What is your opinion on Windows 8.1

go back to school and re-learn how to read. pay attention to what they say, metro is their choice for the F future... they are saying already, and, no one wants to believe it!!!

As much as people love to say how stupid Microsoft is, it's pretty hard to understand why Microsoft would abandon a market that it completely dominates particularly when there are others in it. It makes 10 times more sense for Apple to abandon desktops and laptops considering that for the last two decades they have pretty much gone nowhere in terms of market share. But, wait for it, they still make money on Macs. Pretty much how Microsoft makes zillions off Windows even today.
 
You people are aware there is a classic start shell that's open source that gives you the start menu and boots windows 8 to the classic windows 7 menu right ?
 
It's never going to have the mass appeal of Windows 7 (or XP for that matter). Too many issues that MS is never going to address. I'm hoping they can do better for Windows 9, but I won't hold my breath.
 
It's never going to have the mass appeal of Windows 7 (or XP for that matter). Too many issues that MS is never going to address. I'm hoping they can do better for Windows 9, but I won't hold my breath.

The appeal of 7 was that it fixed Vista's issues and improved it overall. What makes you think they can't do the same with 9?
 
The appeal of 7 was that it fixed Vista's issues and improved it overall. What makes you think they can't do the same with 9?
What makes you think they can't do the same with 8.1?

I'm just pointing out, don't buy into the trolls' arguments.
 
Until I can setup a classic start menu where I can read the title of every one of my windows quickly, I'm not changing over. Windows 7 made it clear that it's shifting away from the classic start menu and moving more towards an Apple type menu. Windows 8 made it even more clear that Microsoft is attempting to copy Apple with all of the bs.

You actually mean the taskbar, which is what you have pictured, and you can do all of that that in 7, and without installing anything.

Set the Taskbar buttons to never combine, and to use small icons, then set position to right (if you want it as shown) and unlock then drag it to whatever size. You can even use the classic look if you want to make it look almost identical. You can add folders to the taskbar by toolbar>new toolbar, and have whatever piles of icons you want.

Though the biggest problem and biggest misstep with Windows 8 was the gutting of options.
 
Well, going by this pattern,
425998_519607631422977_184948671_n.jpg



I guess Windows 8.1 = Good?
 
I want buttons not hot corners. I want a start menu, not a start screen and charmless bar. I would prefer that the defaults were to desktop apps, or that there was a single switch that allowed one to quickly switch between the desktop app defaults and metro app defaults. I can reset all of the defaults myself, but the switch would make things a lot easier for people that switch back and forth a lot between tablet mode and laptop mode on their convertibles.
Does 8.1 bring me these options?
 
I've come full circle on Windows 8 and have been using it as a daily driver (as much as I can given my work) for the better part of a month now. I like it. I could care less about the start button now that I am used to not having it (coming from Unity or Gnome3 made this really easy for me) and think it just need some cohesion and a couple tweaks to be a better Mouse/Keyboard driven OS. To be honest 8.1 doesn't seem to be addressing many of these issues to my eyes. I'll upgrade when it releases and go about my business. The bigger issue with enterprise is the wholesale movement to 7 was timed long ago, and they have some serious usability and security (windows app store) issues baked into the OS with 8. It might trickle in on random devices here and there but Win 7 is going to rule that roost.
 
Well, going by this pattern,
425998_519607631422977_184948671_n.jpg



I guess Windows 8.1 = Good?

This pattern has been debunked numerous times. There is no pattern.

I want buttons not hot corners. I want a start menu, not a start screen and charmless bar. I would prefer that the defaults were to desktop apps, or that there was a single switch that allowed one to quickly switch between the desktop app defaults and metro app defaults. I can reset all of the defaults myself, but the switch would make things a lot easier for people that switch back and forth a lot between tablet mode and laptop mode on their convertibles.
Does 8.1 bring me these options?

It brings some hot corner options. Bottom left hot corner was replaced with start button.

