of MediaCenter–which does suck–but otherwise leaving Media Center in. But something I read recently–I wish I had thought to grab the link–said that unlike Windows 7 and earlier, in Windows 8 you will be able to take an iso disk image, and actually *mount* the damn thing and *run it* without burning anything first to a DVD!

          Now, if that’s the case then I retract my original complaint.

          Yep, [url=http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-8-iso-vhd-mounting-win8,13358.html<]that is[/url<] the case. I'm all in on this particular change.

          • bcronce
          • 8 years ago

          That’s because over $1bil licensing fees for the DvD codec for computers that couldn’t even play DvDs.

          They decided not to waste the money and let individual people decide if they want the codec instead of making it part of the base install.

      • bhtooefr
      • 8 years ago

      Actually, there’s also ReactOS.

      And Windows 8 being dreadful may encourage further development. And, due to it being based in Russia, it’s safe from Microsoft.

      • Bensam123
      • 8 years ago

      I would change in a heartbeat if Nix had any sort of realistic game support.

        • jensend
        • 8 years ago

        Commercial games on Linux practically disappeared after the mismanaged Loki Software porting house folded in the dotcom crash; people were scared off by that debacle. But things are finally getting much much better.

        Every game in the Humble Bundles runs on Linux. That’s a lot of games, most of them quite good. Many other indie games run on Linux, and most of the games from the Kickstarter fad/trend/revolution, whatever you think of that, have said that as long as they meet a particular target they’ll have OS X and Linux versions.

        Steam is coming to Linux, along with all of Valve’s games.

        Beyond gaining momentum among consumers, there are strong network effects on the technical side as more games are given native Linux ports. Existing libraries etc are improved, drivers and infrastructure are given a stress test, etc, and if an engine’s been ported it’s often fairly trivial to port other games which used that engine.

        Outside of native ports, Wine has become very good in recent times. It’s had DirectX 11 support for well over a year. [url=http://appdb.winehq.org/<]They advertise[/url<] that Oblivion, Bioshock, World of Warcraft, Starcraft II, and Fallout 3 can run flawlessly. I think Win8 will hasten the Linux gaming trend. Gabe Newell hates Win8 and that may have accelerated the existing work at Valve; he's certainly not the only developer who doesn't think highly of Win8. I don't imagine Win8 will cause such a massive user migration that it will drastically change the market share picture, but I think that those people who do leave Windows will be more likely than average to be interested in games for their new platform.

          • chuckula
          • 8 years ago

          Good post but… Wine does *not* have DX11 support or even mostly functional DX 10 support. The support for DX9 is pretty solid though and DX11 games like CIV5 work pretty well in fallback mode. I use wine quite a bit and it supports a surprisingly wide range of software but it is by no means perfect.

          • Theolendras
          • 8 years ago

          Gabe Newell hates Windows 8 for sure, they will now get a more credible competitor. Windows apps store will makes it’s way in every PC on Windows 8 for tons of software, and since human rely mostly on habits, this put Steam in a disavantage. With Xbox integration feature as well, it puts a lot of people in a confort zone. Steam could be nice on Linux, they have the cash to make gaming on linux credible, but, for now, I’m still skeptical this is coming. They can’t single handily force driver developpement to improve. Chicken-egg situation, they have to own a significant market before the graphics compagny put ressources to that segment. Same for game developpers.

          I would be in the interested camp tough.The MythTV box would become quite versatile.

      • volnaiskra
      • 8 years ago

      But neither is OSX (designed for users like us). I’ve been using OSX for 3+ years at work, and it continues to slow down my productivity due to UI that is designed to be fantastic for casual use but is poor for power users. Some of the limitations the OSX UI forces upon the user are just plain baffling.

      And Linux is pretty much out of the question for 95% of users. If you’re a gamer, or work in a PC workplace, or have invested time and money into PC- or MAC-exclusive software (eg. Adobe), then Linux is off the table.

        • entropy13
        • 8 years ago

        [quote<]I've been using OSX for 3+ years at work, and it continues to slow down my productivity due to UI that is designed to be fantastic for casual use but is poor for power users. Some of the limitations the OSX UI forces upon the user are just plain baffling. [/quote<] Looks like you've been using it wrong for 3+ years.

        • End User
        • 7 years ago

        You’ve been using OS X for 3+ years and you still type Mac out in all caps?!?

        I don’t know how you have been using OS X but I, as a power user, find it does a fine job (way better than Windows).

    • jjj
    • 8 years ago

    I expect it too to be Vista 2 but chances are ,just like Vista,it won’t be the end and if it is the end for Windows,something else will gain traction.

