Windows 8 Has Driven Millions To Become Apple Users

I want the choice back...from your comments I don't think you do. Is that so wrong to have choice? You can have both as we all know. Why must you or MS try to force us into change for what people believe is no benefit for desktop users and the new UI? Please tell me how much more efficient and productive the new UI will make our employees as our tests don't show any other than upgrade and training costs in its current state?

As I've said before I'm not against choice but this is a 20 year old UI and while it still has its uses the desktop market is mature and in a serious sales decline and if there's not some kind of movement to make the PC align more with how increasing numbers of people interact with computing devices then I fear that the PC will simply become less and less relevant to average people.

I think that it is important for people that want this kind of switch to at least understand the nature of the market and that they want Microsoft to continue support something that 20 years old and in decline. Microsoft didn't do this for the hell of it, for some reason a lot of people think that's the case.
 
What does Win8 do that nothing else does?

My starter for 10.

Well compared to Windows 7 it will load the AV first if you get infected and will clean off the virus at the next boot. Seen it happen to. Works a treat! Windows 7/Vista etc. all bend over and pull their pants down instead if they get infected.

Stop surfing porn and going to warez sites.. No problems with viruses here.
 
What does Win8 do that nothing else does?

My starter for 10.

Well compared to Windows 7 it will load the AV first if you get infected and will clean off the virus at the next boot. Seen it happen to. Works a treat! Windows 7/Vista etc. all bend over and pull their pants down instead if they get infected.

This is interesting. Load the AV first. This is what I'm looking for here. This is good.
 
Actually, all the "pros" that I know are singing it's praises. Hell, multichannel SMB alone is worth the $20 upgrade price. The only folks I know of that don't like it are gamers who THINK they're "pro". You know the kind. Flat-bill, hellaflush, tap-out, CoD players. They love to hop on any bandwagon they can, and the Windows 8 hate is the current popular one.

Maybe the planet your living on.

All the people I work with who are admins hate Windows8.
 
What say you heatlesssun?
What does Win8 do that nothing else does?
 
Maybe the planet your living on.

All the people I work with who are admins hate Windows8.

Ahhh they guys who go "Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

No one likes having to work for a living do they?:D
 

Yes lets all deal in speculations. A feature is not a feature unless its in the product just because it MAYBE in a future release it doesn't enhance the current functionality.

That's like me saying In the future we might develop super duper batteries for your Plug in XYZ brand Electric car which will give 1000 mile range but currently your limited to 50 miles..

Just because Microsoft Might release the Start button in 8.1 that doesn't make current windows 8 any less shity.
 
most of my co-workers say windows 8 is bad because they heard it was bad. i personally like windows 8. i feel it's snappier then windows 7. also use StartisBack on it since i don't like tiles interface.
 
Ahhh they guys who go "Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

No one likes having to work for a living do they?:D

Yes that's what all admins do. Tell 100's of users to turn it off and on to fix the problem.
 
most of my co-workers say windows 8 is bad because they heard it was bad. i personally like windows 8. i feel it's snappier then windows 7. also use StartisBack on it since i don't like tiles interface.

So essentially you like the back end improvements and the legacy desktop yet you obviously have a problem with Metro.

So how come MS couldn't just Patch windows 7 instead?

Also when you disable certain functions in corporate environment 8 is just as slow as 7.
 
Microsoft should make a dang tutorial video that is mandatory for most users to go over for the new Modern interface. it's actually not that bad for most common functions like MsOffice.
 
ok....so the best we've got at this point is that we should be running Win8 over anything else because it load AV before it loads any other software.

Does anyone have anything else?
 
Those are not Windows 8 Features but Server 2012 features.
Actually, Hyper-V and ReFS support are built into Windows 8, not just Server 2012. It's the first desktop OS that Microsoft has offered these features.
 
What does that have to do with record profits?

I'm glad they are making money as I hope every company would but if you think Win 8 drove those record profits you are seriously wrong. Please wow me with the numbers to back it up as I've read the details.

It's really simple. Microsoft is making money hand over fist *despite* the Windows 8 failure. PC life running Microsoft OSes goes on, business as usual.

