Windows 9 Could Arrive Much Earlier Than Anticipated

I like 7 and since it's supported until 2020 I'll just stick with it as long as possible just like I did with XP, down to the last drop.
 
Trimlock said:
Did anyone really? this thread immediately turned into "BOUT TIME THEY JUNKED THAT POS METRO!!!!"

Funny thing is, its more than likely to show up on Windows 9.
Click to expand...

It is in one way or another. They didn't kill off metro and metro apps. They just changed how it all works.
 
Exavior said:
It is in one way or another. They didn't kill off metro and metro apps. They just changed how it all works.
Click to expand...

Even if Microsoft offered a Metro off switch, they can't kill off their tablet platform only after two years.
 
heatlesssun said:
Even if Microsoft offered a Metro off switch, they can't kill off their tablet platform only after two years.
Click to expand...

Didn't say they were killing it off. also never said they were having an off switch.

What we know is supposed to be happening is that the start menu is supposed to make a come back and that Metro apps will run windowed or full screen. We will just have to see how they go about giving us both options the metro start screen for those who want / need it and the start menu for others.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
I have spent years as a PC Enthusiast turning shit off and preventing it from running in the background. Why the hell would I want the OS to run more shit in the background? That defies all logic. I spent the better part of my early career turning off all the useless shit clogging up peoples PC's and educating people on how to get rid of garbage like searchbars and stuff running in the background. I am not exactly on board with a UI that encourages more of that shit.

I know it may comes as a surprise to the Win 8 supporters, but most people don't need an interface that looks like it was designed for 6th grade special needs kids. It isn't a matter of putting that shit into a window, it is a matter of not needing 5000 shit programs in mini windows cluttering up your desktop. I seriously don't get this movement toward more and more distracting shit in front of your eyes. Our brains can only process so much information at once. I don't need a giant ass "Tile" to tell me what a program is and does and frankly anyone that does probably isn't nearly as smart as they hoped.

The start menu coming back would be a massive step in the right direction and MS knows it. Hell at this point it is only a small handful of people I even see continuing to argue in favor of this crap. Let it go...It was a Stupid idea and most of us told you so years ago and the financials of MS validate it. There is a reason no one tried the same UI on devices that worked in fundamentally different ways before..Because it is a TERRIBLE IDEA. It was a terrible idea 20 years ago and it remains a terrible idea today. But that all aside..a simple toggle..and this debate never even existed. Simply allowing us choice would of kept the metro UI proponents happy and kept those of us who actually want a Desktop ui happy. If you like it, good for you. I don't and will be happy the second MS gives me the "OPTION" to turn it off.

It's a shame really. Win 8 is really a quite excellent OS under the hood. Just a pity it takes so much hoop jumping to get rid of all the garbage in the way.
Click to expand...

Hey, way to be objective and non insulting. :rolleyes:
 
pcjunkie said:
Then just call them programs. Saying "I'm opening my app" on a desktop pc just sounds stupid. Can't wait until Windows 9 brings back the start menu. Sooner the better.
Click to expand...

Start menu is gone for good. Start menu like interface will be in Windows 9 though. Apps, programs, same thing, different day. :rolleyes:
 
Exavior said:
Didn't say they were killing it off. also never said they were having an off switch.

What we know is supposed to be happening is that the start menu is supposed to make a come back and that Metro apps will run windowed or full screen. We will just have to see how they go about giving us both options the metro start screen for those who want / need it and the start menu for others.
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth and overall I agree with what you're saying here. Windowed modern apps I think is a given as 8.1 shows a path of making modern apps more desktop friendly. The big unknown I think is the Start Screen/Menu. If modern apps will be windowed, in my opinion it's all but certain that the classic Start Menu is history because it would not work well with modern apps which would work on the desktop like any old desktop app. The big issue is full screen, deal with that and the rest is nothing comparison.
 
Give it up, MS. Corporation is not going to upgrade its operating system within a year.
 
Exavior said:
It is in one way or another. They didn't kill off metro and metro apps. They just changed how it all works.
Click to expand...

I'm mostly just fed up with the internet nerd rage towards Win8, especially since most of it is unfounded.

I'm all for bettering a system, I honestly like the way MS is going with live tiles and the new Windows layouts.
 
This still doesn't change the fact the term "app" has been in use for about a generation. Sorry.
 
Flyboat said:
Give it up, MS. Corporation is not going to upgrade its operating system within a year.
Click to expand...