      • Shouefref
      • 8 years ago

      It won’t be the end of Windows. Windows is too big for it, and has too much power on the business market. That’s the power they use to force such changes upon us: lots of people just don’t have any choice.
      The big problem is Windows has not competition anymore. Not on the desktop.
      They have huge competition on the smartphone and tablet pc markets, and they try to use their power on the business market to crunch the competition on the other markets. That’s the only purpose of Metro;

      • Theolendras
      • 8 years ago

      If you ever used Vista then you know it as very much usable. I think Windows 7 could have been a service pack if market reception of vista had improved. The number one problem was drivers weren’t ready and ram requirements (i know they’re are few others like UAC, but then you can disable it, but let’s keep it simple).

      The new driver model was a good move systems are much more stable now thanks mostly to it. So I think the was a great move that needed some time for third party to adjust.

      The second, was a none issue by the time Windows 7 came to market, was the RAM requirements, from there RAM was cheap and abundant.

      I feel like you report others opinion, please make your own on fact, not on other impressions.

        • ImSpartacus
        • 8 years ago

        Yup, Win7 is like an enormous service pack. And yet, people love it and hate Vista.

        That’s exactly what MS wanted to do with Win7: replace Vista.

          • LoneWolf15
          • 8 years ago

          I’ve had all sorts of performance issues with Vista that I never had with Win7. It’s more than just a service pack.

          Windows Vista’s UI is fine, but its disk access issues, graphics overhead, and memory overhead compared to Win7 are problematic on a lot of systems. I’ve seen a ton of systems that fly with Win7 that are hobbled by Vista.

            • Theolendras
            • 8 years ago

            I bet these systems had subpar drivers, which is one of my point… Stil this is hardware support more than anything.

            • LoneWolf15
            • 8 years ago

            Actually, the laptop last week that I worked on had Vista, and I had updated every last one of its device drivers. It didn’t stop SuperFetch or Windows Search from being hyper-agressive and constantly accessing the hard drive. Nor did it help out the lousy graphics refresh, which wasn’t even that much faster by turning Aero off.

            And this was a dual-core laptop, that shipped with Vista. With AHCI enabled for the hard drive. One that I made sure any bloatware was prevented from running at startup.

            The odd thing is that I do find occasional systems that run Vista fine –I always wonder what those systems have that the slow ones don’t; I’ve not found a lot of rhyme or reason that explains it. Still, the poor-performing Vista systems perk right up when Win7 is loaded on them.

    • Jive
    • 8 years ago

    Every time Microsoft releases a new version of Window there is always crying, moaning, and whining about how the updated user experience is terrible but then eventually everyone gets used to it.

    I have not tried Windows 8 myself (nor do i care to), but from Cyril’s take on the OS and other TR forum members comment, I think this time will be different as the change is too drastic and everyone downright loathes it (as opposed to just disliking it).

    I use OS X and Windows 7 side by side on a daily basis. For day-to-day use i prefer OS X without question. I only keep a Windows box around for video games. I think if i am ever forced to give up Windows 7, i would perhaps build a hackintosh box and make it my main system.

    Most games today have a Mac client and eventually developers will not be able to ignore the OS X market because it will be too big to ignore.

    I dont think Windows 8 will be the product that kills off Windows, but i think it will be the product that actually gives OS X a fighting chance.

      • Palek
      • 8 years ago

      I have no ill will toward Apple, OS X, and their users, but I cannot help myself here…
      [quote<]Most games today have a Mac client[/quote<] BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!! Most games? You cannot possibly be serious.

        • jbraslins
        • 8 years ago

        And games that do have mac clients, suffer 25%+ fps loss.

          • syndicatedragon
          • 8 years ago

          It’s true. Mac ports of Windows games are largely inferior in both performance and features. For example, the Mac version of Steam is a … steaming pile. It uses something like 20% CPU when it’s IDLE. Valve knows about it (just check out the forums) but I don’t think they really care… Civ V as mentioned by sweatshopking is a great example of a terrible port. No multiplayer, no mods, and it’s usually a patch or two behind the Windows version. Mac gaming? No thanks.

        • sweatshopking
        • 8 years ago

        and some of them are neutered badly. i have a buddy who picked up a copy of the app store version of civ v, to play multiplayer on with us. He purchased it, and play single player a bit, to get a grasp. later that night, he realized it doesn’t have multiplayer. App store said it was stated it’s single player only (and it does) and so he couldn’t get a refund to purchase the right one. I understand their position, but the fact that there are even 2 available, one broken, one not, is retarded. that’s not unique to osx, but they need to fix the main store selling neutered apps for the same price.

