Microsoft Wants You to Forget Windows 8

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
People and corporations alike don’t care to be reminded about their failures and Microsoft is no exception. It’s a fact that Windows 8 is bound to follow the likes of Windows ME and Vista into the forgotten annuls of history if Microsoft has anything to do with it.

Rather than belabor Windows 8, which is dead to Microsoft, it will beat the drum on the next name for its Windows client.
Click to expand...
 
I've been lucky to skip the crap myself. Win XP, skipped ME and Vista. Running 7 skipping 8. Probably will go with 9
 
I think the tweaks they made to 8.1 have made it a damned good OS. I did try Win8 and yes...utter crap. One of the few times when I actually rolled back to a previous OS.
 
Windows 8 was my first journey back to Windows since XP, which I still have on a VM. I can't stand Windows 8. I should have gotten 7, but it was latest greatest thing. :mad:
 
if you have to sign in to a micro$oft store account, makes me think window 9 won't be any better.
 
Would have happily skipped 8 myself, but then BestBuy just had to have their turn in a Windows XP laptop and get $100 towards a new one deal.
 
Except each failed for different reasons ... Windows ME (which I used) was a truly buggy OS ... after 98 had set a high bar for performance MS just dropped the ball ... Vista wasn't as bad if you had a new computer but it was dismal for legacy users (especially those with insufficient RAM) and its lack of driver support hurt it immensely (but that wasn't totally MS's fault) ... Win8 was too big a paradigm shift for people where the market hadn't really developed a need for these new features yet, it also followed the extremely robust Win7 which hurt it that people still had that fall back ... perhaps MS (like the older Star Trek Movies) suffered from the curse of every other release sucked :)

MS situation was somewhat compounded by the previous generation they followed:

Windows ME followed the extremely robust '98 (but without being at that level of robustness itself) ... it was then replaced by the paradigm shifting XP which did actually fix problems both the consumer and company had (updated the file system, aligning the enterprise and consumer products, and fixing the bugs of ME)

Vista followed the extremely mature and stable XP ... it required system capabilities (GPU and RAM) for maximum performance that many legacy users didn't have ... and its legacy program compatibility and driver support hurt anybody who didn't get a new system ... however, if you got a new system with all the bells and whistles and weren't running a lot of old software it was pretty robust ... it was then followed by the much more robust Windows 7 (which addressed many of the driver and compatibility concerns and was more optimized across the widest range of user systems)

Win8 was primarily targeted at easing the transition to mobility and touch but it wasn't a transition that most consumers were ready to make yet ... consumers didn't want tablets as much as they wanted iPads and Android touch devices ... MS was too late to the game to inspire shifting to their platform ... and their system which was actually pretty elegant for touch and mobility was a little too cumbersome for the desktop bound majority of users ... plus, it followed the extremely robust Windows 7 which people weren't in as big a hurry to abandon
 
sign on to mico$oft store to see the advertising on the right and left side of your desk top, new apps. clothes. what ever it maybe lol will be funny to read people complaining about it.
 
kbrickley said:
Except each failed for different reasons ... Windows ME (which I used) was a truly buggy OS ... after 98 had set a high bar for performance MS just dropped the ball ... Vista wasn't as bad if you had a new computer but it was dismal for legacy users (especially those with insufficient RAM) and its lack of driver support hurt it immensely (but that wasn't totally MS's fault) ... Win8 was too big a paradigm shift for people where the market hadn't really developed a need for these new features yet, it also followed the extremely robust Win7 which hurt it that people still had that fall back ... perhaps MS (like the older Star Trek Movies) suffered from the curse of every other release sucked :)

MS situation was somewhat compounded by the previous generation they followed:

Windows ME followed the extremely robust '98 (but without being at that level of robustness itself) ... it was then replaced by the paradigm shifting XP which did actually fix problems both the consumer and company had (updated the file system, aligning the enterprise and consumer products, and fixing the bugs of ME)