This, I don't know why they keep trying to pump out all these OSes suddenly. Lot of companies are still on XP! 7 is a fine OS and to me they should have stuck with that much longer. Perhaps Metro should have been an optional add on pack you can install on 7. Then release a copy of 7 that has it included (but optional to install) and latest patches, kind of like there are versions of XP that come with service packs. Basically, they need to continue selling 7 and 7 needs to be considered the latest OS. Instead they're trying to force everyone to 8 and then soon, 9. People don't want to keep changing their OS that often.

Or if they want, do like Ubuntu, have "cutting edge" versions that come out every 2 years or something, and every 3 or even 5 OSes is a LTS version. 10 years between LTS versions sounds fairly reasonable. There is a lot involved for a company to change OS especially if it involves changing all the computers.

Basically, MS needs a more predictable release cycle that taylors both businesses and home users. They seem to be all over the place.
 
Trimlock said:
I'm mostly just fed up with the internet nerd rage towards Win8, especially since most of it is unfounded.

I'm all for bettering a system, I honestly like the way MS is going with live tiles and the new Windows layouts.
Click to expand...

They had to do something. The first computing device this generation will use far more often that not won't have a physical keyboard and pointing device. Sucks for Microsoft but the world is changing. I understand very well the issues that some have with Windows 8 on the desktop, but the desktop simply is quickly fading as the main UI most people use daily. A Metro off switch would only reinforce the idea that Microsoft thinks the desktop is still the dominate platform which it dominates.
 


I read the news section here quite often and I frequently see people arguing over all kinds of topics. Usually politics of some sort. If we all used this feature of the board more often maybe we'd have a more peaceful community. Folks less riled up and all.


Everyone, Please excuse my off topic posts.

Please, back to the topic at hand.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
I have spent years as a PC Enthusiast turning shit off and preventing it from running in the background. Why the hell would I want the OS to run more shit in the background? That defies all logic. I spent the better part of my early career turning off all the useless shit clogging up peoples PC's and educating people on how to get rid of garbage like searchbars and stuff running in the background. I am not exactly on board with a UI that encourages more of that shit.

I know it may comes as a surprise to the Win 8 supporters, but most people don't need an interface that looks like it was designed for 6th grade special needs kids. It isn't a matter of putting that shit into a window, it is a matter of not needing 5000 shit programs in mini windows cluttering up your desktop. I seriously don't get this movement toward more and more distracting shit in front of your eyes. Our brains can only process so much information at once. I don't need a giant ass "Tile" to tell me what a program is and does and frankly anyone that does probably isn't nearly as smart as they hoped.

The start menu coming back would be a massive step in the right direction and MS knows it. Hell at this point it is only a small handful of people I even see continuing to argue in favor of this crap. Let it go...It was a Stupid idea and most of us told you so years ago and the financials of MS validate it. There is a reason no one tried the same UI on devices that worked in fundamentally different ways before..Because it is a TERRIBLE IDEA. It was a terrible idea 20 years ago and it remains a terrible idea today. But that all aside..a simple toggle..and this debate never even existed. Simply allowing us choice would of kept the metro UI proponents happy and kept those of us who actually want a Desktop ui happy. If you like it, good for you. I don't and will be happy the second MS gives me the "OPTION" to turn it off.

It's a shame really. Win 8 is really a quite excellent OS under the hood. Just a pity it takes so much hoop jumping to get rid of all the garbage in the way.
Click to expand...


A-fkng-MEN!
 
At least bring back aero glass theme. I hate how win 8 looks like everything is made up of post it notes stuck everwhere. So boring, flat and pointy.
 
It really does not matter what version number of windows you are running it is the same old resource hog crap that can't compete on platforms with android due to more hardware needed to perform.

MS on desktop has a monopoly but all of the past years it is more like a paid bugfix rather then lean and mean operating system.

How can you expect a company that has been stuck in monopoly mode for 25+ years ever to produce anything more then another version with minor upgrades and more flash then substance.

Linux desktop is a far superior option when it comes to simple things like browsing.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
It really does not matter what version number of windows you are running it is the same old resource hog crap that can't compete on platforms with android due to more hardware needed to perform.

MS on desktop has a monopoly but all of the past years it is more like a paid bugfix rather then lean and mean operating system.

How can you expect a company that has been stuck in monopoly mode for 25+ years ever to produce anything more then another version with minor upgrades and more flash then substance.