          • JohnC
          • 8 years ago

          Yeap, CIV 5 is a pretty bad port on Mac in general. I’ve tried playing it on MacBook Pro – I get much better performance (on same exact machine) with Windows 7 installed through BootCamp than with OSX. Maybe because the game itself is poorly optimized, maybe because Nvidia don’t give a fuck about optimizing their drivers for OSX – I don’t know, but trying to play some kind of resource-heavy game with OSX is not a pleasant experience.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            if you have it on steam, add me.
            sweatshopking

            i’m not great, but i can beat king. which is pretty bad, considering the level some guys get at. we can multi-hug some some civ!

            that goes for any of you guys. add me, and we’ll play!

            • JohnC
            • 8 years ago

            I would, but I stopped playing it long time ago and don’t really want to restart :-/

      • WaltC
      • 8 years ago

      Guy, don’t you realize why Apple Computer removed the word “Computer” from the company trademark years ago? Enjoy your OS X while you can, because Apple is working night and day to bump you to iOS, and an iOS device, in some form or another…;)

      You really don’t understand that OS X and Windows are *not* competitors, do you? Look, here’s the difference: OS X is not for sale to the general public–ie, you cannot walk into a Frye’s or a Best Buy and buy a copy of OS X to take home to boot up on the PC you just built–legally, that is. As you know, with Windows this is no problem. Apple is the reason OS X perpetually hovers at 5% of world market share–Apple insists on artificially tying OS X to *Apple-branded* x86 PC clones (known as “Macs.”) There cannot be a “fighting chance,” ever, for OS X, because Apple is simply not going to do what Microsoft has done for decades–and that is, unlike Microsoft, Apple is not going to build in support for just about every hardware standard on earth. OS X runs on a very limited set of hardware, as I’m sure you know. That’s by design. Microsoft, otoh, supports just about everyone’s hardware–also by design. That’s one of the main reasons OS X is shipped on ~5% of the world’s consumer computers and Windows ships on the other 95%.

      The only battle ahead of OS X is the battle Mac users are going to have wage with Apple in order to convince the company not to dump OS X into the sea in favor itsy-bitsy iOS devices…;) Microsoft isn’t going anywhere–but the future is far, far less secure for OS X.

        • Corrado
        • 8 years ago

        And yet… Apple sales are up 51% in the enterprise sector, and still had a 5% overall year over year increase in sales for the March quarter? And that was considered disappointing.

        Dell and HP are both down in revenue. Up to 7% down in the same period.

          • WaltC
          • 8 years ago

          It’s amusing to see Apple apologists referring to “profits” while ignoring market share and unit sales–but, the idea is only to make Apple look better, right? I can understand why Apple people would mostly always wish to distort the issues–heck, it’s an Apple trademark…;) Without the RDF the nation’s humor quotient would be the worse off, no doubt about it.

          Percentages really don’t mean a whole lot–example: if Apple sold 1 Mac to “enterprise” (which might be Todd & Kathy’s Wallpaper Store), and then next quarter Apple turned around and sold a total of 2 Macs to “enterprise”–gosh, that would be a 100% increase in sales from quarter to quarter, wouldn’t it? Sounds far more impressive than it is, though.

          Besides, Ars Technica can’t even get Apple to *talk* about the future of Mac Pro boxes–and even they, stalwart Apple defenders to the bitter end, aren’t confident Apple is even interested in that market sector anymore. I’m inclined to agree with them, as I don’t know anyone who thinks OS X is worth a premium of the $1200 difference between an Apple Mac Pro x86 clone and a Dell or HP box identically spec’ed, but with Win7–that costs literally half as much, and provides a much better warranty at the same time. ($5k vs. $2.5k, etc.) Apple eschews competition whenever possible and looks to open markets where it will have none–at least for awhile. When competition heats up–zoom–Apple’s either in court suing its competitors to hopefully force them not to compete or else Apple is fleeing that market sector altogether.

            • TakinYourPoints
            • 8 years ago

            [quote<]I don't know anyone who thinks OS X is worth a premium of the $1200 difference between an Apple Mac Pro x86 clone and a Dell or HP box identically spec'ed, but with Win7--that costs literally half as much[/quote<] An identically specced (dual socket Xeon, server grade mobo, ECC RAM) Dell Precision workstation costs roughly what a Mac Pro does, a little more actually depending on the configuration.