Anything else is either unknown or not there.
 
This pattern has been debunked numerous times. There is no pattern.

I would say there is a pattern to individual Windows releases are perceived. However, commercially every Windows release 3.0 has been successful, some more successful than others of course.


It brings some hot corner options. Bottom left hot corner was replaced with start button.

Anything else is either unknown or not there.

8.1 addresses in some way just about every major complaint I know of with the exception of a Metro off switch and Start Menu. There are other more minor things that were addressed like Aero transparency, etc. There's enough adjustments in the release I think to make 8.1 a bit more palatable to some keyboard and mouse folks. There are a lot of options for lock down and manageability options in 8.1 that should be it more business friendly, though some of those options require Windows Server 2012 R2. Then there's the All Apps default view for the Start Screen and the desktop background option for the Start Screen and of course the return of the Start Button, now called the Start Tip.

The biggest unknown I think is what GORANKAR mentioned, any kind of tools to set application defaults? There was a presentation at TechEd that mentioned "staying on the desktop" or something to that effect which would lead me to believe that there will be a way to control the app defaults that we've yet to hear about. We should know in two weeks.
 
This is my thing. Why?

Why switch to Windows 8 when Windows 7 is fast, stable, has awesome driver support, awesome dev support, and is familiar?

Why take a chance of hating something when I already have something I love?

Why would I want an OS clearly made for touchscreen devices on my desktop which isn't touchscreen?

Why move to an OS that is widely hated and is such a flop that Microsoft is slowly turning it into Windows 7.5 with their coming updates?

Why?

(spaced it for easy responses ;) )
 
This is my thing. Why?

Why switch to Windows 8 when Windows 7 is fast, stable, has awesome driver support, awesome dev support, and is familiar?

Why take a chance of hating something when I already have something I love?

Why would I want an OS clearly made for touchscreen devices on my desktop which isn't touchscreen?

Why move to an OS that is widely hated and is such a flop that Microsoft is slowly turning it into Windows 7.5 with their coming updates?

Why?

(spaced it for easy responses ;) )

The same question could be asked with Vista that was patched to Service Pack 2. 7 doesn't offer much new over Vista that wasn't added in by the service packs.

All this is combined with why should I buy a new desktop when I have a perfectly functioning Windows 7/Vista/XP desktop?

The main point of 8 is to get Windows into the tablet, touchscreen laptop and ultrabook market. Microsoft is trying to make a new market for themselves in the x86 touchscreen market (includes laptops, ultrabooks and tablets).
 
go back to school and re-learn how to read. pay attention to what they say, metro is their choice for the F future... they are saying already, and, no one wants to believe it!!!

I hate metro.

:rolleyes: yeah that's what I thought. No source other than your own worthless opinion.
 
Why switch to Windows 8 when Windows 7 is fast, stable, has awesome driver support, awesome dev support, and is familiar?

Windows 8 enjoys essentially the same support and runs on more devices, like the upcoming 7"& 8" in tablets using CPUs that are supported under Windows 7. Yes there are elements of the UI that are different and that causes problems for some people. For others they are running their desktop apps just like they would under Windows 7 and it's not a big deal.

Why would I want an OS clearly made for touchscreen devices on my desktop which isn't touchscreen?

Yes, the UI has been there are elements of the UI that have been made more touch friendly and they work much better I think when using Windows on a tablet, something that I do daily. But once I got used to the UI using 8 with a keyboard and mouse with my desktop apps just hasn't proven to be really any different than 7. So personally I get much more use out of Windows 8 than 7 as I can use it in ways that don't work well with 7 and the desktop, though different, isn't all that different as desktop apps work as they always have. You're not really doing anything when you're in the Start Menu or Start Screen. The heart and soul of it is in the apps.

Why move to an OS that is widely hated and is such a flop that Microsoft is slowly turning it into Windows 7.5 with their coming updates?