Linux desktop is a far superior option when it comes to simple things like browsing.
Click to expand...

Not sure if serious???????? :D

Just in case, Windows just works, Linux on the desktop can be a pain in the butt. I used Linux Desktop on and off for about 12 years until I got tired of the instability and crashing. (It was mostly caused by video drivers from NVidia.) I just need my work and home machines to work. Linux on the Desktop is sometimes fun but hardly superior. Heck, OS/2 Warp and the Amiga OS 2.04 where far better in their day in my opinion.

Right, give it up Microsoft and the 100's of Billions you have. :rolleyes:
 
S-F said:






Ahhhhhhh. Feel like I took a great dump.



Now I can get back to reading the news!
Click to expand...

Welcome to my ignore list as well, now you do not have to apologize for you off topic posts anymore. (Where any ever on topic?) :D
 
ManofGod said:
Start menu is gone for good. Start menu like interface will be in Windows 9 though. Apps, programs, same thing, different day. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You don't know that for sure do you? It's really cool though to call what we say "programs" for the last umpteen years apps now doesn't it? Makes you feel all modern. :rolleyes:
 
pcjunkie said:
You don't know that for sure do you? It's really cool though to call what we say "programs" for the last umpteen years apps now doesn't it? Makes you feel all modern. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Really? So you must say run that program called Word? Or run that program called Doom? Apps, programs, same thing, different day.
 
heatlesssun said:
This still doesn't change the fact the term "app" has been in use for about a generation. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Not in my world of IT until mobile/BYOD reared its ugly head. In the servers and workstation world their called programs. Apps are what they put on mobile devices and I don't mean laptops. Stupid argument anyway but you and manofgod will beat it to death just to be different as always. Sorry.
 
ManofGod said:
Really? So you must say run that program called Word? Or run that program called Doom? Apps, programs, same thing, different day.
Click to expand...

Never called Word or Doom an app...wtf are you babbling about? Apps are the "new cool" aren't they?
 
pcjunkie said:
Not in my world of IT until mobile/BYOD reared its ugly head. In the servers and workstation world their called programs. Apps are what they put on mobile devices and I don't mean laptops. Stupid argument anyway but you and manofgod will beat it to death just to be different as always. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Nah, I just beat it to death to get a good laugh out of it. :) To me, it makes no difference one way or the other. Now, when someone uses noone when there is no such word and means "no one", then that can be annoying. (Proper English after all.)
 
Trimlock said:
I'm mostly just fed up with the internet nerd rage towards Win8, especially since most of it is unfounded.

I'm all for bettering a system, I honestly like the way MS is going with live tiles and the new Windows layouts.
Click to expand...

I am with you. I was just in a training class last week for learning how to setup on translations in a telephone switch. We were talking about something during a break and I brought up something about windows 8. Our instructor had never had a chance to see or use it yet so I was showing it to him. Somebody else in the class made the typical, well you can't use windows 8 unless you have a touch screen. So stopped what I was doing and turned off my touch screen functionality and started to use it just as easily with my track pad. To show him that you could use a keyboard and mouse, explained that is what I do with my desktop which then got the different response of "yeah, you CAN use it with a keyboard and mouse without any issues but that isn't how they designed it to be used". With me giving that instructor no more than maybe a 2 minute run through of the system he thought it was good (and he is a mac user) and was thinking of getting it for his windows needs.

Red Squirrel said:
This, I don't know why they keep trying to pump out all these OSes suddenly. Lot of companies are still on XP! 7 is a fine OS and to me they should have stuck with that much longer. Perhaps Metro should have been an optional add on pack you can install on 7. Then release a copy of 7 that has it included (but optional to install) and latest patches, kind of like there are versions of XP that come with service packs. Basically, they need to continue selling 7 and 7 needs to be considered the latest OS. Instead they're trying to force everyone to 8 and then soon, 9. People don't want to keep changing their OS that often.

Or if they want, do like Ubuntu, have "cutting edge" versions that come out every 2 years or something, and every 3 or even 5 OSes is a LTS version. 10 years between LTS versions sounds fairly reasonable. There is a lot involved for a company to change OS especially if it involves changing all the computers.

Basically, MS needs a more predictable release cycle that taylors both businesses and home users. They seem to be all over the place.
Click to expand...

This isn't suddenly, for them this is normal.

