Microsoft may kill Start menu hacks for Windows 8

In Windows 8, Microsoft is killing the Start menu and replacing it with the Metro Start screen. That move essentially forces users to dance back and forth between Metro and the legacy desktop if they want to get any work done. But that’s okay, because you can just bring back the Start menu with some third-party hacks. Right?

Well, yes, but maybe not for much longer.

According to Paul Thurrott of the eponymous Supersite for Windows, those third-party hacks won’t work in the upcoming Windows 8 Release Preview… or, apparently, in the final version of Windows 8:

Related to this second point is information I’ve received that Microsoft has been furiously ripping out legacy code in Windows 8 that would have enabled third parties to bring back the Start button, Start Menu, and other software bits that could have made this new OS look and work like its predecessor. In fact, I’ve seen that several well-known UI hacks that worked fine with the Windows 8 Consumer Preview are no longer functional in the coming Release Preview.

Worse yet, Thurrott claims neither Windows 8 nor its server counterpart, Windows Server 2012, will allow business users to boot straight into the Desktop interface. He says this move is part of a “calculated risk” to focus on consumers—consumers that might be “on the cusp of slipping through its fingers thanks to Apple and, to a much lesser extent, Android.” Business users, meanwhile, will likely have to stick with Windows 7 for the foreseeable future.

I’ve already discussed my trepidations about Windows 8, and this story only adds to them. I think it’s not just business folks Microsoft who will be leaving behind. Power users, too, may see the awkward Metro-desktop cohabitation as an impediment to productivity, and they may end up sticking with Windows 7, too, which would rob them of many of the advances and improvements Windows 8 makes to the desktop. It’s sort of tragic, really, and I hope Microsoft reconsiders its stance. (Thanks to Neowin for the tip.)

Comments closed
    • moresmarterthanspock
    • 7 years ago

    Microsoft, WTF is your problem? Quit being dictators, or, in this extreme case, just quit being dicks! Not everyone wants to change with the times! Just give users the options, it’s not complicated! I may just switch to another OS, PERMANENTLY! Paid or free, I don’t care. As long as I have a choice! Pardon me, I must not be drinking flouridated water. I’m not as calm about this as many people seem to be!

    • LoneWolf15
    • 7 years ago

    Server 2012 RC seems to boot straight into the Desktop interface, with a new Server Manager app (streamlined from the previous offerings). Hitting the Windows key will bring up Metro as the “Start Menu”.

    If Microsoft wants to focus on consumers IMO, then Windows 8 Premium should have Metro as default, and non-consumers (i.e., business and IT professionals) should get a choice with Windows 8 Pro or Enterprise. It’s not like Microsoft has to force everyone to adopt one strategy just to gain more of the consumer market.

    The only place I see Metro making sense in the business world is for touchscreen kiosks, or areas where an IT department wishes to give the user about half a dozen specific apps to work with, and no more (possible example :bank tellers), either for ease-of-use, security reasons, or both. This would still hinge on MS making sure that Group Policy can be used to do this with Metro (though I don’t see why they wouldn’t.

    For users whose job actually involves being a power user (e.g., multiple monitors and heavy multitasking), forcing Metro is simply a bad decision.

    EDIT: There is some speculation that MS may allow admins to disable Metro via Group Policy as well. It will be interesting to see if this happens.

    • Mystic-G
    • 7 years ago

    Microsoft – What’s this? People trying to modify our UI to suit themselves? We can’t have this. All your base are belong to us.

    • brute
    • 7 years ago

    The 800-pound gorilla in the room has yet to be addressed.

    Can you change the cursor to a peeling banana? If not, I’m going to stick with XP. It’s patently ridiculous that such an important feature is neglected.

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      this is the best post on the topic.

    • moog
    • 7 years ago

    Even if you can’t boot into the Desktop directly, couple of clicks and you’re in Desktop mode (or use the shortcut keys). It’s not difficult and it’s easy to get used to.

    It’s also about perspective. You can think of the Metro screen as the Start menu. The essential functionality is the same, you can search for your apps and you can pin them there.

    Scrolling through the tiles in Metro actually has advantages over a hierarchical menu system which blog authors overlook or ignore

    – It takes more precision to position the mouse and activate tiny menu entries, therefore it’s slower
    – Selecting menu entries are prone to error (overscrolling the menu)
    – Folder menus require a few milliseconds to activate
    – Reading menus (reading in general) is considerably slower than picture recognition, which Metro is designed around
    – Most users access only a few apps repeatedly, it’s slower to scroll through menus to find them and finding their tiny icons or text is more prone to error

    So Metro provides equivalent functionality but its usability should be better than the Start menu. Once users get used to Metro I think they will get very quick and find it easy to navigate.

      • achaycock
      • 7 years ago

      I’m sure many users will adapt just fine to the new metro interface, but actively removing the ability for people to use their computer the way they want to do so is something I disapprove of.

      People work in different ways and having used Windows 8 since February, I can safely say that metro drastically hinders my own ability to use the computer effectively.

      Yes it does take more precision to position the mouse over menu entries, good job a mouse is actually a precision tool isn’t it? I can honestly say I’ve made more errors selecting items in Metro than in the start menu, folder menus can be tweaked to appear instantly, but the Metro screen at present is certainly not instant, I find picture recognition worse for me than reading menus – mainly because one has to interpret pictures the same way as its creator and whilst there are only a few apps I use daily, I have hundreds installed. Scrolling sideways through hundreds of pictures is a hell of a lot worse than going through my categorised start menu i.e. Creativity > GIMP.

      If Microsoft want to encourage consumers to use Metro, fair enough. I’m willing to accept that maybe they can see something that I can’t. But if they’re going to stop me from using the computer as I want to use it, then they can keep Windows 8 and I’ll find something else. Power and business users will do exactly that, hence the increased popularity of Linux Mint after Ubuntu forced Unity on its users. And Unity is much, much better than Metro for usability.

      • Zoomer
      • 7 years ago

      Try telling that to the 50k users who call in everyday and the support techs have to ask if it’s plugged in, and have they tried turning it on?

      And by the way, metro will be slower just because it takes up the whole screen. Now, I can start apps while not taking my eyes off whatever I’m doing, and simply type -> enter. That’s no longer possible.

      The existing start menu has for more than a decade promoted frequently used apps in big rectangles by default. What’s new?

    • volnaiskra
    • 7 years ago

    For 17 years now, I’ve been trying to figure out why anyone in their right mind would actually use the Start menu. I couldn’t see the big deal in 1995, and 7’s version, albeit much improved, still seems redundant and subpar.

    It’s clunky, disorganised, time-consuming, and requires way more precision mousing than a good UI should. I suspect that those people who consider it necessary have just been using it out of habit….a bad habit.

    Actually, getting rid of the start menu seems like the first good news I’ve heard about Windows 8.

      • Pholostan
      • 7 years ago

      Yeah, I feel the same. I ran litestep on Win NT4 for like forever. Many people I know hated the start menu too. I remember Interface hall of shame doing a whole article about it. But you know, people have gotten used to it. They expect it to be there, even if they never actually use it. So naturally they howl if it goes away. Heck I have gotten used to it. And when I finally get rid of it for what I hope is for good, I too grumble 🙂

      Rest In Peace start menu, and God Bless.

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      You should add this self-important superiority complex into your resume as one of your “Skills and Abilities”, and you’ll have a job at Microsoft in no time. You could even try to get an interview at Apple!

