Looks like Windows 8 RT has failed

Discussion in 'Operating Systems' started by ComputerBox34, Apr 2, 2013.

  1. pelo

    pelo 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,911
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    I've read that they didn't have time to get Office completely tablet friendly, and it just so happens that neither did they have enough time to finish WinRT and make it 100% tablet friendly -- and when you look at the control panel and WiFi settings you can see that's the case. These were issues that existed even in the Beta but fixes couldn't make into RTM. The control panel and configurations changes are coming in Windows Blue, but I'd also expect Office to finish its overhaul and adapt to tablets some time in the near future as well. Ribbon is okay on a tablet, but it's still very clumsy.

    Windows Blue brings absolutely nothing to the desktop, instead yanking away functionality that required the desktop instead. The changes to Metro are in an effort to make it behave like the desktop (allowing customziation of the interface, albeit slight). As far as I'm concerned, Microsoft has already abandoned the desktop crowd. If Win9 is another "hybrid" OS, it's going to follow the Win8 trend and buff up Metro for touch whilst neglecting the desktop even further. The only hope is a separate enterprise/desktop OS, but that's nowhere in sight and highly unlikely.

    If you like your PC and desktop, you'd better learn2linux or stay with Win7 for the foreseeable future.

    WinRT should have been marketed differently. Microsoft can't expect to show commercials of kids jumping around and snapping shitty keyboards into a tablet and expect a sales boom; that's beyond idiotic. Microsoft is late to the market and therefore has to offer incentive for users to not just choose MS's products, but to also jump ship and abandon their applications and whatever services they had with Android and iOS. "It's got Office and a keyboard!" clearly hasn't worked. Office isn't Windows-only anymore and neither are they the only ones with keyboards. They need something different that only MS can offer and people actually want. What that is I have no idea, but then again neither does Microsoft. What they have had to offer to users is the legacy/Win32 compatibility, but considering their direction it's quite clear that the "It's also got your desktop" isn't going to last very long.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2013
  2. bigdogchris

    bigdogchris [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,891
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    One of the most ironic things about the new Start Screen is how cluttered it looks. But to back up a moment, Microsoft tried to introduce active wallpapers back in 98 days. That idea failed pretty quickly. Around the same time you started having problems where users had cluttered desktops with icons everywhere. Icons all over the desktop were always a sign of a 'novice' user, at least in technician’s eyes.

    Fast forward to 2012, you now have a re-emergence of 'active' updating on your back ground (Start Screen tiles) and you have a Microsoft encouraged cluttered desktop. Start Screen icons are everywhere and look very similar to the cluttered desktops of old. Why is the clutter it OK now?

    Eerie similarity

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  3. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    One of the more interesting points that gets repeated frequently in this debate are people that say that if only Windows 8 had a Metro off switch or Start Button/Menu option that they would upgrade instantly from 7 to 8. Something that can be obtained 3rd and easily done but on the other hand Microsoft has abandoned the desktop?

    There's just so much noise about this subject that until I see some technical evidence that Microsoft is abandoning the desktop this is one of those things that I'm going chalk up as an urban legend. There's no technically and logistically possible way that this can happen within the next decade, probably longer. It would require massive software development efforts across the board for years and years to come and it's still not even possible because Windows RT doesn't support much of traditional desktop capabilities.
     
  4. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    Superficially similar if you're looking at static images and not actually using it across different kinds of devices.
     
  5. DeathPrincess

    DeathPrincess [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    18,205
    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    The "different devices" is a crap argument as very few have Windows Mobile devices, using that argument is making Windows 8 as compelling as a Blackberry desktop.

    The tablet fad is also showing signs of losing momentum, much like the netbook. :p
     
  6. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    What does how many people have Windows 8 tablets have to do with the fact that the desktop and Start Screen are quite different? Indeed in Windows 8 you could have both a cluttered desktop and cluttered Start Screen since they both exist. The Start Screen also scrolls and zooms and yes it, it works well with touch which was obviously part of the point of the Start Screen design where as the desktop certainly was never designed to do so. These are inherent differences that simply don't show up in a static image.

    And I've seen no major IT analysts reports that show anything but a rapid increase in tablet sales overall though in the coming years. I think current projections are that tablets are going to outsell laptops this year.
     