      • Peldor
      • 8 years ago

      I’ve got Win 8 as my only install currently. It has a lot of rough edges in pre-release, but I can stay in the desktop mode about 99% of the time, essentially only using Metro with Win-Q to list all programs when I need to get to something I wouldn’t normally keep on my desktop or pinned to the taskbar. If that wasn’t enough, I could install a Win7-style start menu too.

      Metro itself doesn’t add a lot IMO if you are comfortable with the older WIMP model. But a ton of people are not (still) and that is the point.

      MS definitely still needs to work on their own key Metro apps like Explorer (they are too bare IMO even for casual use), but neither does Metro jump you and take over your world. The whole thing is overblown by the usual crowd of doomsayers.

      I did like the suggestion (somewhere in this comment thread) of making Metro a translucent overlay when you are working in the desktop rather than being a completely different screen. I could see that being a very functional design to bridge the two models.

        • Corrado
        • 8 years ago

        Kind of like the OSX ‘Launch Pad’? I’m primarily a Mac user at home and PC/Windows/Linux user at work. Launch Pad is something I NEVER use in Lion.

          • End User
          • 8 years ago

          I agree with you about Launch Pad. I never use it.

            • Noigel
            • 8 years ago

            Agreed, another non-launcher here.

    • Meadows
    • 8 years ago

    [quote<]It's like I'm a hot tub enthusiast, complete with a mustache and chest hair and 1970s hairdo, and Microsoft is about to toss me into a steaming hot spring at the bottom of a volcano. And the hot spring is full of sharks. And the sharks also have mustaches and chest hair.[/quote<] I'm so moist right now. [quote<]In either case, my multitasking experience is going to take a bullet in the leg.[/quote<] (Better than an arrow in the knee.) I believe the Metro Start Menu would be a lot better if only it ditched the [i<]full-screen background[/i<]. Instead, it should show your desktop, but blur it with Aero in the background. That would at least solve the feeling that you're "waltzing out of the desktop" whenever the start menu is invoked.

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      dude. dudes don’t get “moist”. that’s for girls. and you have the male parts. stop saying creepy things.

        • rrr
        • 8 years ago

        Why? You got moist because he said that?

          • sweatshopking
          • 8 years ago

          no. i got boy parts too.

            • bthylafh
            • 8 years ago

            Pics or it didn’t happen.

            • dpaus
            • 8 years ago

            Oh, for God’s sake, don’t give him ideas!!!

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            possibly nsfw, depending on what you figure.
            [url<]http://tinyurl.com/6qwcrfx[/url<]

        • lilbuddhaman
        • 8 years ago

        my body is ready, and moist.

        • Meadows
        • 8 years ago
      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      OMG WHAT DID YOU SAY?!

    • RhysAndrews
    • 8 years ago

    Where there is a demand, there will be a product to fulfill that demand.
    So I’m not scared – I’m excited because I know whatever happens, Microsoft isn’t going to come to my door and shoot me in the head. And I always have Windows 7, and even once support is cut off, there’ll be another solution out by then. I’m safe. I get to watch Microsoft take this big leap of faith in the comfort of my own life.

    I’m supporting Microsoft in this too, because at least they’re taking risks. They’ll get it right eventually, they have to, they’re a company.

    I actually really like the Metro interface. It’s poops all over iOS and it’s going to be just fantastic for tablets and phones. They’ve done cloud services and centralisation far better than Apple ever has. For a desktop or laptop that needs the productivity, well it needs work. But then Mac OS X is taking steps backward too with all its simplified reminders apps and such that are simply not fitted to a desktop environment.

    -R

      • Jingles
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]once support is cut off, there'll be another solution out by then[/quote<] That's what I'm hoping. I just hope that MS get it right next time. It seems that MS have forgotten that desktops and laptops still exist and designed Windows 8 for tablets and phones only. [quote<]it's going to be just fantastic for tablets and phones[/quote<] And rubbish for everything else, can you imagine the Metro interface on a server? It's bad enough on a desktop or laptop.

        • cygnus1
        • 8 years ago

        Server 2012 won’t have Metro

          • DeadOfKnight
          • 8 years ago

          Source? I have only read otherwise:

          [url<]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Server_2012[/url<] However, Stardock is developing a Start Menu app: [url<]http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/[/url<]

            • cygnus1
            • 8 years ago

            I stand corrected. I thought I had read in some earlier release that metro wasn’t enabled by default. Based on the screen shots i saw though, it actually looks pretty nice. and they’re finally adding an IPAM role, that’s pretty sweet

            • d0g_p00p
            • 8 years ago

            Wow, metro interface for a server product, thank dog for server core installs.