Vista followed the extremely mature and stable XP ... it required system capabilities (GPU and RAM) for maximum performance that many legacy users didn't have ... and its legacy program compatibility and driver support hurt anybody who didn't get a new system ... however, if you got a new system with all the bells and whistles and weren't running a lot of old software it was pretty robust ... it was then followed by the much more robust Windows 7 (which addressed many of the driver and compatibility concerns and was more optimized across the widest range of user systems)

Win8 was primarily targeted at easing the transition to mobility and touch but it wasn't a transition that most consumers were ready to make yet ... consumers didn't want tablets as much as they wanted iPads and Android touch devices ... MS was too late to the game to inspire shifting to their platform ... and their system which was actually pretty elegant for touch and mobility was a little too cumbersome for the desktop bound majority of users ... plus, it followed the extremely robust Windows 7 which people weren't in as big a hurry to abandon
Click to expand...

Ipad tablets sales are in decline, I don't think sales for android were ever good, people are finding a 8 in phone useful for their needs. I personally believe that sale for tablets will continue to fall and we will see sales for 8 in phone continue to grow.
 
Using windows 8 atm WITH Stardocks Start8, if I did not have Start8 I would be back on Win7. When you do not have to deal with any of the Metro bull shit, it is a good OS, then again I have simple needs, Games, Watching Videos, Web Browsing, etc. I could see this being hell for IT guys in company's, though and new users. Still can not understand why Microsoft wanted a tablet GUI for a desktop:confused:
 
kbrickley said:
Win8 was too big a paradigm shift for people where the market hadn't really developed a need for these new features yet
Click to expand...

I see Win8 as more of some really horrible marketing reports. Someone said "look at how many iphones and ipads are doing, we should go in that direction" when actual computer users are like "We actually use keyboards and mice for a reason" and they were "forced" to use that interface. Then combine that with what very obvious is MS's way of getting lazy and just making "one OS to rule them all" I mean shit, even Apple computers don't use the iPad's interface system, but MS was going to say fuck it and make it so
 
Sometimes it takes a bad release to bring awesome features to a new release. For example, a ton of the virtual memory features in windows 7/8 wouldn't have been built without windows Vista.

The same thing can be said for Windows ME and features that were carried over to newer releases (system restore anyone??).

It is unfortunate though that it seems to be almost a Microsoft norm for just about every other release of windows to have issues....
 
zerodamage said:
There was actually an OS worse than Vista and it has the number '8' in its name.
Click to expand...

Vista was shit mostly because the processors / memory in those days were stuff like Pentium 4 and 512mb of ram. XP was lean and fast and then Vista comes out and looks like and runs like this. Windows 8 runs nicely but looks like complete shit. Close race IMO
 
PornoSatan said:
Vista was shit mostly because the processors / memory in those days were stuff like Pentium 4 and 512mb of ram. XP was lean and fast and then Vista comes out and looks like and runs like this. Windows 8 runs nicely but looks like complete shit. Close race IMO
Click to expand...

this = shit. stupid no edit
 
Windows 8 isn't a bad OS. it's what it signifies that people hate. Microsoft's message for Windows 8 was: Let's kill all Windows app compatibility and switch to a new interface designed for tablets!

Which alienated their core fan base who spent every free second telling everyone they knew how upset they were. This even bothered me, I used to be a big Microsoft fan and I'm now leaning towards being totally platform agnostic. Microsoft hasn't done anything new worth a damn on the interface side since Windows 98 and all their competitors have. I bought a Nexus 5 last year and haven't looked back on the devices side. Android is a mature and ecosystem at this point.

It's gone from a one-horse town for OSes to a more competitive market. I'm willing to give Linux a shot again as soon as the gaming support is there. But I would argue that lack of direction is still a huge problem for Linux, it almost needs a corporate influence to create a Linux-based desktop OS similar to the way Google made Android. Right now being a gamer requires you run Windows but seeing as how Microsoft puts all their gaming clout behind Xbox instead of Windows they may very well lose that advantage soon.

It's almost as if their entire marketing direction is a larger version of the Xbox One launch, they try to screw us as much as possible and then backpedal until we don't quite want to tie them to a stake and set them on fire.
 
The only problem with win 8 is the stupid start menu. Once you install a custom start menu it's perfectly fine. Not like WinME and Vista which had stability and speed problems.
 