  7. DeathPrincess

    DeathPrincess [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    18,205
    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    Read your own statement:

    Can you find the reason? The fact that very very few have these additional devices makes any "multiple devices" argument ridiculous.

    Growth rates slowing (already), major sellers missing sales targets. The fad is slowing down. Another reason not to base the whole OS on a slowing market. the laptop thing is a bunch of crap. Go into any computer retailer and see how many tablets vs. laptops there are (I did yesterday and was surprised to see there was a whole 2 tablets and rows upon rows of laptops, there was more netbooks than tablets). Then see how many people are buying the few tablets...
     
  8. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    Why should a user have to install a unsupported 4rd party tool, which may break the OS, may not be free etc, for functionality that should be in the OS?

    The fact is, the ability to boot straight to desktop, turn off parts of Metro etc is TRIVIAL and should be in the OS. The only reason its not is the same reason Win 8 removes all customization - they want to force their way of working on you. How can anyone possibly justify not having a simple 'boot to desktop' option in control panel? It doesn't even have to be on by default.

    MS of old would never be so arrogant.
     
  9. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    I still don't see what's so hard about launching Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome, or whatever program you're going to run when you first boot up your computer...

    I mean, how many people just sit there staring at their desktop when they first start their computer? I find that the boot to desktop argument is a really stupid one. If it's about not liking the Start Screen and wanting to shut it off completely, fine.
     
  10. pelo

    pelo 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,911
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    So Windows Blue doesn't add functionality to Metro that was only available on the desktop and the applications aren't (again) defaulted to Metro? Because I'm pretty sure that's exactly what's happening.

    The desktop won't disappear, but it's clearly already taken a backseat for Microsoft. They've offered next to nothing for the enterprise/desktop crowd while nearly all of the improvements are targeted at tablets and hybrid devices that aren't tied to a specific ISA -- x86 isn't the king of the roost anymore. Apple is offering more to their yearly cadence OS X updates to the desktop than has Windows in the past few years.

    Can you still use the desktop? Sure, but be prepared to do extra clicking, paying more, and fiddling with options and settings to get it to work. That doesn't sound like MS is promoting the desktop, rather its software and functionality are being hidden behind a wall of Metro.
     
  11. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Again, why would they offer anything for the desktop corporate in Windows 8 when the focus is clearly on portable touchscreen computing? Corporate desktops are either 1. Staying on XP, or 2. Upgrading to 7. Very few will make the jump to 8, even if it contained significant improvements to the desktop (not sure what can actually be upgraded in terms of UI), and if anything, Windows 8 is the best time for Microsoft to try out new paradigms. And given how much of Metro seems to be a mess, I doubt they had time to work on the desktop much anyways.

    Also, quickest way to change defaults to desktop programs: uninstall all unneeded Metro apps.
     
  12. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    So because very few people have multiple monitors or GPUs those things are ridiculous as well?

    http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...ts-to-outsell-desktops-this-year-laptops.aspx

    So tablets should outsell desktops this year and laptops next. I don't know where you're getting your information and I understand reticence in relying much on what analysts say but what you're saying isn't being said by any mainstream IT analyst.
     
  13. pelo

    pelo 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,911
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Because they're a corporation that's out to make money?

    Which means no incentive to upgrade. That's not a smart business decision, especially if you consider heatless' argument that legacy software and desktop compatibility are such a huge deal. If they were, they wouldn't be ignored in such a fashion.

    And that's exactly my point: Microsoft isn't putting their weight and attention behind the desktop and legacy/Win32, but rather behind Metro. What was possible to Metro-fy has been Metro-fied; while the desktop itself is now just an icon on the start screen, tucked away to not "confuse" the user. Windows Blue furthers this by adding desktop functionality to Metro (or at least a small sliver of it).

    You can't have it both ways here. Win8/Blue and MS can't be pushing the desktop and legacy/Win32 landscape yet somehow they're not adding to it whatsoever. That's not support, that's neglect. And when you compare it to how much attention the touch-centered Metro is receiving, it paints a grim picture for all things legacy.

    Ever stop to ask yourself why this wasn't done by Microsoft if the legacy applications are so much better?
     