Huh? Ok, the Start Button, now the Start Tip is back. But no Start Menu and the Start Screen is still there. Metro apps now are more capable, those obviously weren't in Windows 7.
 
The same question could be asked with Vista that was patched to Service Pack 2. 7 doesn't offer much new over Vista that wasn't added in by the service packs.

All this is combined with why should I buy a new desktop when I have a perfectly functioning Windows 7/Vista/XP desktop?

The main point of 8 is to get Windows into the tablet, touchscreen laptop and ultrabook market. Microsoft is trying to make a new market for themselves in the x86 touchscreen market (includes laptops, ultrabooks and tablets).

Which boils down to; don't. If you're happy with the OS you have and/or don't like things you've heard about the newest release, why upgrade? There were solid security reasons to move from Windows XP to Windows 7, plus support for WinXP is ending soon. To me, there is absolutely no reason for me to spend money to upgrade to an OS I'll like less then what I already have. I have a desktop, not a touchscreen device, hate the hot corners and charms bar and have no reason to want smartphone/tablet apps on my dual screen desktop computer. Add to that Windows 7 still has many years of support and I'm fine to hold onto my 7 Windows 7 licenses and pretend Windows 8 (and 8.1) never happened.
 
I have W8 Pro and have no issues with it.Whats the problem.I figured out how it works and are happy.
 
I have W8 Pro and have no issues with it.Whats the problem.I figured out how it works and are happy.

MS made some rather unpopular, and to my mind stupid, decisions with Win8 regarding the UI, program defaults, and how they advertised/educated the public. If it works for you, great. I find it a PITA without third parties and myself fixing it.

New non touch laptop came with it, and I have learned to live with it after restoring the start menu, creating a god mode folder, removing every metro app I could, followed by changing all of my defaults to desktop programs. If I have any further issues with it later on, (like if win update were to break any of my fixes), I will just clean install Win7 and be done with it..
 
The start menu was nice because one look at it gave you an idea if what it was used for, and really flattened the learning curve. Same with scroll bars, maximize and minimize windows buttons... Heck, buttons of all kinds. Sure these are euphemisms for real-world UI elements, but those buttons and switches have lasted a century for a reason: a labeled button is a good thing.

Windows 8 is one of several examples of the trend away from making things obvious by sight alone. Put someone in front of Windows 8 and ask them to power off a computer and watch them flounder. This isn't just a Microsoft thing: OsX getting rid of scroll bars, widespread adoption of single-tasking tablets and the like have all had PCs trending toward a single window with no UI elements.

I can appreciate this when its done right. Some of you may remember WordPerfect 5.0 when it came out. One blank blue screen and a flashing cursor. It was nice in a way; nothing to distract you from the written word. I see Windows 8 in similar light, except this time I'm not so convinced its the right call. I loved WP on my 12" display, but I don't need such UI frugality on a 27". I find it amusing when people say we don't want to learn something new. Far from it. I've been in this game since DOS 1.0; I've had to adopt quite a bit of change. Some good like the start Menu. Some not so good, like Active Desktop. W8 is not new; it's Windows 2.0 come back to life. I don't mind trying something new, but I insist it be new in a forward-thinking direction. W8 is not that. It reeks of Microsoft looking at iOS with envy.
 
Their apps still suck and don't work well in a multi tasking / productivity environment. It's still built around laptop/single monitor thinking.

The entire idea behind windows 8 is completely opposite of every windows before it. Windows was/does make multi tasking easier and more convenient, however windows 8 is built around the idea that you are only going to do one thing at a time, and only on 1 screen.

I think eventually Microsoft is going to have to do something or they are going to have yet another XP dilemma. The overwhelming majority of their licenses go to enterprise use, and they built an OS that cannot be used in that environment.
 
Their apps still suck and don't work well in a multi tasking / productivity environment. It's still built around laptop/single monitor thinking.