Lets start with windows 3 and look just at the home side
3.0 - May 1990
3.1 - April 1992 (just over 2 years)
95 - Aug 1995 (just under 3.5 years)
98 - June 1998 (just under 3 years)
98 se - may 1999 (just under 1 year)
ME - Sep 2000 (just under 1.5 year, just over 2 years from initial 98 release if you count se and initial to be the same OS)
XP - Oct 2001 (just over 1 year)
Vista - Jan 2007 (just a little over 5.5 years)
7 - July 2009 (around 2.5 years)
8 - Oct 2012 (around 3.25 years)
8.1 - Oct 2013 (1 year)
9 - estimated date of late this year or early next year (which at the earliest puts it a little over 1 year past 8.1 or 2 years past 8, going with the expected release some time next year makes that more of around 1.5 / 2.5 years.)

So as you can see XP is the only odd ball with twice the normal time frame. However with the major changes that SP2 brought around some might argue that was a new OS, just that they didn't change the name. However we will ignore that, however as you can still see this isn't anything new and they have been keeping to about the same type of schedule for decades if you ignore that extra 2 years that XP had.

pcjunkie said:
Not in my world of IT until mobile/BYOD reared its ugly head. In the servers and workstation world their called programs. Apps are what they put on mobile devices and I don't mean laptops. Stupid argument anyway but you and manofgod will beat it to death just to be different as always. Sorry.
Click to expand...

I would argue that they were called programs or applications. this was shorted down to apps as you said come the mobile age.
 
Exavior said:
I would argue that they were called programs or applications. this was shorted down to apps as you said come the mobile age.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct. We would "run the application". Not saying that the word "app" was never used but it doesn't have the same connotation as it did a generation ago.
 
Hopefully this will be 8.2 with a proper GUI overlay - Win7 Aero and full Start Button with Start Menu. And the ability to have Windows boot into it as default.
 
Everyone who is asking for Aero back realizes that it's actually ugly and gaudy as hell, right?
 
WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot said:
So basically, instead of finishing Windows 9 they are taking some of their work and merging it with 8.2 and shoving it out the door just to get a new version number on the shelves...
Click to expand...

Yes. I believe every 1-2 years? They want to put out a new version number.

I would be okay if they did it like apple and it was only $30 to upgrade.
 
heatlesssun said:
The modern UI certainly has a place on the desktop. A PC isn't just that thing that dad uses for work, PCs have for a long time been consumption and entertainment devices. It's critical to the future of the PC especially in the consumer space that it have modern consumptive capabilities and apps otherwise why would it appeal to consumers?

The problem with the modern UI on the desktop for a lot of folks is that it's simply not familiar and not as well integrated with the desktop paradigm as it needs to be and that's been long understood by many Windows 8 proponents like myself. I bet a lot of people that don't like Windows 8.x on the desktop would be very happy to have something like modern UI Twitter app Tweetium running on their keyboard and mouse driven desktops in a window. If modern apps can run in a window on the desktop I don't see what the point of a Metro off switch would be.
Click to expand...

You can still be familiar with metro and still not want it. Its called choice and hopefully MS brings it to their OS. Although classic shell and others do a decent job of it.
 
Hagrid said:
You can still be familiar with metro and still not want it. Its called choice and hopefully MS brings it to their OS. Although classic shell and others do a decent job of it.
Click to expand...

It's a choice of sticking with the same old thing though. And the problem there is that the first computing device that kids now are using don't like Windows desktop. The modern UI extends the reach and capabilities of Windows that are more in alignment with casual computing but as the Windows RT API progresses I would imagine that it will be more suitable for more productive things. The modern version of Office should be coming out in the next 6 months are so for instance.

It would be better to improve the modern UI's integration with the desktop and make the choice irrelevant than just putting in a switch just to go back to the same thing.
 
heatlesssun said:
It's a choice of sticking with the same old thing though. And the problem there is that the first computing device that kids now are using don't like Windows desktop. The modern UI extends the reach and capabilities of Windows that are more in alignment with casual computing but as the Windows RT API progresses I would imagine that it will be more suitable for more productive things. The modern version of Office should be coming out in the next 6 months are so for instance.

It would be better to improve the modern UI's integration with the desktop and make the choice irrelevant than just putting in a switch just to go back to the same thing.
Click to expand...

Or have 2 different OS's, one for desktop and one for touch? Or the option to load it that way.