  14. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    It's not that the Start screen is bad. It's about having the option. Tons of options were removed in Win 8 (e.g. I can no longer customize window colors) for no reason at all.
     
  15. pelo

    pelo 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,911
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    To decrease the size of the OS.

    Whatever you come across that makes you wonder, "Why would they do this?" it's probably because they had to to fit it into a tablet. Even still it's really porky
     
  16. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    Apparently yes as Win 8 doesn't work well with multiple monitors at all. Its a lot better than it was before the RP, and Blue will finally allow you to have Metro on multiple monitors, but you can tell it was not a design goal.
     
  17. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Windows 8 desktop actually works better on multimonitor setups than Windows 7 desktop, so they did improve it there.

    Yes, they're out to make money, but the corporations that are sticking to Windows are either 1. upgrading to 7, or 2. have already upgraded to 7 and have absolutely no plans to upgrade to 8 simply due to costs involved. I don't know how much a volume license costs, but let's say $50 as a conservatively low estimate. In a corporation with hundreds of computers, that's thousands of dollars they don't need to spend.

    Therefore, Windows 8 is perfectly positioned for Microsoft to try out new paradigms and try and get into the booming mobile markets.

    And again, what exactly can they do to improve the desktop experience from 7? They made multimonitor support better on the desktop. They improved the task manager, but that doesn't really have anything to do with the desktop interface. But on a typical single monitor setup, what exactly is there to be done?
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2013
  18. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    And yet plenty of people are saying that all they want is Windows 8 as is with a Metro off switch and they'd upgrade and that all would just be fine and dandy with Windows 8. In this debate one thing stands out. Do anything beyond small incremental changes to the desktop and a bunch of people freak out. How exactly is Microsoft supposed to even make lots of improvements to the desktop when touching it in almost any way beyond a minor tweak doesn't even seem to be wanted any more?
     
  19. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    As I have said a lot of times, I'm not opposed to built-in options, but if the desktop market is indeed shrinking, what long term sense does it make to cater solely to the desktop?

    A lot of people would say that Microsoft has mellowed quite a bit after the anti-trust issues from the 90's. Windows 8 isn't about arrogance but survival in a computing landscape that's rewritten itself in many ways since the launch of the iPad just three years ago after Windows 7.

    Multiple monitor support for the desktop was improved in 8 with the new task bar. Metro apps and the Start Screen don't work well with multiple monitors and I've been talking about this issue since Day One. The Blue leak seems to have fixed most of the issues with Metro and the Start Screen on multiple monitors.
     
  20. DeathPrincess

    DeathPrincess [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    18,205
    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    how many games have been solely invented with multiple monitors/GPUs in mind. go on, list them, ill wait. :p

    Fool.com? Ok then. :p

    They say whatever crap to get attention and pageclicks, don't pay any attention to them. Real life doesn't agree with them.

    One of the biggest problems with slowing PC sales growth rate (not sales themselves) is that people have no reason to upgrade as any computer is powerful enough to do basic tasks. So, with weak crippled platforms like tablets what is the reason for people to buy another tablet to check emails and watch YouTube? None. Tablets are just utter crap and still too expensive (>$100).
     
  21. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    I may be in minority on this one, but I was expecting a big improvement in the desktop side too. They made some nice changes to file copy, explorer, esp the new task manager, but the rest of the desktop is unchanged.

    It's clear why they didn't focus any resources on this - desktop market is considered to be shrinking, and Win 7 UI is 'good enough'. But its sad to see a company with the resources of MS not push for any innovation.

    The last time they were truly innovative was the Longhorn reveal in PDC 2003 - that was a truly exciting OS, with a new vision. But they scrapped all of it, including WinFS, Cairo etc.
     
  22. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    I'm not sure what you're talking about, not being innovative. Attempting a hybrid OS is innovative in itself, the problem is they didn't do that great a job at it.
     
  23. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    Fortunately the Start Screen works with mice and keyboards and well as touch.

    Again, fortunately I can use my tablets to create notes and work on Office documents with again both touch or track pad and keyboard. And yes, it's nice to be able to take a thin and light device to surf or read on the couch or in bed without having to lug a heavier device with an unneeded keyboard and track pad in those situations.
     
  24. Wrench00

    Wrench00 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,423
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Start screen does work with keyboard and mouse. Does it work better then 7 thats highley debatable.