The entire idea behind windows 8 is completely opposite of every windows before it. Windows was/does make multi tasking easier and more convenient, however windows 8 is built around the idea that you are only going to do one thing at a time, and only on 1 screen.

I think eventually Microsoft is going to have to do something or they are going to have yet another XP dilemma. The overwhelming majority of their licenses go to enterprise use, and they built an OS that cannot be used in that environment.

The apps were designed for mobile usage, not desktop usage. For desktop usage you still have the normal desktop...

And to say that there were no desktop enhancements would be a lie. Windows 8 has much better multi-screen support than Windows 7.
 
Does windows 8 let you revert to the GUI of previous windows editions? For example, I have my win7 laptop running with the win2k interface (to the extent it allows).
 
Nope, which is a huge oversight and what most people have been complaining about.
 
Nope, which is a huge oversight and what most people have been complaining about.

At this point after almost two years since the Windows 8 UI was displayed publicly it's no oversight, it's intentional. Clearly Microsoft had no intention of having a "Metro off switch" and I think the reason why is because Microsoft figured as long as desktop applications worked as they always have, and they do in Windows 8, that they could setup the base UI of Windows 8 to be both touch and desktop friendly.

Overall it is but it is different and much of it is hidden in the hot corners and swipes. But for the long game, I really think Microsoft made the right call. When you look at the growth numbers for tablets versus Windows laptops and desktops there's no contest. Given those numbers no one is going to invest enough resources to supplant Windows as the dominate OS. Really, who is going to claim the throne of defeating Windows on the desktop when the desktop is in serious free fall? When even Apple can't sell desktops and laptops?

It's a very smart move, yes there's risk, but not so much that with Windows 7 and 8 combined that Microsoft still won't be able to maintain it's desktop dominance and hopefully that can translate into some tablet success. That's the real risk, on the tablet, not the desktop.
 
Does windows 8 let you revert to the GUI of previous windows editions? For example, I have my win7 laptop running with the win2k interface (to the extent it allows).

No, which is a shame because even ignoring the start menu, the flat ugly GUI is absolutely hideous and bland. It was removed so tablets could have better battery life (I wonder how much battery like the "2 hours" pro would have had :D)...which meant that even on a desktop it was impossible (apparently).
 
At this point after almost two years since the Windows 8 UI was displayed publicly it's no oversight, it's intentional. Clearly Microsoft had no intention of having a "Metro off switch" and I think the reason why is because Microsoft figured as long as desktop applications worked as they always have, and they do in Windows 8, that they could setup the base UI of Windows 8 to be both touch and desktop friendly.

Overall it is but it is different and much of it is hidden in the hot corners and swipes. But for the long game, I really think Microsoft made the right call. When you look at the growth numbers for tablets versus Windows laptops and desktops there's no contest. Given those numbers no one is going to invest enough resources to supplant Windows as the dominate OS. Really, who is going to claim the throne of defeating Windows on the desktop when the desktop is in serious free fall? When even Apple can't sell desktops and laptops?

It's a very smart move, yes there's risk, but not so much that with Windows 7 and 8 combined that Microsoft still won't be able to maintain it's desktop dominance and hopefully that can translate into some tablet success. That's the real risk, on the tablet, not the desktop.

This is where you and I disagree. I think this was a huge mistake and will hurt them in the long run. You don't sacrifice the satisfaction of some of your customers in order to get better marketshare in another area of the market. The desktop OS is Microsoft's bread and butter (well, OS and apps). They are doing horrible in the mobile arena, which is all their fault because they've let Apple and Android get so far ahead of them it's going to be very difficult to catch up, let alone dominate the mobile space. In their rush to do better in the mobile arena, they're making mistakes that are costing them sales in the desktop arena. I won't buy Windows 8, because of those decisions and I know of a lot of other people who feel the same way. Also, most businesses will give Windows 8 a pass. All that so they could artificially force people on desktops to see and use metro, which is supposed to spur the adoption of it on mobile devices. I think the "one OS to rule them all" idea is misguided. For one thing, the OS feels completely different on a mobile device. One a mobile device, most of the UI elements make sense and are compelling to use. On the desktop side, they just piss me off. Add to that the fact that MS has no idea how to compete on price. Their tablets are way too expensive. They're coming in with price parity with the devices they're trying to compete with and that's dumb. I just think they're making poor decisions left and right and certainly don't see these decisions doing anything positive for the company in the future.
 