      • streagle27
      • 7 years ago

      It’s called ‘organization’, as in the verb, to ‘organise’.

      Without organization, inefficiency reigns.

      We’ll let all the Windows 8 user’s use YOU to organize their desktop and create tiles for their programs.

      And when they have trouble running more than a couple of tiled programs at once, we’ll refer them to you.

      I suspect your ancestor had similar comments when the typewriter was invented.

      “It’s clunky, disorganized, time-consuming, and requires way more precision usage of one’s fingers than a good pencil and paper would…”

      IBM and, peripheral, technology companies as well as the vast majority of corporations and their employees all around the world would be grateful you weren’t in charge back then.

      Sometimes, believe it or not, to get more done, one needs to learn new things.

      Windows 8 is a step BACKWARD.

      It doesn’t make things EASIER for USERS, it makes them more difficult to do.

    • jackbomb
    • 7 years ago

    “Worse yet, Thurrott claims neither Windows 8 nor its server counterpart, Windows Server 2012, will allow business users to boot straight into the Desktop interface. ”

    So real server rooms are finally going to look like the ones shown in the movie Hackers?

    • Krogoth
    • 7 years ago

    I don’t get why enthusiast are so distressed over WIndows 8.

    Windows 8 has never been designed as a desktop OS and it doesn’t offering anything compelling over 7 for desktop users.

    Windows 8 has been a portable OS from the start. MS already knows that their business clientele is still dealing with XP => 7 upgrade and have no interest in doing another upgrade. What’s the big seller for the mainstream market at the moment? Portables.

    Windows 8 makes perfect sense if you think of as Window 7 Mobile 2.0 not a whole new OS.

    Microsoft is going get back to desktop users with the next version of Windows and implement whatever works well with Windows 8.

    • internetsandman
    • 7 years ago

    I guess the difference between apple and Microsoft is this: when apple makes design decisions to show their userbase what they really want, they’re usually right, unlike microsoft, who simply sees seemingly arbitrary decisions come from apple that work, and think that they can make their own arbitrary decisions and be just as successful

    • From40zto5thz
    • 7 years ago

    If this rumor is true than I will definitely be avoiding windows 8 like the bean and beef burritos that’s been sitting for four hours on a buffet line.

    It’s bad enough that I will have to explain to my family members the difference between RT and windows 8 on x86 tablets, but not allowing a person to avoid metro on a non touchscreen system is the last straw for me.

    I’ve tried to use the consumer preview several times on a multiple monitor setup and each time I found myself wanting to go back to windows 7, which I did and deleted the partition.

    There are some improvements in the desktop environment but they are not worth the jarring experience a user must suffer when you press the windows key cough cough metro.

    I can only imagine the percentage of consumer market share that Microsoft is going to lose to Apple. Considering that Intel is pushing MacBook clones for the same price point with inferrior results plus the fact that users have to learn a whole new operating system. Why not take the plunge and buy a Mac since you know future OS upgrades will only be $30 and your spending a $1,000 anyway?

    This is coming for some one who is in the market for a notebook and has several windows PC in the house for gaming and everyday use.

      • TREE
      • 7 years ago

      I completely agree with what you just said; in fact I think if Apple were to make Mac OS compatible with non Mac products I reckon there’d be a mass exodus to the operating system and just like that, Windows would lose it’s market dominance.

    • Wirko
    • 7 years ago

    Well, if some makes an application launcher that looks and works like the old Start menu, can be pinned as the leftmost icon in the taskbar, and that icon is an orb with a colourful window inside, can Microsoft kill it?

    • Bensam123
    • 7 years ago

    So, if users don’t like what we did so much so that an actual profitable market develops to undo what we did, we’ll just try harder to do what we originally did by making it impossible for them to undo it?

    Microsoft your logic and giant eschlong is of unimaginably fathomable proportions.

    Really, this is all about ego and believing since they’re the one true OS maker they always know right. And if their users don’t like it so much so that they’ll actually actively rebel by developing software that works around theirs, they’ll just try harder to crush them. I don’t see the makings of a tyrant anywhere in here.

    Whatever happened to fucking options? You know the little checkbox or pull down menu where you can pick things and are offered a CHOICE. I can really understand locking down a OS to force a appstore on people, but this is just messed up. Especially considering they’re also basically giving the middle finger to corporate customers.

    Why is Metro even part of WServer 2012?

      • Wirko
      • 7 years ago

      This.

      Instead of an UI that’s extensible in every way one can think of, we are getting a one-size-fits-all solution, and this is more worrying that the removal of the Start button.

    • PopcornMachine
    • 7 years ago

    This is the “Vista” mentality all over again. Deciding what people will use instead of giving them what they want.

    Thought Microsoft learned their lesson with win7, but no. We can only hope that they continue to support win7 and win8 will run on current hardware, which Vista didn’t do very well.

    • Geistbar
    • 7 years ago

    I’m not particularly bothered the news related to the title itself. Code changes between pre-releases. They aren’t going to go out of their way to ensure a 3rd party switch coded for one version still works in later versions. Once Win8 comes out, they won’t be able to stop people from making a start menu hack. I don’t think they’ll be interested in doing so either — people willing to install such are not going to be their concern.

    What I [i<]am[/i<] bothered by is the potential for them to disable booting to the desktop. Blocking that is just pure inconvenience. I'm not excited about Metro being included in Windows, but I've not written it off completely without having used it first either. At the same time, everything I do with my computer is desktop-centric, I have no desire to stay in a touch interface on my non-touch enabled desktop. Forced booting to Metro just means I wouldn't be able to boot to the environment I intend to use. Hopefully that rumor is false, and if not, hopefully we can get a hack for that. Win8 looks to be the most disjointed Windows yet; I love all of the under the hood improvements, there's a lot of really nice ones in there. I don't like the new "hood" though, and while I'm willing the entertain the notion that I'll change my mind on it, I don't like all of the attempts to force me to use it even when it makes little sense to do so. Windows has always been about choice: why are they so keen on removing choices?

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 7 years ago

      Keep in mind that the desktop is to Windows 8 like the desktop was to Windows 3.1. The desktop is a program that runs on top of the main OS. The main screen for Windows 8 is the Metro screen. The desktop “app” will run afterward if you turn it on. That’s why it’ll start in the Metro screen. Because we’re back to the wonderful days of Windows 3.1.

      Progress is grand.

        • Geistbar
        • 7 years ago

        I’m not sure that’s really true in the way you’re portraying it. The desktop is coded just as, if not more, deeply into Windows that Metro will be. If anything, Metro is the bolted on aspect. All they’ve done is set “default=dwm.exe” to “default=metro.exe”.

        • sschaem
        • 7 years ago

        And the metro start screen is not an ‘app’ itself written on top of the os…

        The metro start screen is great on a single display touch screen device, it as no use on a dekstop system.

        Windows8 should default boot to metro on tablets, and desktop on laptop/desktop (those old computers that come with a keyboard and mouse)

        MS is trying to force feed people metro, even if its the wrong paradigm and the wrong tool for the job.

        This will bite them hard in the long run…

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      I don’t think this is about them keeping legacy code around, rather actively developing their OS to thwart using it in a way they don’t like.