This headline is an Apple marketing effort that [H] has sadly given into. At the same time Microsoft is reporting record profits Apple shares are plummeting. That's reality. Millions becoming Apple users is merely unfounded spin.

Luckily the public filings tell the real story. Should be pretty easy to find an enormous increase in Apple sales since Win 8 has been released, alas that's simply not there, and Apple shares are diving.
 
I've for years thought about moving to Windows for a laptop. But, in the end, I've never done it. I wanted to try a Mac when I was first looking at laptops for college back in 2007 and did so. That Mac I replaced with another Mac in 2010. I've no silly sentimental attachment to either OS but have great familiarity with both; I have used Windows since 3.1 days and Macs since 10.4. In that time period I've also used numerous Linux distros, favoring those based on Debian. I can say, without any hesitation, that I dislike using Windows on mobile devices the most, and enjoy Linux and OS X equally. In the end I've found no reason to go with a Windows laptop over the alternatives. And, honestly? On the desktop side it's the same thing. I've come to love how OS X works and love how I can do anything with Linux. It allows the tinkerer in me to do just that.

It's a shame really. Once Microsoft fixed XP with SP2, it was a decent OS. With SP1 on Vista the same could be said, if not better than XP. Windows 7 hit the mark on release, it was great even before SP1. But, with Windows 8 if I'm going to be forced into a paradigm I might as well be forced into one that I've been using for years and that I actually like, with OS X. Or just make my own paradigm and go with Linux. If the rumors of Windows 8.1 are true, I might consider it, but at the moment? Windows 7 is going to be my last foray into the platform. So, perhaps the article isn't entirely accurate as I won't go wholly Mac, but I will go a combination of that with Linux.
 
This would be like claiming that because it's hard to find a girlfriend, millions of men became gay.

But seriously, I would use Windows 8 over Mac OS, for software compatibility alone.

Exactly.

I can kill metro and make it close to looking and working like Windows 7. Not to mention, you could just keep using Windows 7. It's not like you don't have a choice.
 
It's really simple. Microsoft is making money hand over fist *despite* the Windows 8 failure. PC life running Microsoft OSes goes on, business as usual.

This headline is an Apple marketing effort that [H] has sadly given into. At the same time Microsoft is reporting record profits Apple shares are plummeting. That's reality. Millions becoming Apple users is merely unfounded spin.

Luckily the public filings tell the real story. Should be pretty easy to find an enormous increase in Apple sales since Win 8 has been released, alas that's simply not there, and Apple shares are diving.

Who cares what Apples' marketing dept. is doing?

What does Win8 do that nothing else does?
 
Microsoft should make a dang tutorial video that is mandatory for most users to go over for the new Modern interface. it's actually not that bad for most common functions like MsOffice.

Oh common your saying the piece of shit tutorial upon creating a user is not enough to instruct users on the obscure functionality and gestures of Metro..

You don't SAY. Insert *NICOLAS CAGE MEME*
 
ok....so the best we've got at this point is that we should be running Win8 over anything else because it load AV before it loads any other software.

Does anyone have anything else?
*scratches head*

You seem to have completely discounted the benefits I mentioned. Allow me to restate them:

1) You can mount a .ISO file natively now.
2) You can transfer files across the network at 400MB/s instead of 100MB/s thanks to SMB multi-whatever.
3) You can work with VMs natively now.
4) You can use drives or drive pools formatted with the new file system.

You can do all of these with Windows 8. You can not do any of these things in Windows 7. These are features that many power users will utilize every day. However, because they will not help grandma browse the web, folks seem to think that Windows 8 is worthless.

I don't understand it.
 
I just don't get why all the complaints about things folks don't like about Windows 8 keep going on when they are easily changed in seconds.

Folks keep saying Metro Start Screen is unavoidable. No it isn't. Just install Classic Start and it boots straight to Desktop.

Set your default applications to the Desktop ones, takes about 45 seconds.

Pin the Control Panel to the Taskbar if you have to. Takes 10 seconds via Search (you do know how to use Search I take it?).

It's all easily configured.

And don't give me that bull about "You shouldn't have to configure Windows to work they way you want it!"