Removing the start menu was a horrible idea. Having it there would add nothing negative to the experience if you are in Modern/Metro since you can't see it. It's just dumb to make everyone workaround not having it there. Yes, I can and have worked around it. It's still one of the worst decsions made in the last few years in software. In some respects, Microsoft is agreeing based on the screenshots of 8.1 that some type of Start is required.

The flat ui is another story. You can get used to it, and believe it or not, some people actually like the look. I find it boring unless you have active tiles.
 
This is where you and I disagree. I think this was a huge mistake and will hurt them in the long run. You don't sacrifice the satisfaction of some of your customers in order to get better marketshare in another area of the market. The desktop OS is Microsoft's bread and butter (well, OS and apps). They are doing horrible in the mobile arena, which is all their fault because they've let Apple and Android get so far ahead of them it's going to be very difficult to catch up, let alone dominate the mobile space. In their rush to do better in the mobile arena, they're making mistakes that are costing them sales in the desktop arena. I won't buy Windows 8, because of those decisions and I know of a lot of other people who feel the same way. Also, most businesses will give Windows 8 a pass. All that so they could artificially force people on desktops to see and use metro, which is supposed to spur the adoption of it on mobile devices. I think the "one OS to rule them all" idea is misguided. For one thing, the OS feels completely different on a mobile device. One a mobile device, most of the UI elements make sense and are compelling to use. On the desktop side, they just piss me off. Add to that the fact that MS has no idea how to compete on price. Their tablets are way too expensive. They're coming in with price parity with the devices they're trying to compete with and that's dumb. I just think they're making poor decisions left and right and certainly don't see these decisions doing anything positive for the company in the future.

You are correct about a number of things here. Plenty of Windows 8 proponents have said that 8 needed work on the keyboard and mouse side and if not a Metro off switch, as better way to handle the Start Screen for desktop users. And yes, Windows 8 tablet pricing on the low end is to high.

I think the changes in 8.1 to the Start Screen, options for the hot corners, adding back the "Start Tip" (i.e. Start Button), defaulting to All Apps, booting to the desktop and allowing the background of the Start Screen to the desktop background go a long way to addressing desktop users issues. One issue of course will be how to set all of these options, it would be nice if there where some sort of wizard that allow this stuff to be configured as they are all new. In a business environment where all of these things can be preconfigured for users, it won't be as much of an issue. I think as long as Microsoft keeps tweaking the new UI the disruption will in time become very minor and in a shrinking desktop market I do think that the gamble needed to be made.

As for pricing Microsoft announced last week it was cutting Windows 8 & RT licensing fee on devices with screen sizes from 7" to 10.1". They didn't say how much they cut the price but some reports have it as a very large reduction, like 75%. With the addition of Office 2013 Home and Student as well Windows pricing should be much more in line with what many of the OEMs are paying Microsoft for Android licensing.

So Microsoft does look to be addressing the things it has to though maybe not in the way that everyone would have liked. We should know much more in two weeks with the 8.1 Preview comes out and how well received that is. So far it looks like most like the changes and see it being better with keyboards and mice and new users, but the devil will be in the details. And we'll need to see what the generation of hardware brings, particularly Bay Trail tablets.
 