    Sure I like to take tablet to sit on a couch and read possibly do minor edits (highly unlikely) Is it going to be with an inferior and overprice device such as Surface or a Win RT tablet. My Transformer has a solid keyboard (trackpad as well)not the floppy piece of shit that will not function on your lap. Has a better battery life and a resolution of 1900X1200 which I can RDP to a desktop in my house so I can have a FULL pc functionality. This whole argument of MS is trying to Unify os bs is a lost cause why? because people have NON MS devices.
     
  25. pelo

    pelo 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,911
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    As if there's nothing to improve?

    - multi-monitor support still sucks; whether Win8, Win7 or Blue, they all have issues.

    - They need an inherent way to handle scaling, and this has to be handled at the desktop level. The fractional scaling approach isn't working.

    - Workspaces. How in the world does MS still not have these? How can you possibly call yourself an enterprise/professional OS without them?

    - Security is still a concern. MS needs a way to match the root accessibility/lockdown of *nix, and a "yes or no" alert box isn't enough. In fact, it's pathetic.

    - Get rid of registry files. They're pointless in today's ecosystem. Keep it for legacy, but don't use it for modern software.

    - Charge less for the OS. Windows costs way too much, to OEMs and end user both.

    - Package the OS with applications that are worth a damn. A barebones Windows install on a desktop should have applications that are worth paying the licensing fee for, not just minesweeper and their nightmare of a media player.

    - Thread scheduling. MS really needs to do a better job with respect to this. Though Win8 has improved, threads are still bounced between cores.

    Let's not pretend like they don't have any work to do here. MS still has plenty of things to improve upon for the desktop crowd.
     
  26. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    Its not really a hybrid OS. It's 2 different parts - Metro and Desktop, that share nothing and are connected via Start Screen.

    I guess you mean hybrid in the sense that Windows runs on Arm + x86, on phones and pc's, and that I agree is an achievement.
     
  27. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Kernel/base improvements =/= desktop UI improvements. Those require significant amounts of work to ensure stability.

    Multimonitor support is better in 8 than 7. However, I bet that if Microsoft did even half of the stuff available through third party tools, they'll get slapped with anti-trust and monopoly lawsuits, just like Windows Media Center, Windows Media Player, and Internet Explorer.

    Costs are what the market dictate them to be. You're not just paying for the right to use the code, you're paying for the support staff, updates, service packs, and security patches.

    You complain about price, then you want them to package things that they would have to pay for, which of course they would pass down to the consumer and raise prices. I love your logic.




    It is a hybrid OS, just poorly implemented. The two halves are not well integrated.
     
  28. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    So what exactly would be a big improvement to the desktop that would excite people? Do average people even get excited about desktop or laptops anymore? I get your point but considering just how much people freak out when Microsoft changes much on the desktop without an option to keep the desktop just like it was in the last version, I don't really know how much can be done on the desktop these days without constant complaints to keep it just like it is.

    Yeah, there was a lot of cool stuff there and it would have been nice to see some of this stuff come to fruition. I think there were some comments by Bill Gates a few weeks ago lamenting some of the things he wish would have come out of Longhorn.

    I think the hybrid nature even as it is now in Windows 8 is probably is strong suit. Yes much needs to be improved and we can debate the Start Screen and the Charms and their appropriateness on the desktop but it is possible and not particularly difficult to run the same desktop applications with a keyboard and pointing device pretty much like any prior version of Windows and run Angry Birds or Netflix or Kindle with touch pretty much like an iPad or Android tablet on one device. That's the gamble here by Microsoft. If this kind of capability becomes successful then Windows 8 and/or its successors will should also be successful. If the hybrid concept doesn't catch on then Microsoft is in trouble.
     
  29. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    The Start Screen I think is easier to navigate with a large list or arbitrary items than the Start Menu short cuts with a mouse that supports momentum and or touch. The Start Screen is harder to maintain, but that has nothing to do with mice and keyboards, but an incomplete design.

    The Surface devices aren't the only Windows 8 tablets. You can't get the resolution in of the TF Infinity in a Windows 8 Clover Trail but it's weight, battery life and clamshell dock are available in Clover Trail devices that are about in the same price range. And of course running locally works well for standard desktop stuff like Office.