        • Geistbar
        • 7 years ago

        The exact quoted text says that this change was caused by removing legacy code. While it’s entirely possible that they removed it to prevent people from getting start menu workarounds, the process doesn’t sound that implausible once you know even a little bit about how software development works.

        People will make new start menus after Win8 comes out, and Microsoft isn’t going to play whack-a-mole blocking those with a new patch every month. There’s no point in going out of their way to block it now.

          • Bensam123
          • 7 years ago

          Yuh… notice how that quote is quite ambiguous? What exactly defines ‘legacy’. The very fact that W8 uses Metro makes the old start menu ‘legacy’. It has nothing to do with it being useless, detrimental, or outdated, it has everything to do with how it’s defined.

          I guess ‘knowing even a little bit about software development’ implies immediate ignorance. Good thing you already stated that I don’t.

    • tootercomputer
    • 7 years ago

    Another example of the stance that Microsoft has maintained for years and years:

    We (Microsoft) know what’s best for you.

      • Meadows
      • 7 years ago

      I thought that was Apple. Oh wait, Microsoft is copying the stance for little reason.

    • albundy
    • 7 years ago

    i dont have the need to do more clicking to get the same job done. i need it to be done more fluently with less workload. if they cant understand that, then there is no hope for winblows 8.

    • Starfalcon
    • 7 years ago

    The big reason MS is doing this is…money….they see android and apple making tons of dosh selling apps. They lost tons of money on all the people sitting on XP for a decade, as they weren’t going out and buying the new OS when it came out every 2 years or so. MS now has to come up with some way to get money flowing back into their coffers, so they see people spending cash on apps for their phones and tablets. The lightbulb pops up over Stevie B’s head and bingo, we have apps in our windows.

    MS is going to make a mint selling apps now, they don’t even have to write them, just get people creating them, put them up in the app store and bingo…money for doing a whole lot of nothing. Just wait until they release the Start Menu app, for the low price of $100, you too can have your legacy start menu back and functional.

    The only issue will be if it flops, MS is going to find themselves in a world of hurt, it is a big gamble…but MS really doesn’t have anything else it can do to boost revenue. After Win 8 launches, we will see if MS has more money than they know what to do with, or Ballmer’s head on a spike.

      • indeego
      • 7 years ago

      The app stores are [u<]not[/u<] massive moneymakers for anyone, let alone Apple. Microsoft has a massive uphill battle ahead, and they won't be able to pull more than they need [i<]and[/i<] keep developers.

        • Starfalcon
        • 7 years ago

        Yeah, but it will be for MS…they get their money when you buy the OS, then don’t see another dime from you until you buy your next OS. They provide patches and updates for your system for free. With their app store, if they can get the average person to spend $10-$20 on apps yearly, that’s going to be a lot of extra revenue they would never have had otherwise. $20 X 10 million people is a lot of extra money, they would have to sell a lot of OS packages to make that much. A lot of my friends will buy a dollar app as an impulse buy, and MS is counting on that I am sure.

    • Starfalcon
    • 7 years ago

    Hooray for duplicate post

    • LastQuestion
    • 7 years ago

    I have a collection of wallpapers and themes I enjoy and really don’t see the value of utilizing a touchscreen interface with a mouse&k/b, so, w8 can suck it until upgrading is actually an upgrade.

    • flip-mode
    • 7 years ago

    I’m OK with being the only TR reader that will happily use Windows 8.

      • Chrispy_
      • 7 years ago

      I’ll enjoy Windows 8 on a tablet too, where it belongs.

        • burntham77
        • 7 years ago

        I have my wallet locked and loaded for a Windows 8 tablet, and not for the desktop version.

      • drfish
      • 7 years ago

      I will happily use it on a tablet and phone. The jury is out on a PC. I have a lot of confidence in their team though, I appreciate the information shared via the Building Windows 8 blog… However I do wish they would just put an end to this start menu silliness and just make it an option…

        • HisDivineOrder
        • 7 years ago

        They could solve all the complaining if they’d just accept that a lot of desktop/laptop users will never have any use for the Metro/Windows App Store/start button-less nonsense they’re adding. If they’d just ADD features instead of REMOVING features, they’d get everyone back on board.

        They don’t even have to improve the Windows 7 UI. That’s how sad the whole thing is. At this point, we all just want the damn OS to stay the same without improvement from Win 7 because that’s actually optimal and quicker for the current Windows computer than the new kludge they’re tossing out.

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      I don’t know if I should vote you up cause that’s like saying ‘I’m going to go out and huff a pound of crack today’, because the statement is so stupid and detrimental to yourself I sorta want to see you suffer. But at the same time I don’t think you’ll be happy using W8, rather you’re just using it to spur anyone who thinks progress (done wrong) is bad.

      It reminds me of the kid in HS who kept running around telling everyone to use WinME and talking about how awesome it was.

      I’ll vote you up so you’re closer to 0, which is where I think you belong.

      • flip-mode
      • 7 years ago

      Down-vote me!!!! I like Metro! Seriously!

        • Beelzebubba9
        • 7 years ago

        …I like Metro too….

        (I also think nerds have terrible opinions for the most part).

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      i also like it! we can hug my canadian friend!

    • Kent_dieGo
    • 7 years ago

    I remember when Win95 came out. The news groups were flooded by complaints where many said they were going back to Windows 3.1. I wonder how many of those people are still using Windows 3.1?

    That said, It seems most people will be happier waiting for Windows 9 where they fix the UI to be more useful for desktop users.

      • Frith
      • 7 years ago

      I don’t remember hearing any complaints about the Windows 95 user interface. I remember there was a lot of trouble over the fact that Microsoft set the minimum requirement to 4MB when it really required 8MB. However, when it came to the UI most users were very happy with the changes, despite it being very different to the 3.11 UI. This was because users could see that the Windows 95 UI was a significant improvement over 3.11 and that the changes were for the better.

      Microsoft apologists keep saying that people don’t like Windows 8 because they don’t like change, but Windows 95 demonstrated that users are very accepting of change when they can see it is for the better. The reason Windows 8 is getting such a negative reaction is not because it’s different, but because it’s patently inferior.

        • burntham77
        • 7 years ago

        Thank you. Change is fine, if it brings improvements. Even getting rid of older, useful functions is totally fine if the new OS brings with it something better than what was taken out. Windows 8 simply does not do that. When I used Windows 8 for a month, I was less productive than I was on Windows 8. It just took longer to get things done.

          • rrr
          • 7 years ago

          “When I used Windows 8 for a month, I was less productive than I was on Windows 8. ”

          Shouldn’t second 8 be replaced with 7?

        • superjawes
        • 7 years ago

        I don’t remember what my first version of Windows was because I was too young…but I do remember when 95 came out, and growing up with Win 95 and the following versions, I can say that it made it easier for a young person to learn.

        I think part of the resistance to Windows 8 is that now we have generations that have grown up with home computers, all based on the 95 interface. Once the final version is released, we’ll probably see extensive comparisons between 7 and 8 to determine which one is clearly inferior, but the loudest voices right now are definitely those resisting change.