          • Rand
          • 8 years ago

          They’ve already showed off Server 2012 with Metro, and various Metro apps designed specifically for it.

            • nanoflower
            • 8 years ago

            Why would someone need or want Metro on Server 2012? As I understand it Metro is really about making the computer easy to understand for those that don’t need to do much more than web browsing and email. A server is designed for people that dig into the system and may serve many different purposes. It seems like having Metro be on that type of system (and likely taking over the interface as it does on the consumer OS) doesn’t make sense. At least not to me.

            • Rand
            • 8 years ago

            I believe your under the mistaken impression Microsoft cares about what people need or want.

      • Compton
      • 8 years ago

      It might be the best thing evAr! for mobile devices, but it’s no Desktop savior.

      • Shouefref
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]Microsoft isn't going to come to my door and shoot me in the head.[/quote<] Of course not. That's illegal. They do other things, like pushing the new things with eyecanyd, to get simple minded people to buy the new thing, so they install new formats and force the others to buy the new thing too. That's much more profitable than shooting clients in the head and much better for their image.

      • Shouefref
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]Where there is a demand, there will be a product to fulfill that demand.[/quote<] True. So, if you don'nt demand it, there's no market. So I'm not excited at all about the way MS is going to meddle with my computer system.

    • Mathieu Bourgie
    • 8 years ago

    Windows 7: The new Windows XP!

    As in everyone will still be using it in a few years, refusing to “upgrade” to W8, just like we saw with XP and Vista.

      • riviera74
      • 8 years ago

      If you think about it, Windows 8 is not that bad an upgrade if Microsoft would do one thing: make Metro optional and NOT the default. There are quite a few positive changes that come with Windows 8, particularly the speed and improved robustness of chkdsk compared to Windows 7.

      I do find it interesting that they are NOT pushing Metro onto their sever version: WIndows Server 2012. I wonder why that is……

        • Zoomer
        • 8 years ago

        Win server is not going to run on tablets. Like, for real.

        • Grigory
        • 8 years ago

        Hmm, maybe the server versions will become the new desktop versions for people who want to actually do something productive with their computers.

          • bthylafh
          • 8 years ago

          lolwhut

          Have you priced the server versions of Windows at any time in the past fifteen years?

            • Grigory
            • 8 years ago

            Not really but I see your point. 🙂

        • DeadOfKnight
        • 8 years ago

        Actually they are.

    • Compton
    • 8 years ago

    I walked into the Consumer Preview believing that Microsoft’s incalculable resources placed in developing user interfaces had created something fresh and interesting, something revolutionary.

    I was so f’ing wrong.

      • Wirko
      • 8 years ago

      I can’t agree with you. They created an UI that is fresh, interesting, and revolutionary.

      But that’s about all.

        • travbrad
        • 8 years ago

        What exactly about the UI is revolutionary? It seems like a nice enough UI for touch devices, but it doesn’t really seem to do anything that other touch UIs don’t. I’m not even sure it’s an evolutionary change, let alone revolutionary.

          • Voldenuit
          • 8 years ago

          [quote<] What exactly about the UI that is revolutionary? It seems like a nice enough UI for touch devices, but it doesn't really seem to do anything that other touch UIs don't.[/quote<] Exactly. It is a touch-centric interface, designed to deal with the limitations of current touch devices (limited screen real estate, legibility on small screens, quick access to common functions) while adding nothing, nay, severely detracting from desktop usability (lousy multitasking, task switching, codec and add-on support, customization, freedom of distribution channels, efficient use of space etc.). They're trying squeeze a camel through a pinhole, when we already had a superhighway (windows 7, OS X, Linux).

        • rrr
        • 8 years ago

        Well, by that logic MS Bob certainly was fresh, interesting and revolutionary too.

        As it stands however, fresh, interesting and revolutionary are trumped by “practical”.

    • FuturePastNow
    • 8 years ago

    I uninstalled the Consumer Preview from the laptop I was using it on, and I’m not going to willingly touch Windows 8 again. So I guess the CP did its job, then, previewing the hell that is Metro.

    Good job, Microsoft. You finally made me hate a version of Windows (I liked Vista).

    • DeadOfKnight
    • 8 years ago

    I feel exactly the same way, Cyril.

    • xand
    • 8 years ago

    Thanks for the article.

    As a (very) minor suggestion – perhaps “take a bullet in the leg” should be “take an arrow in the knee”.

    It’s all I could think about after reading the sentence.

      • Glix
      • 8 years ago

      He’s obviously gearing himself up to play max payne. :p

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This