Like you are telling me you all use your Windows 7 installs "out of the box" with zero tweaking and configuration?
Yep!

Or you can just right click the lower left corner of the screen and Control Panel is there.

You can also put it on your desktop if you enable the desktop icons, which brings back the other icons that are default on Windows 7.

Lastly, if you open up My Computer (desktop icons needed) Control Panel is one click away via the Ribbon in the window.

So yes, there are several ways to get to where you need to go.
 
1) .ISO native mounting can be done in Linux
2) I see no reason why I can't do file transfers at higher speeds with a good network and a few tweeks (without Win8)
3) what is the advantage in native VM?
4) plenty of people used drives and drive pools with XP.....explain "new file system"
 
*scratches head*

You seem to have completely discounted the benefits I mentioned. Allow me to restate them:

1) You can mount a .ISO file natively now.
2) You can transfer files across the network at 400MB/s instead of 100MB/s thanks to SMB multi-whatever.
3) You can work with VMs natively now.
4) You can use drives or drive pools formatted with the new file system.

You can do all of these with Windows 8. You can not do any of these things in Windows 7. These are features that many power users will utilize every day. However, because they will not help grandma browse the web, folks seem to think that Windows 8 is worthless.
I don't understand it.

The ISO is really not a huge advantage. I like to unzip iso so I can great MSI deploy GPO. Lets face the common person WILL NEVER EVER use this.
Yes you can link aggregate but you need machines with multiple cards which again desktop have usually 1. Don't get me wrong its great on a server.
Natively VM's what percentage of people are going to use this? <0.001% and then most people will use a server OS.

You can create pools sure but this is a very buggy feature that has a huge amount of problems, and unless you know what your doing you will never use this feature as most people already have huge amount of storage.

Great features just not for the general public.
 
1) .ISO native mounting can be done in Linux
2) I see no reason why I can't do file transfers at higher speeds with a good network and a few tweeks (without Win8)
3) what is the advantage in native VM?
4) plenty of people used drives and drive pools with XP.....explain "new file system"

1) You asked for things that can't be done in 7. That is one. Linux has no place in this discussion.
2) You would need to purchase new hardware to hit 400MB/s. 10GigE switch, cables, and cards. It's not cheap. Windows 8 allows you to team existing gigabit NICs together on your existing gigabit network and combine their speed. Once again, you cannot do this in 7.
3) There are several. In particular, I'm fond of not having to learn another piece of software just to do the job. But at any rate, it's another thing that Win8 can do that 7 can't. As requested.
4) You cannot mount or use a ReFS pool or drive in any version of Windows prior to 8 (to the best of my knowledge). This includes XP. Furthermore, when attempting to move an XP "drive pool" to another system, you will often find it to be impossible unless the hardware is identical. Storage Spaces allows you to mix and match drives of different capacities, speed, and types. You can plug in the 2.1GB fiber channel drive you have laying around, and add it to the 4x300GB 15K SAS pool you've already created. I wouldn't recommend it, but you could. You could then take it all apart, stick it in a new server with 100% different hardware, plug all the drives in different ports, smack one with a hammer while chanting and ranting about how bad Windows 8 is, and still have all of your data available. Can't do THAT with XP.
 
Great features just not for the general public.
I agree completely. However, this site is about power users. We're supposed to be the [H]ardcore geeks. Instead, all this bandwagon hate has us looking like a bunch of whiners. 8 isn't as bad as most folks make it out to be, and that really bugs me. And don't even get me started on the anti-Apple sentiment. I just want a little more logic and a little less "Durr, it's awful because it's not what I use!"
 
Oh, and support for ReFS.

How is this an improvement? ReFS removed tons of useful features (like encryption and transaction NTFS). And it is still no where near as versatile or robust as ZFS.


It is useful but nothing you can't get with Xen.

SMB multichannel/multipath/whatever-it's-called

Good. They've finally caught up with NFS.

...and .ISO mounting. Forgot about that nice little feature, too.

This doesn't really impress me because GNU/Linux and other *nixes have had this ability since their inception. In fact, I can not only mount ISOs but I can mount other file systems stored as files as well because *nix treats everything as a file and does not distinguish between a file stored on a hard drive and a file that points to a physical storage device.