        • indeego
        • 7 years ago

        [i<]"The reason Windows 8 is getting such a negative reaction is not because it's different, but because it's patently inferior."[/i<] In your opinion. Consumers are not enthusiasts. They want their apps, they don't run many of them, and they crave touchscreens. Sorry if this really bugs "power users" but Microsoft actually puts serious thought and market research (as does Google and Apple, and Hollywood, and automakers,) and they have serious number crunching going on to determine where the market is going. I'm really really sorry! This really bugs a lot of people, but you just aren't their target market. Microsoft is willing to bet that you'll either whine and join the fold, or they'll lose you and gain/maintain 100 other customers. As always, it's a numbers game.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 7 years ago

          That doesn’t explain spending time to disable Aero/start menu.

          • elnad2000
          • 7 years ago

          When you say Hollywood, you mean the same guys that decided to produce John Carter and loose a bunch of money from it. Or the same guys that create new series each years that are flops.

          Automakers do errors ALL THE TIME. Never seen a Pontiac Aztek? Remember Saturn, now closed.

          It’s stupid to think that Microsoft can’t make errors. I never bought an Ms Office with the ribbon. I hate it with all my heart. I have to use it at my work and hate it every day. I can’t believe Microsoft decided to use a lot of vertical screen to put drawings that don’t explain what they do. Menus was good for me. Why can’t I pay for a version with FN menus? It’s my freaking money and they don’t let me give it to them. How stupid is it for a business decisions!!!!!

          • travbrad
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]Microsoft is willing to bet that you'll either whine and join the fold, or they'll lose you and gain/maintain 100 other customers.[/quote<] Actually they just know that the people who don't like Windows 8 will buy Windows 7 instead, so either way it's a sale for them. Almost no one is going to switch to Linux/Mac because of Windows 8.

          • LoneWolf15
          • 7 years ago

          How many desktops do you know that are driven by touchscreens?

          How many businesses that use even moderate multitasking can be productive with a touchscreen as the primary desktop interface?

          I understand what you mean when it comes to tablets and smartphones; this makes complete sense. On the desktop, not even close. I think if it did, someone would have beaten Microsoft to the punch on it (possibly Apple, or someone else) long ago.

    • indeego
    • 7 years ago

    Yawn, the predictability of “we’re staying with Windows 7 for-eva'” from the “enthusiast” community.

      • Chrispy_
      • 7 years ago

      This is the same “enthusiast” community that praised 2K, XP, 7, and jumped ship from Millenium and Vista in a heartbeat?

      “enthusiast” communities may be irrational and opinionated at times, but we’re able to recognise a turd when we see one.

        • Meadows
        • 7 years ago

        Nobody praised XP when it came out.

          • Kaleid
          • 7 years ago

          I did.

          • bitcat70
          • 7 years ago

          It only became what it was supposed to be with the release of SP1.

      • Malphas
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<]Yawn, the predictability of "we're staying with Windows 7 for-eva'" from the "enthusiast" community.[/quote<] Indeed. Every time Microsoft has made any kind of significant change to Windows has resulted in an outbreak of nerd rage since for as long as I can remember, e.g. Start Menu in Windows 95, Luna in Windows XP, general overhaul in Vista, and the Taskbar changes in Windows 7. It's also funny how everyone said they were going to stick with XP forever upon the release of Vista, but then all happily migrated to the slightly tweaked version of it (Windows 7) and started hailing it as the best thing ever. My prediction is that Microsoft takes the telemetry from Windows 8 users, makes a few tweaks, incorporates it into Windows 9 with a general polish and everyone upgrades to it and moves on.

        • ermo
        • 7 years ago

        Well, don’t forget to take into account that Vista as released was not without its issues. The ‘slight tweaks’ you mentioned represented, what, 3 years of development of the ideas and driver changes that Vista carried with it and I think it was these 3 years of developments that made the difference (and the time it gave the hardware driver developers to get on top of the new driver model), not what you call ‘slight tweaks’.

        As an enthusiast, I’m happy to let someone else take the brunt of the pain of encountering what I would call the ‘papercuts’ inherent to the new UI experience that Windows 8 represents. Then, when MS has gotten a better handle on what its consumers want and need (and don’t want nor need) from the Metro UI, I (and many like me) are going to migrate in droves.

        The changes under the hood certainly sound worth the upgrade, even if the UI decisions leave me sort of puzzled.

    • GasBandit
    • 7 years ago

    Honestly, I remember back in 95 thinking the Start Menu was a huge step backwards from just nested folders with icons in them on the desktop. Come to think of it, that’s still what I use. I never go into my start menu, I’ve got folders and icons on my desktop and quicklaunch bar.

    I realize it’s human nature to freak out about change, but really, remember that the start menu was a poor design choice to start with.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 7 years ago

      Notice the big difference here? In the first case MS let you continue using what you were comfortable with and didn’t forcibly remove your ability to use desktop icons.

        • burntham77
        • 7 years ago

        Bingo. Windows has been a flexible OS for awhile. Windows 7 is great because I can use the taskbar, desktop and the Start menu to manage program shortcuts. The OS gives us options. Windows 8 is taking away options.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 7 years ago

      It’s also human nature to want OPTIONS. Not have them taken away to push some moneygrubbing agenda for making up insane amounts of lost ground as rapidly and as foolishly as possible.

    • Shambles
    • 7 years ago

    Sure looks like Windows 7 will be the next XP where people won’t be upgrading their OS for the next 10 years. I’m ok with that.

      • squeeb
      • 7 years ago

      My thoughts exactly.

      • smilingcrow
      • 7 years ago

      That seems premature as Win9 might be out 2 years after Win8 and be well received.

        • Chrispy_
        • 7 years ago

        The only reason people were forced to move to 7 was becuase XP32 was the only decent version and people were being limited by the 2GB application limit. Because W7 isn’t as limited by driver support as XP32 was, I don’t think we’ll see the same enthusiasm for W9 as we did for W7.

        If XP64 had decent driver support, a lot more people would still be hanging onto it.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 7 years ago

      I suspect Windows 9 will come out a year after Windows 8. They’ll undo a lot of the crap Windows 8 produced and probably swap up the name to wash away the foul taste of Windows 8 from the OS. Any name’ll do. I mean, seriously. By the time Windows 8 has had time to really stink up the place, you’ll be wishing for any name. Like Windows ME Vista Bob 2.0. You’ll just be glad it’s not like Windows 8.

    • kumori
    • 7 years ago

    It seems that typing the name of an application to launch it is much better than the start menu. I can’t remember I used the start menu for anything else besides searching for applications and shutting down my computer in Windows 7.

    • Walkintarget
    • 7 years ago

    Microsoft = HP 2.0

    I never thought it possible for a company to drive itself into the ground harder and faster than HP, but MS …you may be on to something here.

    • Alchemist07
    • 7 years ago

    Dont like windows 8?

    Simples.

    Stay on windows 7.

    OK?

      • Grigory
      • 7 years ago

      Ok.

      • Shouefref
      • 7 years ago

      How are you going to do that when you buy a new computer?
      They won’t let you choose, you know.

        • superjawes
        • 7 years ago

        Build your own. XP was still available in Spring 2009, even though 7 released in October. Unless you’re getting a laptop, most people who want 7 will be able to stay with 7 until we’re talking about the release of Windows 9, and even then, Microsoft will probably still give some support to 7 for two or three years after that.

      • burntham77
      • 7 years ago

      Gonna.

      • bthylafh
      • 7 years ago

      Which will work until the program you really want and/or need for a specific purpose is no longer developed for Win7, and/or until Win7 is no longer supported for security fixes and/or new hardware.

      Eventually nobody will support Win7.