Quix said:
Microsoft hasn't done anything new worth a damn on the interface side since Windows 98 and all their competitors have.
Click to expand...

Microsoft doesn't really have any competitors on the desktop market. They decided to invent competitors when they thought they could compete on the mobile market.

The simple truth is that Windows 8 really failed not because of its interface and metro, but because they didn't give users the ability to switch between the more traditional start menu interface and the newer metro interface. People could have tinkered with the metro interface on their own time and become familiar with it on their phones (as intended by MS) while also having the ability to go back to something familiar.

But nope, they shoveled it into everyone's face and rightfully got the flak they deserved.
 
ktk said:
LOL, wheres heatlesssun now huh ?

ROFLMAO!!
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO look at the other thread. Me and many others directly and i mean directly pointed out exactly why the start screen is in fact a slower way to navigate in step by step processes. This shit is getting old, the members and posters on this forum have gotten significantly worse and even more clueless over the years
 
I really cannot forget, since its a historical trend with MS.

XP.....Vista......7......8.....9. By that we should assume 10 is gonna the future crapper.
 
zerodamage said:
There was actually an OS worse than Vista and it has the number '8' in its name.
Click to expand...

Windows 98 wasn't too horrible. It was made better with 98SE. Similar to Vista got better after the SP.

Vista wasn't horrible. It was a step up from XP, with the right system. It was plagued with problems, from OEM's selling systems that were underpowered and with poor drivers to too high of system requirements for basic usage.

Windows 8 is a damn nice OS. Start Screen is fine on touch, but it's a not a good mouse/keyboard interface. It was meant to be the "One GUI to rule them all", and that isn't possible, or someone hasn't created it yet. The "we're going to change the way you use your PC" outlook isn't going to fly. People use their PC's the way they use them. There is no reason to change for the sake of change.
 
Where are you, ktk, are yot going to answer VladDracule?

At any rate, going back to the topic. I want a better marriage of tile interface with the old start menu. Both have have place, and I would like to see Microsoft baking adaptability right in.

I would like to have the ability to map larger icons to keyboard shortcuts or function to apps that weren't made with touchscreen in mind actually, since touch is here to stay and I want to leverage legacy apps more effectively than just being able to use them!

Similarly, I would like a traditional window tab mode support being mandatory for newer apps. I don't want two separate applications if I can help it! I want one app that can change its interface depending on my current usage scenario! We have the hardware to do it, so there's no excuse to not follow through on it.
 
samm said:
I really cannot forget, since its a historical trend with MS.
Click to expand...

Vista wasn't a bad OS. I'd even say it was one of Microsoft's best products. Vista dramatically improved security on the Windows platform without breaking backwards compatibility and it was actually faster than XP with newer hardware by the time SP1 came around. The real problem for users was that many hardware manufacturers used the XP->Vista transition to discontinue support for a lot of perfectly functional older products.

Windows 8 is a different story. They've stripped out features from Windows Vista/7 and tacked on a phone interface that doesn't work very well on desktops. They make you pay extra for Media Center for no reason at all. They made it hibernate instead of shut down by default and call it a huge new feature. You're stuck with all the modern UI bloat that nobody writes apps for... Unless you're a niche user who benefits from the tablet features there's really no compelling reason to upgrade or buy a a new machine with Windows 8.
 
ktk said:
LOL, wheres heatlesssun now huh ?

ROFLMAO!!
Click to expand...

Defending a "hybrid" OS by claiming a touch screen interface is the best for everyone, all the time. Just get used to it you old fogeys. Its better, because we say it is.
 
I want MS to drop the stupid idea of making Windows into a limited tablet OS.
 
Vista was the worst OS Microsoft has ever made, it crashed constantly. I swear I did a clean install every month and it still ran like crap.

Win 8 is very, very stable. I'm not sure I've ever had a bluescreen when I wasn't overclocking and I use it on all my PCs. Yes, the start menu decision was bad but at least it worked.
 
I've run Vista on my gaming rig since a few months after it launched. Never ever had an issue.
 