    So? Somebody might have an iPhone and an Android tablet but want a Windows machine for some other purposes like running Office and might want a device with pen to use with OneNote or Photoshop. Of the person has these other touch devices and wants to have that same type of experience on Windows machine. It's not only about unification but about being able to use one device in different ways depending on the task at hand.
     
  30. pelo

    pelo 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,911
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Please, MS couldn't get hit with an antitrust lawsuit today even if they tried. The issues they're facing in the EU is compliance with the past rulings and IE, not their OS dominance; which is actually slipping in all platforms.

    And they should bundle third-party software. Both Google and Apple do this, why the hell can't Microsoft? I understand they want to sell their software, but they have to realize that the first thing a person does once they install their OS is bypass the Mircosoft provided software and get the better stuff. Why not just offer that better stuff from the beginning? Should I really have to load a web browser to get a decent video player that supports all formats? What about a file compression tool that actually works?
     
  31. Wrench00

    Wrench00 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,423
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Where they have made a giant mistake is in the services department They should have focued on bring desktop to a dumb device rather then a Desktop on a dumb device. or a Dumb device on your desktop.

    If they made it easy on any platform to access your computer and files on it and resources such as printers on an Android, iOS, Winmo etc. People would have been happy. Ala Logmein.

    Consumers don't know/trust/care for 0365 but if they paid a small fee to access their stuff I am sure they would do so.
     
  32. pelo

    pelo 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,911
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Windows-Blue-Windows-8-Windows-RT-Topeka-QuickStart,21803.html

    The ~$85 OEM price is being dropped by 35-40%, and that includes Office with the WinRT bundle. That's something that OEMs and us forumtards have been saying for months now: WinRT licensing fee is too damn high! Google's Android is free and offers way more apps and a much healthier ecosystem, yet MS was charging $85 because they still lived in 90's.
     
  33. Wrench00

    Wrench00 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,423
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Plus RT can't be used for business.
     
  34. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    But there are a lot of ways to do these things already, new printers have this built in.
     
  35. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    But these are small incremental improvements, sure you can always do that stuff and actually Microsoft did do a lot of this stuff that affects the desktop in 8. Not sure what you mean by multi-monitor support sucks in 7 and 8 and Blue isn't even out yet. Workspaces would be nice but has been done by 3rd parties forever. The registry is probably going to outlive desktop applications, its still heavily used for better or for worse. Ironically you only mention desktop scaling because of high DPI tablets like the Surface Pro, it's not really an issue for the vast bulk of todays laptops and desktops. And security is always an ongoing concern. As for price, Microsoft offered the best prices on upgrades it ever did at 8's launch and people actually made the comment that if Windows 8 were worth it they'd charge more, go figure. And they isn't Microsoft now cutting licensing fees for OEMs?

    I don't disagree with the spirit of what you're saying but all incremental and all of this stuff combined would barely get a mention in the press, barely be noticed by most users and wouldn't probably do a lot to increase Windows' sales.
     
  36. wonderfield

    wonderfield [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,396
    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    Correct. An alternative license is required.
     
  37. MikeTrike

    MikeTrike [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    8,191
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2005
    RT is about as useful as an iPad for anything I've tried to do with it. Well less useful because the lack of apps in the MS Store.

    That being said their x86 tablets are fantastic. I've got an Acer W510 that's legit as fuck and I use it all the time. :)
     
  38. Wrench00

    Wrench00 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,423
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Again I fail to see how this is a compeling reason.

    Clover trail device will Be much more then my 450 dollar infintiy, and no where as portable. I have no issues running RDP via my 3g tether using a TSG. I do most of my work this way. What is seriously lacking is the ability to interact with the desktop with Tablet. Honestly the amount of people going to use photoshop and onenote on a underpowered tablet is going to miniscule.

    I can have a windows desktop experience on my android with out a half ass UI.
     
  39. Wrench00

    Wrench00 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,423
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    But its not a unified experience.
     
  40. pelo

    pelo 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,911
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    So proper DPI scaling, good thread scheduling (and reduction in power consumption), dumping of the hog that is registry, and a thorough approach to security are incremental changes to you?

    [​IMG]

    Come back to me when you get back to planet Earth.