        • Squeazle
        • 7 years ago

        And eventually your house will probably decay and collapse. But you will either be dead or have a new one by then. Stick with what works until you can’t or there’s a better option, no point in switching if the switch is less functional, especially so soon after getting something that works well.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 7 years ago

      Sounds great except I want all the awesome underpinnings (faster boot, improved file transfer dialogue/handling) of Windows 8. If they’d just port that stuff on over in a SP to Windows 7, then I say let Windows 8 burn the whole house down, I’m in my underground bunker.

    • bcronce
    • 7 years ago

    I can’t wait for more Linux games, so I can run them in FreeBSD. Wine does not work well in FreeBSD.

    • FubbHead
    • 7 years ago

    I’ve always thought that the Start Menu needed to be updated, making it easier to configure and organize, and fix little annoyances like making sure icons put there by applications also got removed when uninstalled, regardless if the icons has been moved, etc.

    Other than that, it has been perfectly fine.

    But I’m pretty sure that I will loathe that Metro crap, though….

      • danny e.
      • 7 years ago

      The start menu does need updating. In fact, a full screen for the start menu is a great idea. However, the metro implementation of it sucks.

    • 0g1
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]sticking with Windows 7, which would rob them of many of the advances and improvements Windows 8 makes to the desktop.[/quote<] I didn't notice any improvements over Windows 7. Oh, I like the new Task Manager, that's about it.

    • thanatos355
    • 7 years ago

    Step 1: Stockpile Win 7 products.
    Step 2: Wait for MS to yank Win 7 from store shelves and e-tailers.
    Step 3: Slowly (so as not to flood the market) slip Win 7 products from your stockpile onto ebay et al.
    Step 4: Profit.
    Step 5: Take over the world! MWUAHAHAHA!

      • ew
      • 7 years ago

      Step 3.5: eBay takes all your listings down because you maybe might probably be violating an unenforcible clause in the EULA you never agreed to but who cares. Piracy!

        • smilingcrow
        • 7 years ago

        Plenty of MS software on eBay and I’ve bought and sold with no problems.

    • kroker
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]That move essentially forces users to dance back and forth between Metro and the legacy desktop if they want to get any work done.[/quote<] No, this move essentially forces users to go/stay with Windows 7 or find other OS alternatives if they want to get any work done.

    • sircharles32
    • 7 years ago

    Great.

    Can someone please tell me when Win 8 is being released, so that I can make damn sure I’ve bought another copy of Win 7, before that happens.

    Thanks.

      • Rand
      • 7 years ago

      Buy a few extra so you can resell them, I’m willing to bet anything you’ll be able to sell Win7 at a huge premium a year from now.

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      This is a great idea

    • ALiLPinkMonster
    • 7 years ago

    I feel like Microsoft is sticking a giant middle finger right in my face.

    Well right back at ya.

    • sonofsanta
    • 7 years ago

    It’s bad enough that it’s being done to the consumer version, but Server 12? What in crying f**k are they doing it to the server system for? What sysadmin is going to want bloody Metro as the default screen? Most are still using the command line let alone the GUI, so a bloody touch interface as the default is laughable!

    stupid stupid stupid stupid

      • derFunkenstein
      • 7 years ago

      Yeah, I really don’t get why they’re forcing metro on the Server product.

      • Rand
      • 7 years ago

      Well they’ve already said their replacing the base level Server configuration tools and applications with Metro variants, so this fits in well with that if they expect servers to be managed exclusively from metro via a touch interface.

      As laughable as this is to say, given Microsoft’s current actions it wouldn’t seem out of character to market tablets as servers. Reality and logic doesn’t seem to exist in their world anymore.

    • Dingmatt
    • 7 years ago

    I’m using windows 8 CP and I honestly can’t see the problem, here’s the steps:

    1) Press windows key
    2) Quick type the name of the app
    3) Hit enter key

    Who cares if its the start menu or metro, it works on either; hell if your a power user just hit Win+R.

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      quit being reasonable. nm the fact that going to metro and then to the desktop in 8, thanks to it’s WAY faster booting, still saves a ton of time vs 7.

        • HisDivineOrder
        • 7 years ago

        Yet if you had the “WAY faster booting” of Windows 8 in Windows 7 (boots to the desktop), it’d be even MORE “WAY faster booting.”

        • sschaem
        • 7 years ago

        Its call an “unnecessary inconvenience” , something good designers try to optimize.

        This choice was not made from a good design stand point, but to brute force metro app adoption on desktop. And if you used any of the metro apps you would know how wrong this is for desktop users.

          • streagle27
          • 7 years ago

          MS is going to brute force themselves out of the market.

          They’re already creating a mostly negative opinion among those who have tried Win 8 and it’s about to get much worse.

      • ludi
      • 7 years ago

      You’ve seen that graphic that compares Metro to Windows 1.0?

      What you just described takes us back to DOS.

        • sweatshopking
        • 7 years ago

        i’ve seen the graphic, and so? it’s not realistic. they’re hardly the same thing. power users are whining about change, same as always. big surprise.

          • ludi
          • 7 years ago

          If the best workaround for having to use touchscreen tablet interface on a non-touchscreen desktop computer is to go all command line in order to launch applications, then I’m going to learn how to use Linux for real, instead of just tinkering with it on a spare box every third or fourth major release.

            • Pholostan
            • 7 years ago

            I use windows for gaming, surfing the web and watching videos. All the actual work I do is done in Linux. Seems like Windows 8 will fill my needs just fine 🙂

            • streagle27
            • 7 years ago

            Believe it or not, there are plenty of users in corporate America and in education who use their PC’s heavily, who still have issues just finding the program in their start menu, and now Microsoft is about to force them to MEMORIZE and TYPE the name of the program to run it?

            You have GOT to be kidding me.

            Who’s the brainiac who thought up this?

            I can just hear all these users muttering curses under their breath at Microsoft, as well as their IT departments who dare to deploy this b.s. I’ve already got rid of Win 8 on my PC’s and have NO plans to ‘test’ it further, let alone recommend it to anyone.

            And people thought going from XP to Vista/Win7, or learning Google Docs was bad!

            I find it the height of irony when people are FORCED to hack Win8 to make it more usable and then end up fighting MS because MS themselves refuse to better their own product.

            Incredible! Wow!

            I’m going to try and just watch the show now while MS proceeds to blow their own brains out.

            A tablet is not a PC, a phone is not a PC. All three devices are different in design AND use despite their similarities, and so require different approaches to their user interfaces.

            I guess this concept is just too hard to figure out for some people.

            Perhaps MS should get new people.

            What would be really funny is to to hear all the curses emanating from within MS corporate headquarters when everyone there is forced to use Windows 8.

            They’ll all be saying the same thing to themselves, if not out loud.. ‘what is this $h#% and who’s idea was this’?

            I’ll stick with Win7 and Server 2k8R2 and start toying with Linux again, since I got fed up with Windows 8.

            Designing products for monkeys might seem to be a good idea except that human beings aren’t monkeys. They expect their tech to do more and make life easier.

            Win 8 doesn’t cut it in either of these areas.

            Have a good Day!

          • streagle27
          • 7 years ago

          Forcing power users to jump through more hoops to do the same amount of work, is stupid.

          While whining about change may usually occur, sometimes, the whining is justified.

          As for the idiots in charge who made these decisions, well… what happened to the Vista team again?