I don't use touch, apps, or anything much that 8 has over 7. So for me, I just need the thing to work for my programs and games.

I have my phone and tablets that are touch, and it works fine for that.
 
heatlesssun said:
It would be better to improve the modern UI's integration with the desktop and make the choice irrelevant than just putting in a switch just to go back to the same thing.
Click to expand...

This is like when people try to get me to eat fish, then I tell them I don't like fish, and they keep offering to cook it differently.
 
Hagrid said:
Or have 2 different OS's, one for desktop and one for touch? Or the option to load it that way.

I don't use touch, apps, or anything much that 8 has over 7. So for me, I just need the thing to work for my programs and games.

I have my phone and tablets that are touch, and it works fine for that.
Click to expand...

That seems rather pointless in a way though. People already bitch about all the versions. why have Home, Home with touch allowed, business, business with touch allowed. That is getting back to XP then. where you have XP home, XP tablet, XP media center...

I have had a touch display since back in the days of windows 7. There was nothing special to windows 7 for it to work. They had a few programs that were branded under Surface from the actual original Surface (the table with a touch screen top not the tablet). You only used those programs if you had a touch screen. Same as the special programs that came preinstalled for touch use.

As long as either touch or keyboard support works equal there is no need for anything special to be made. Regardless how people want to play it, Metro doesn't require a tablet. That doesn't make it a tablet OS. Yes it was designed to mimic the phone interface where you quickly see everything. But it actuality can be just as useful for people that have normal desktops or laptops. I know people that use Google as their home page because they want to use MyGoogle or iGoogle or whatever that is called. That way every time they bring up their web browser they can see a little bit about their weather, their email, their news, a few other feeds... All of that now carries over to the OS as an integrated part. Sure not everyone is going to find it useful but some very well might even without a touch screen.

All that really is needed to break the incorrect logic you guys have is that the start screen could be switched to a normal menu. A single screen is all that causes this entire "OMG FUCKING MICROSOFT WON'T LET ME USE A FUCKING MOUSE WITH MY PC ANY MORE!!!!". So all that is needed then is for you to be able to select if you want the screen or a menu.

I myself could care less as I don't ever use the start menu or the start screen as I actually prefer to use my computer for something productive. but you know to each their own.
 
Exavior said:
That seems rather pointless in a way though. People already bitch about all the versions. why have Home, Home with touch allowed, business, business with touch allowed. That is getting back to XP then. where you have XP home, XP tablet, XP media center...

I have had a touch display since back in the days of windows 7. There was nothing special to windows 7 for it to work. They had a few programs that were branded under Surface from the actual original Surface (the table with a touch screen top not the tablet). You only used those programs if you had a touch screen. Same as the special programs that came preinstalled for touch use.

As long as either touch or keyboard support works equal there is no need for anything special to be made. Regardless how people want to play it, Metro doesn't require a tablet. That doesn't make it a tablet OS. Yes it was designed to mimic the phone interface where you quickly see everything. But it actuality can be just as useful for people that have normal desktops or laptops. I know people that use Google as their home page because they want to use MyGoogle or iGoogle or whatever that is called. That way every time they bring up their web browser they can see a little bit about their weather, their email, their news, a few other feeds... All of that now carries over to the OS as an integrated part. Sure not everyone is going to find it useful but some very well might even without a touch screen.

All that really is needed to break the incorrect logic you guys have is that the start screen could be switched to a normal menu. A single screen is all that causes this entire "OMG FUCKING MICROSOFT WON'T LET ME USE A FUCKING MOUSE WITH MY PC ANY MORE!!!!". So all that is needed then is for you to be able to select if you want the screen or a menu.

I myself could care less as I don't ever use the start menu or the start screen as I actually prefer to use my computer for something productive. but you know to each their own.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure others use their computer for productive stuff? Maybe I am wrong.

I use mine for browsing, games, and learning. If I need to do anything I just click an icon and im ready to go. I don't even like touching my phone or tablet, but I haven't bought a touch pen yet.
I don't want metro and have no need for it. I don't see the big problem with not having it?
 
Exavior said:
That seems rather pointless in a way though. People already bitch about all the versions. why have Home, Home with touch allowed, business, business with touch allowed. That is getting back to XP then. where you have XP home, XP tablet, XP media center...
Click to expand...

Microsoft could just take a clue from Apple on this one...

OS X
OS X Server
iOS

That covers everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top