As I've said before I'm not against choice but this is a 20 year old UI and while it still has its uses the desktop market is mature and in a serious sales decline and if there's not some kind of movement to make the PC align more with how increasing numbers of people interact with computing devices then I fear that the PC will simply become less and less relevant to average people.

The age is irrelevant. You don't change things for the sake of change; just because something is old does not mean it is bad.

Microsoft is not going to make the PC more relevant by creating an interface that makes people want to toss theirs out the nearest window.

I think that it is important for people that want this kind of switch to at least understand the nature of the market and that they want Microsoft to continue support something that 20 years old and in decline. Microsoft didn't do this for the hell of it, for some reason a lot of people think that's the case.

The nature of the market is this :

1.The PC market is established.
2.PCs are now commodities for the average user. There is no appreciable difference between different manufacturers of Windows-based PCs. People will therefore get the cheapest one possible because, to them, they are all the same.
3.PCs last a really long time now. The average user can go 5-7 years or even longer without having to upgrade. This is normal for an established product line; when something new comes out, there is an initial burst of innovation and then it gradually slows down.
4.Tablets cannot and will not replace notebook/desktop PCs for everything. They are inappropriate for most forms of content creation (with the notable exception of drawing, in which have the potential to be superior).
5.Content creators tend to require more computing resources than content consumers. A lot of content creators would need more power than tablets offer. I very much doubt that you will see an engineer ditch their high-end Dell Precision for a Windows tablet anytime soon.
6.Tablets are necessarily small in size. This means that they will always be behind laptops (which in turn are behind desktops) in terms of the processing power of the best of the best. You can only cram so much into such a small space.
7.Desktops and laptops are not going away.
 
1) I did ask about Win7 yes. (the spirit of the question is what makes Win8 an individual)
2) fair (still requires additional hardware though)
3) fair
4) maybe

I'll go with these answers but this is something that would mainly apply to network/IT admins. Win8 is not exclusively sold as such.
 
How is this an improvement? ReFS removed tons of useful features (like encryption and transaction NTFS). And it is still no where near as versatile or robust as ZFS.

It is useful but nothing you can't get with Xen.

Good. They've finally caught up with NFS.

This doesn't really impress me because GNU/Linux and other *nixes have had this ability since their inception. In fact, I can not only mount ISOs but I can mount other file systems stored as files as well because *nix treats everything as a file and does not distinguish between a file stored on a hard drive and a file that points to a physical storage device.
I'm not saying that Win8 is better than *NIX. I'm saying that it's the best version of Windows to date. ReFS is not ZFS, but it's a hell of a lot better than FAT32. Once they fix a couple of things, it'll probably end up better than NTFS, too. I no longer have to hunt down and install third party software to do a ton of things. I don't have to try and keep all that up to date, either. For most folks, there's no reason to "upgrade" to Windows 8. I get that. But these folks need to realize that for some, there is a reason. Their way is not the only way, nor is it even the "best" way. Use cases vary, and the overwhelming attitude of "Windows 8 sucks" is annoying.
 
I agree completely. However, this site is about power users. We're supposed to be the [H]ardcore geeks. Instead, all this bandwagon hate has us looking like a bunch of whiners. 8 isn't as bad as most folks make it out to be, and that really bugs me. And don't even get me started on the anti-Apple sentiment. I just want a little more logic and a little less "Durr, it's awful because it's not what I use!"

This is why I'm asking this. This site has ALOT of readers from all over the globe and Win8 has created alot of questions and alot of angst. The opinionated arguing should be minimized and discussion needs to be had on a technical/factual level.
 
I'll go with these answers but this is something that would mainly apply to network/IT admins. Win8 is not exclusively sold as such.
True enough. I'll admit, I am an IT admin, and my view of the OS is biased as a result.
 
lol cohesive, yes... efficient? hell no. Unfortunately I'm forced to use it at work, but at home I have all that crap removed.

Its a mess. I like a very clean and organized workspace. I don't like that the ribbon gives you icons of all different shapes and layouts (some vertical, some horizontal) plastered all over the bar. I prefer a simple text based list personally for finding seldom used functions, while having a minimal toolbar for commonly used functions.