      • derFunkenstein
      • 7 years ago

      This is the greatest feature of all the features added to Windows Vista. Been doing this all along, and been doing similar on OS X since Tiger in 2004. Looking for an app on the start menu is so 2006.

        • Alchemist07
        • 7 years ago

        start menu was a terrible idea to begin with, I much prefer using keyboard shortcuts. W8 ftw.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 7 years ago

          How does a start menu prevent keyboard shortcuts?

      • rrr
      • 7 years ago

      And you can do that on Win 7 too. Point?

        • Dingmatt
        • 7 years ago

        That is the point… nothing changed and people are up in arms over said nothing

          • rrr
          • 7 years ago

          Ummm, if start menu is removed, I wouldn’t count it as “nothing changed”.

            • indeego
            • 7 years ago

            No functionality that the start menu had is lost with metro. Functionality is gained.

            You must use it to understand, but the windows key toggles metro [i<]quite quickly[/i<]. You'll use it and be done with it faster than the start menu chaos of 7 or lower. Everyone else will use taskbar/keyboard shortcuts as they always have.

            • rrr
            • 7 years ago

            No, it doesn’t matter how quickly you toggle metro. With start menu gone, functionality is lost, period.

            BTW some apps do make great use of start menu, putting extra shortcuts in their folder. One example I can think on top of my head is Apache server with shortcuts to config files. Other is Visual studio with plenty obscurely-named yet useful application you won’t be able to remember, yet will recognize them by browsing.

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      So, now I have to [i<]know[/i<] the name of the app to be able to run it? How ridiculous!!

      • Kaleid
      • 7 years ago

      I use the mouse much more than I use the keyboard.

      • Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman
      • 7 years ago

      Then what the hell is the point of a GUI if the users have to memorize and type the application name?

    • jdaven
    • 7 years ago

    After reading the comments on Windows 8 speculation and rumors, readers seem to be going through the Kubler-Ross stages of grief model. Different readers are at different stages but most seem to be in the first two: denial and anger.

    The bargaining, depression and finally acceptance stages should be quite humorous.

      • Alchemist07
      • 7 years ago

      +1

      • Grigory
      • 7 years ago

      How about we make a happy faces and you stop rubbing it in? This is just sad. Oh well, there’s nothing we can do anyway other than go along for the ride.

    • Silus
    • 7 years ago

    Wow, Microsoft is really trying to make Windows 8 a failure!
    I never heard of such a significant change in a product, that didn’t take baby steps, so that users got used to the new look/features etc, while still being able to use what was familiar to them from the past versions of the same product.

    • forumics
    • 7 years ago

    i read somewhere once that windows didn’t become the #1 operating system in the world because microsoft sold people what they wanted but because ms sold people what they needed

    we might not see it now but metro might just be what we will eventually come to need; the start menu has been with us since 1994 when win95 was 1st released. perhaps its time for a change?

      • Grigory
      • 7 years ago

      There is never “time for a change” if that change is to the worse.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 7 years ago

      Unity’s dash HUD is approximately 100x better than metro.

      • rrr
      • 7 years ago

      Breathing air was with us since we evolved as species, maybe it’s time for a change too?

        • spigzone
        • 7 years ago

        Democracy has been with us since the start of the Republic, maybe it’s time for a change.

        Uh … an oligarchic fascist police state say?

        Oh, wait …

    • Frith
    • 7 years ago

    This seems like a good opportunity for Apple to release a version of MacOS for PCs. It would likely be a huge success since everyone will be thoroughly pissed off with Windows 8. If Apple allowed the likes of Dell, HP and Lenovo to sell computers loaded with OSX it could potentially grab a large chunk of the operating system market. The risk for Apple is that sales of MacBooks could decline if lower price clones were available, but I think MacBooks would continue to sell well due to the branding, aesthetics and perception that they’re higher quality.

    The only reason Microsoft can get away with forcing crap like Metro on the customer is that they have no direct competition. If Apple permitted Mac clones to be sold, Microsoft would be forced to start listening to customers and giving customers what they want. It likely wouldn’t be long before they released an update that allowed the start menu to be restored and Metro to be disabled.

    Without any direct competition Microsoft will continue to put their corporate agenda first and pay no attention to customers’ demands. A second big player in the operating system market would therefore be very welcome.

      • cynan
      • 7 years ago

      I agree that a real Windows competitor would go along way for PC OSes. But if Apple was going to release an OS for PCs, enabling Mac clone, they would have probably done it over a decade ago when their own products weren’t selling as well. They have very little incentive to do it now. Not to mention the extra work required on the driver development front to get their OS to run on multiple hardware configurations.

      It’s a nice idea, but not going to happen anytime soon.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 7 years ago

      Apple tried the clone market once and it nearly ruined them. They won’t do it again.

      • burntham77
      • 7 years ago

      If OSX allowed the use of any hardware I wanted, and played all modern games (let’s say anything from the last five years) I’d switch. I love using OSX at work on an iMac. It’s a desktop OS that understands what a desktop is used for. Apple does not try to shoehorn things into the OS that gets in the way.

      • aceuk
      • 7 years ago

      You clearly do not know Apple very well. They would never in a million years release OS X for regular PCs.

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      MacOS is already released for the PCs, that’s what Macs are… They wont, however, release it for non-Apple built computers. They make quite a bit of money off the overpriced hardware.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 7 years ago

    I can understand creating a standard setup for win 8, but poopooing the users ability to circumvent their controls is the draw of the platform. They can’t out apple apple. They are missing the point of apples success. Its the fact that apple is simply put all behind its mission statement. Microsoft on the other hand doesn’t know what it stands for and is trying to copy google and apple at every turn. Copying the component parts and not the core philosophy is how you fail.

      • ludi
      • 7 years ago

      Bingo…and pretty much describes why Microsoft has entered dozens of new markets and yet the only one they managed to hold onto was the Xbox. Everywhere else, Microsoft has tried to copy a successful product or approach without understanding [i<]why[/i<] it was working so well for their competitors.

        • HisDivineOrder
        • 7 years ago

        And even in the Xbox they were just THAT much cheaper and earlier than Sony they got an advantage from dumb luck. I mean, look at the fact that Microsoft was shipping out consoles that were almost guaranteed to die within three years (entire editorial staff of IGN had all of theirs die within a year) and people would just go right on buying another one after the last one failed. Then MS decided perhaps they should toss out a token $1bill warranty program because people started to talk to one another and find out that it wasn’t just THEIR Xbox that failed…

        Microsoft hasn’t had a coherent, winning strategy since the heady days of Windows 95/98. Everything else has been, “Continue the NT kernel, continue the Win 95/98 interface, continue, continue…” And every single time they try to upset the established pattern, they screw it up. Every single time. Even the Xbox 360 which was a success was a failure from a production standpoint for years. For any other device, the consumer would have stopped buying the Xbox, but when you have a library of games and they ONLY play on an Xbox, it takes a LOT of frustration for a gamer to throw out or sell for insanely reduced values his whole collection…

        So MS’s stringing themselves up for another ME-sized failure with Windows 8.

    • End User
    • 7 years ago

    I hate Microsoft with a passion but I have to give them a thumbs up for this. I can’t stand people/organizations that are stuck in the past. I hope to give up on Windows 7 as fast as I gave up on Vista/XP.