The problem with this decision is microsoft's high opinion of its ability to design user interfaces, despite huge resistance every time they push a new one (95, XP, vista, 8). That's not just because people are resistant to change, it's because microsoft actually sucks at it. Do you hear these outcries when Apple releases a new OS? Hell no. Because they've been consistently excellent at it

So, IMHO, this was a stupid move by microsoft. They need rapid adoption of this new OS considering the competing OSs and devices in the marketplace, but this will hinder it (if not substantially stop it) in the market that they actually dominate. And their entire business model is built on domination. Genius.

I'd be interested in seeing what happens with Windows 8 Pro and Server editions. Are corporation really going to go for this interface?
 
I think Windows 8/8.1 both suck in general.

Its change for the sake of change. Rather than giving the user more choice/options, all of the choosing is done for you. Its complete trash. Who ever wanted a full screen start menu as a desktop? Who even cares about touch screen? F all that garbage.

If I want a tablet, I don't want it running Windows. Keep Windows on desktops/notebooks or release a completely different OS for tablets.
 
Are corporation really going to go for this interface?

Hell no. Not where I work.

Any level headed manager of IT knows that Win8 sucks balls, and that you should simply skip every other Windows release. For example, stick with XP skip Vista and wait for 7. In this case, stick with 7, skip 8/8.1, wait for 9.

Server 2012 on the other hand, may be put to use by a larger audience.
 
Still hate the start screen and shit-tastic UI. Love the OS


I will likely upgrade to 8.1 on my Ultrabook, but only if StartIsBack works on it.
 
The problem with this decision is microsoft's high opinion of its ability to design user interfaces, despite huge resistance every time they push a new one (95, XP, vista, 8). That's not just because people are resistant to change, it's because microsoft actually sucks at it. Do you hear these outcries when Apple releases a new OS? Hell no. Because they've been consistently excellent at it

I think the UI in Windows 95 is widely considered fantastic judging by the fact that so many of the complaints in Windows 8 are centered on the lack of certain elements that came from Windows 95.
 
This is my thing. Why?

Why switch to Windows 8 when Windows 7 is fast, stable, has awesome driver support, awesome dev support, and is familiar?

Why take a chance of hating something when I already have something I love?

Why would I want an OS clearly made for touchscreen devices on my desktop which isn't touchscreen?

Why move to an OS that is widely hated and is such a flop that Microsoft is slowly turning it into Windows 7.5 with their coming updates?

Why?

(spaced it for easy responses ;) )


This.
 
I think Windows 8/8.1 both suck in general.

Its change for the sake of change. Rather than giving the user more choice/options, all of the choosing is done for you. Its complete trash. Who ever wanted a full screen start menu as a desktop? Who even cares about touch screen? F all that garbage.

If I want a tablet, I don't want it running Windows. Keep Windows on desktops/notebooks or release a completely different OS for tablets.

Not really sure how one can call this change for the sake of change when the idea is to allow Windows to work better on tablets which are incredibly popular right now. A lot of people do want Windows on their tablets for a variety of reasons. I really like my Atom Windows 8 hybrid, works well as a laptop and tablet, a little underpowered but fantastic battery life.
 
Hell no. Not where I work.

Any level headed manager of IT knows that Win8 sucks balls, and that you should simply skip every other Windows release. For example, stick with XP skip Vista and wait for 7. In this case, stick with 7, skip 8/8.1, wait for 9.

Server 2012 on the other hand, may be put to use by a larger audience.

Well, it's not even about it sucking, it's about the incremental upgrades that Windows 8 has over 7, and the costs of deploying Windows 8 when you already have Windows 7, which is largely the same thing. If businesses had upgraded to Vista, they would have skipped 7 and 8.

Businesses skip minor releases (8 is a minor release) and major releases until all the bugs are worked out (Vista). At that point, they would upgrade to the most current version with the bugs worked out (7). Most businesses probably skipped XP (major release) until the first or second service pack came out (bugs worked out on major release), since XP does not have a true incremental successor that Vista did.
 
Back
Top