It's the same reason I liked the organization of the start menu over the cluttered mess that is the start screen. It's either that, or you're pinning all your applications to the taskbar or desktop. No thanks.
What's the point of a desktop or taskbar if you don't want anything to be on it? It might be great to constantly see your background picture, but that is only good when you are not working in anything. Otherwise, it is being covered by your apps windows.

The items I am in all the time get pinned, so I might have 6-7 items pinned (Chrome, IE, Outlook, Windows Explorer, Lightroom, iTunes, Steam). Then I have the other favorites as a shortcut icon on the desktop, leaving just a few icons on the desktop nicely organized. The rest I can quickly pull up via a few second search, "Windows Key, type my query, click".

I guess it is just a personal thing then. I have no issues with the Ribbons and liked them from the get go when they first came on board in Office 2007. I don't see it as impacting my efficiency and it doesn't look cluttered when you realize how the groupings make sense. But maybe it is a whole left brain, right brain perspective (what might work for you might not work for me).

I remember when we were trying to force our users to Office 2007, many didn't like it and chose to have 2003 alongside 2007. Office hasn't drastically changed since probably Office 97, and they were very fixed on that look. This created a divide in our Office.

The biggest issue wasn't that they thought the Ribbons sucked and were inefficient, it had more to do with they refused to learn something new. They had the perception that the ribbons would cause them to be inefficient. They didn't realize that this also brought with it live preview of changes before selecting a change and real time integration with SharePoint. While not tied directly to the Ribbons, they lost out on enhancements due to their condemnation of an interface change that took very little time to learn.

The fact is it wasn't the ribbons that caused them to be inefficient, instead it was their lack of desire to learn the application that impacted their efficiency. You only become efficient at something because you took the time to learn it and harness its capabilities. But it comes to a point where you can no longer become more efficient, you hit a ceiling. When this happens you either have to accept this fact and work with what you are familiar with or find a way to become more efficient. The idea of the Ribbon was to raise the ceiling of achievable peak efficiency while at the same time creating something more visual that will help the less efficient, who were less knowledgeable in the secrets of Office shortcuts, get more out of the application and increase their efficiency. Meanwhile, all the old shortcuts were still there for those in the know.

Eventually, they adopted the new interface. Some did so reluctantly, others more willingly after they were given a tutorial of it. Now, most of them probably know no differently and work just as well as, if not better than, before. They just needed to take a little time to learn.
 
...and .ISO mounting. Forgot about that nice little feature, too.

The ISO mounting without the need for a third party app is a nice feature that I have used quite a few times.

The Hyper-V management is nice. But as I mentioned before, it won't communicate with a 2008 R2 Hyper-V server to manage (only 2012). This is a shame, since I feel MS gimped it on purpose. The interface isn't that different from the two, although the 2012 does add new features.

Your other mentions are true too, with a more integrated AV/Malware protection than 7 being another highlight.

And while not for everyone, I am in love with the new Task Manager. It is very useful for the kind of work that I do.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper-V
Not sure this qualifies since it appearantly goes back to Server 2008

Not useful for 90% of people....I think this is noteworthy

I think it qualifies since it was never offered on a desktop level Windows OS before. At best from MS, you could get a management console for Windows 7 that allowed you to manage Hyper-V on a server. But you couldn't install Hyper-V on a Windows 7 box. You had to invest in a server OS such as 2008, 2008 R2, or 2012.
 
It wouldn't sway me or most people here.

But my father & step-mother bought an apple instead of a windows 8 PC recently b/c windows 8 was too unfamilar & hard to use.

I think its absolutely true for 60+ people.... ie: millions of baby boomers.

They also pick iphones over androids b/c they're easier to use. FOR THEM.


For techies like everyone in here, we go android b/c its more customizable and we're used to it.

As for me, I'm sitting out & waiting as long as I can. Windows 7 is fine on my home PC for now and te foreseable future. If I had to buy now, I'd get a Win8 computer. But I'm holding out for a 8.1 that can bypass that BS tiled start screen.
 
Back
Top