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 7 years ago

      I can’t stand people/organizations that ignore the lessons of the past and think they can force their version of “progress” on other people without letting them decide for themselves.

      Nobody knows best for anyone else.

      • bthylafh
      • 7 years ago

      Come back to me when you’ve done IT professionally for a few years and understand.

        • End User
        • 7 years ago

        Been there.

        What is holding your shop back?

          • Scrotos
          • 7 years ago

          Businesses that we deal with who have specific requirements. It was only a year or two ago that a small little shop we had to deal with only supported Internet Explorer 6 and did not have an essential product that worked with Vista.

          That small little shop? The Federal Reserve.

          And it’s not just that particular vendor. We have others that we have to deal with to keep our business running on a day-to-day basis and we just don’t have the option to randomly change what we run to suit the whims of the current consumer. We have some vendors who offer services via a web portal. These web portals have specific requirements. For one, we were forced to install Firefox. Every other vendor works ONLY with IE, sometimes only specific versions. To provide support, we now have to keep track of multiple browsers. Thanks, Mozilla, for getting scared of Chrome and rolling out 5213250 versions. As least they have ESR now.

          How about a $120k PBX that, if you run Windows Malicious Software each month, wipes out the software because Windows thinks it’s a trojan? Or upgrading your Adobe Acrobat Reader to the latest version only to find out that it breaks printing from the web for several websites like Bank of NY or JP Morgan Chase or some others I’ve already repressed. Luckily, the next release fixed that particular problem so we could start updating Acrobat Reader again.

          So really, I’m sure a few of the IT professionals who read this site applaud your stance, but most of us are forced to support various vendors’ requirements in order to keep our businesses running. And there’s no alternative. You don’t just shop around for another Federal Reserve. Then what? We have some of our employees running on Win8 who don’t need to interface with the Fed and others on WinXP or Win7? That’s an even larger support nightmare not to mention training issues. And to what end? So we can jump on a new, untested OS bandwagon that provides no benefit for the business?

          How do you justify spending $150+ per seat to upgrade all your employees when it comes out? If it comes on a new computer, ok fine, but it makes no sense to me to go out of my way to update just because something’s new. We’re only now migrating from WinXP to Win7 x64 and still run a Win2K Server machine because the software that requires that OS will be $7k or more to upgrade. We’ve already allocated that kind of cash to migrate from SQL Server 2005 to 2012 and I’m not sure if you noticed, but this isn’t exactly a time of plenty for most businesses in the world.

            • Chrispy_
            • 7 years ago

            This is basically the experience of my peers too.
            Well, specifically the dozen of them in sysadmin roles similar to mine.

            • bthylafh
            • 7 years ago

            Oh gods yes. You’re lucky you don’t support any medical equipment. I’m truly not sure which is worse (technically speaking): that or print-shop stuff, but at least the latter generally doesn’t have doctors breathing down your neck when something breaks and wanting to do damnfool things with it when it works.

            It amazes me sometimes how /versatile/ one must be in higher education.

          • bthylafh
          • 7 years ago

          Right now? Me and the other support techs. We’re not going to inflict that godawful mess that Microsoft calls a UI on our users. If they’re getting tablets or something with a touchscreen we’ll consider it, but there’s no gods-cursed reason to use that on a standard desktop or laptop.

          Given Microsoft’s history, it’s unlikely they’ll truly fix the UI in a service pack, so odds are we’ll stick with Win7, mostly skip 8, and see what shakes out for the next release. It won’t be all /that/ long – Vista’s delay was an aberration.

          There are a few programs we support that will have outright compatibility problems with Win8 (and I know this without first testing): ones that /still/ only support vendor-tested versions of Internet Explorer. These will eventually be fixed, probably the last not long after the first service pack in my experience. By that time we still will have a few WinXP boxes (locked down, behind dedicated firewalls) that run expen$$$ive hardware like $40k printers or equally pricey scientific equipment. “Replace it!” you may cry in your ignorance, and I will laugh in your face, my tears of rage and sadness having long since been cried.

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      WUT?!?!?!?!?! HATE MS WITH A PASSION?!?!?! YOU’VE SAID 100 TIMES YOU LIKE WINDOWS JUST FINE!!! AND THAT I WAS THE ONE WHO HAD HATRED!!!! NOW IT SEEMS THE TRUTH IS OUT!!! HYPOCRITE! I WIN AGAIN!

        • Grigory
        • 7 years ago

        Did Microsoft remove your lower case letters as well?

        • End User
        • 7 years ago

        Did I say I hate Windows? No. I said I hate Microsoft. Learn to read. You lose AGAIN!

          • sweatshopking
          • 7 years ago

          oh my friend, you’ve said you weren’t biased at all. You can pretend otherwise, but we both know I’m right.

      • kc77
      • 7 years ago

      People need to understand that companies CANNOT just change willy nilly because MS just released something new. Whenever infrastructure changes what usually follows is a massive increase of employee training or employee down time. “Ooo Ooo shiny” wastes money more often than not.

      There is nothing super special in Vista, Win 7, or even Windows 8 that increases productivity amongst non-IT staff. Sure there are some things in Win 7 that fixes some issues with mapped drives and roaming profiles, but aside from that largely the improvements are minor but the downsides to moving to either Vista, Windows 7 or Win 8 are massive and we can include Office 2007 in that as well.

      Until people have witnessed what happens when you change productivity applications for hundreds of people any anecdotal evidence is just opinion. Small changes like removal of ieSpell can cause 50 tickets if not more. It’s not about lack of change, it’s about changing something that’s not broken in the first place.

        • End User
        • 7 years ago

        Is your shop still on XP?

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      I don’t understand your statement at all… What exactly are you trying to convey to us?

        • Wirko
        • 7 years ago

        He can’t stand people who, as of May 2012, use iPads 2 or Sandy Bridge PCs, or meet new people outside of Facebook.

      • travbrad
      • 7 years ago

      Upgrading hundreds or thousands of machines in a corporate environment is a lot different than installing a new OS on your home machine. Those types of environments are usually constrained by costs and time. They also use various software/hardware which has to all be tested thoroughly to make sure there won’t be any major issues caused by upgrading. In the case of Windows 8 it would also require a significant amount of user retraining, which again costs both time and money.

      In short, a large network of computers/users/servers is a lot more complicated than a single home PC used by just 1 or 2 people.

      Just out of curiosity what is it that you can’t do in Win7 that you want to do in Win8? Or do you upgrade for no reason, just for the sake of upgrading?

      • achaycock
      • 7 years ago

      Stuck in the past is one thing, but one needs to ensure that the proposed alternative is actually superior to the outgoing design. I’m actually quite happy that Microsoft is attempting to innovate and although I do not like Metro, I have no problem with experiment. I DO have a problem with them forcing it upon me. When Windows 95 came out, one could still use the Program Manager instead. The start bar remained supreme as it was genuinely superior. Why therefore, do Microsoft not have the confidence to repeat the same process again? Leave the start menu in and have Metro as default. I suspect it is because they know people won’t use it this time as it is NOT genuinely superior.

      • XA Hydra
      • 7 years ago

      I’m all for change, IF it = progress. I can only speak for myself, but I don’t get the “progress” vibe as I’ve been playing with Windows 8 so far ( and I say that NOT in the opinion that the current GUI is necessarily the “Gold Standard” ). I used to think that everything new was automatically better. I still know a lot of people that will go anywhere they are told to if it’s “the NEW way”.

      …I don’t care for the way 8 is going. If you like it, fine. Just don’t be so quick to assume those that don’t are in a basement running NT4 on a 13 inch CRT and “stuck in the past” ( As much as you can’t stand them )

    • FuturePastNow
    • 7 years ago

    I got downvoted for predicting this before, but I’ll say it again: Steven Sinofsky will be unemployed within two years. Microsoft will say he’s retiring for personal reasons or something, but that’ll be a lie.

    • OneArmedScissor
    • 7 years ago

    I can’t wait for Windows 9. When it shows the Windows logo as it’s booting up, that’s actually the new desktop. Instant on! You just click the logo, and your computer automatically does whatever MS has decided is best for you at the moment.

      • Pan Skrzetuski
      • 7 years ago

      I have a sheet of plexiglass–er, I mean a computer–I would like to sell you.

        • OneArmedScissor
        • 7 years ago

        That won’t be supported anymore in Windows 10. Windows are irrelevant. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

      • XA Hydra
      • 7 years ago

      The trendy hipsters are gonna LOVE it!!!

    • nanoflower
    • 7 years ago

    What is Microsoft thinking? I don’t really understand. I can see that they would want to help Metro along since that also helps get more apps developed for the phone/tablet platform but forcing everyone to use Metro is a sure fire way to hurt desktop/server sales.

    Surely Microsoft understands that so there must be something else going on. Are they convinced that desktop sales are going to start dropping rapidly over the next few years so they feel the need to develop a large pool of Metro apps as quickly as possible? I don’t believe that to be the case as it seems more likely that desktops will continue to slowly be replaced (where feasible) by tablets/smart phones but I can’t see any large decline in sales in the near future.

    Does anyone have a good explanation for Microsoft taking this action? (Other than the desire to give Metro a boost in the number of apps available.)

      • Elsoze
      • 7 years ago

      perhaps it’s…. “WINDOWS 8: The Ballmer Strikes Back” !?

      • FuturePastNow
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<]"Does anyone have a good explanation for Microsoft taking this action? (Other than the desire to give Metro a boost in the number of apps available.)"[/quote<] No. That's the only reason. Metro apps must be sold via Microsoft's app store, and Microsoft gets a cut of every one. It's all about money. They see what a cash cow Apple's app stores are and want in.

      • 0g1
      • 7 years ago

      LOL, I just had an idea. Apple is just taking over their business, increasing market share daily. They are looking at why … it seems people like an easy to use Operating System that “just works”. So they are trying to do that with their Start Menu simple design. Trying to be like Apple and unconfigurable. Pity MS don’t realize their strength was always their configurability. They just need to focus on ease of configuration, ease of system use, ease of security (need to sandbox all apps), and ease of system speed.

        • 0g1
        • 7 years ago

        Metro Apps sorta help with security. But the retarded thing about it is they are so limited. They should have focused on getting traditional apps to run securely and their ease of use. They should have used a sandbox method rather than a check every app method.

        • Grigory
        • 7 years ago

        Best explanation I have heard so far for the Metro nightmare.

      • dragosmp
      • 7 years ago

      …”(Other than the desire to give Metro a boost in the number of apps available.)”

      Maybe this is the answer – they remove the code from the RC to boost the number of apps for Metro. If they reach a critical mass before launch they will stay with Metro only; if there are too few Metro apps they can just “forget” a loophole that a clever programmer can exploit to bring back a start menu.

      /end speculation

      • Malphas
      • 7 years ago

      It’s not hard to understand. Desktop/business users don’t have anywhere else to go, it’s not a big deal if they stick with Windows 7 a while longer, as businesses have to upgrade eventually if they want continues support and the vast majority of individual consumers get whatever version of Windows come with their PC. Anyone that thinks Linux is a viable alternative to Windows for the majority are delusional.

      Tablets and other potential upcoming form factors are the other hand are a different matter. Microsoft is competing (and losing badly) to iOS and Android, Microsoft need to start building a presence there before the market is completely sewn up with them relegated to an outsider.

      Not only that but while the tablet market continues to grow, PCs reached saturation point years ago, everyone that wants a computer has already got one, turnover is slow as usage patterns are more web based and therefore more demanding hardware isn’t required as often anymore, and the majority of PCs sold are now laptops – and increasingly so.

      If you were Microsoft would you continue to appease the desktop and business market that you already have near 100% marketshare in, with no viable competition, that’s potentially on the verge of shrinking at the expense of getting a foothold in the growing tablet market and let two of your biggest competitors take sector for themselves and lock you out? Or, do you mildly inconvenience said desktop/business userbase (who complain about change in the run up to every new Windows version anyway) in order to cut out a sector of an emerging market, hopefully gain a permanent foothold, and sell a ton more copies of Windows?

      You don’t have to like it, but Microsoft are just acting in their own self-interest, which is what every company does.

        • achaycock
        • 7 years ago

        Businesses don’t have to upgrade. Anyone seeing organisations still running Windows 2000 and XP to this day can testify to that. Whilst it’s true that most people won’t switch to Linux and will settle with the version of Windows on their store bought system, one only has to examine the backlash against Vista to realise that Windows 8 does not have guaranteed success awaiting it. I don’t decry Microsoft developing a tablet focussed OS, just the fact that they have done this in such a messy and haphazard way.

        Now as for businesses, where the big money is spent – one has only to attend a tech day and talk to the system admins there to see how well Windows Server 2012 is going down. Metro is being forced in that space too and this is going into territory where Linux does have a majority stake. Talking to people there I got the distinct impression that Microsoft were not being well received at all. Thrusting Metro upon them caused immense bad feeling and by extension, Hyper-V was being rejected in turn as well, despite the fact it shows promise. As a disclaimer, I spoke to just a few dozen people at a Tech day event in Manchester and this does not represent an overall trend, but it’s certainly a discouraging response for Microsoft.

          • Malphas
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]Businesses don't have to upgrade. Anyone seeing organisations still running Windows 2000 and XP to this day can testify to that. [/quote<] XP still has two years left of support, so that doesn't support your argument. Windows 2000 support, on the other hand ended in 2010, and Windows 2000 has less and 1% marketshare, which illustrated my point exactly. Even if a handful of businesses keep running an old version if Windows beyond its support lifecycle, the vast majority will move on. In the long run, Microsoft doesn't need to worry about losing businesses and desktop PC users. Windows Server is a different matter, Microsoft have never had a dominance in the server space and probably never will. It would be totally asinine for Microsoft to move focus from tablets, where they actually have a shot at being a major player in, to appease server customers, we're they're borderline irrelevant.

    • BobbinThreadbare
    • 7 years ago

    Yeah I’m sure they’re going to be rolling in all the cash of sales of WINDOWS SERVER to consumers.

    • Elsoze
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]He says this move is part of a "calculated risk" to focus on consumers—consumers that might be "on the cusp of slipping through its fingers thanks to Apple and, to a much lesser extent, Android."[/quote<] Yes, because *this* is going to help their goal. /facepalm

      • nstuff
      • 7 years ago

      netflix made a calculated risk by trying to spin off its DVD business and raise prices by 50%-70%.

      See around July 2011 to now to see how it went:
      [url<]http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=NFLX+Interactive#symbol=nflx;range=2y;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined;[/url<]

        • smilingcrow
        • 7 years ago

        Relevance!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This