DeathFromBelow said:
Windows 8 is a different story. They've stripped out features from Windows Vista/7 and tacked on a phone interface that doesn't work very well on desktops.
Click to expand...

I've long said that the new UI needed to be better integrated with the desktop paradigm. This situation has improved substantially from 8.0 RTM to 8.1 Update 1. Not everything has been addressed like the option for some type of non-full screen Start Menu, but navigating with a mouse and keyboard overall is very much like Windows 7.

DeathFromBelow said:
They make you pay extra for Media Center for no reason at all.
Click to expand...

I didn't like this move at all, but the reasons are pretty clear. Media Center is a great DVR but we are now in an era where more and more people are cutting TV reception via cable and are relying more and more on online streaming. Then there's the licensing costs of these Media Center technology, such a DVD playback. Microsoft is now offering free versions of Windows and reducing OEM licensing costs because of greater completion from tablets and alternatives like Chromebooks.

Again this is something I don't like and I would love to see Media Center be in the box again. But there's clear business reasons why Microsoft did what they did here.

DeathFromBelow said:
They made it hibernate instead of shut down by default and call it a huge new feature. You're stuck with all the modern UI bloat that nobody writes apps for... Unless you're a niche user who benefits from the tablet features there's really no compelling reason to upgrade or buy a a new machine with Windows 8.
Click to expand...

The Windows 8 fast boot hibernation is not the same thing as full standard hibernation. And while the Windows Store is still well behind iOS and Android, the Windows Store has come a ways in the last two years.
 
carlbme said:
I think the tweaks they made to 8.1 have made it a damned good OS. I did try Win8 and yes...utter crap. One of the few times when I actually rolled back to a previous OS.
Click to expand...

Until Metro is removed from desktops, you cannot say Win 8.1 is good. The dual personality OS needs to end.
 
i like 8.1 i was using it on a touch laptop and it is nice. i like having apps run in the background and give notifications like email, news and social media....

the multimonitor support is much better as is the high DPI monitor support. I just recently upgraded my desktop to 8.1 from 7 pro

which is my primary gaming rig with 3x1080p monitors and it is great, configure it to boot to desktop, pin your apps to the taskbar, have it show the app list rather than start screen and it is a great OS

just bad marketing and poor execution in the beginning marred the OS
 
VladDracule said:
ROFLMAO look at the other thread. Me and many others directly and i mean directly pointed out exactly why the start screen is in fact a slower way to navigate in step by step processes. This shit is getting old, the members and posters on this forum have gotten significantly worse and even more clueless over the years
Click to expand...

Win 7 includes media center. Win 8 does not. If I have to shell out for the OS and then they have the nerve to ask me to buy extra "OS features" on top of it, then they can pretty much go fucking pound sand with their "upgrade". I'll stick to what I have that works, TYVM.
 
Wrench said:
I've run Vista on my gaming rig since a few months after it launched. Never ever had an issue.
Click to expand...

I didn't have a problem with Vista, either. Vista was so new in so many ways, especially the 64-bit version and of course the radical change in the hardware-driver models, that only top-tier hardware vendors managed to put out compatible drivers in a timely fashion. Like you, I had the good sense to be on a desktop and eschew laptops for gaming, and my desktop components all got great Vista drivers. Laptop OEMs, though, generally dropped the ball with Vista, because they didn't do much with their hardware drivers. Lots of laptop owners got screwed, but not by Microsoft--they got screwed by the OEMs that sold them their laptops. The drivers were crap. It wasn't hard to see that, especially since Microsoft had been shipping various versions of Vista to OEMs for *a year* before the OS shipped to the general market. The laptop OEMs did not do their jobs with Vista--they certainly passed the buck, though...;)

Anybody who ran Vista knows that Win7 is only Vista 2.0...;) That's what is so amusing when I hear people talk about how much they hated Vista but how much they love Win7...! Still, I always feel sorry for people who buy laptops--they are compromise machines in every sense of the world.

Win8's problems, however, were caused directly by Microsoft's decision to feature a touch-OS when 95%+ of Microsoft's market was and is non-touch. Had Microsoft been smart and gotten a decent start menu into Win8 a year ago then we might even be seeing a migration to Win8 occurring in Enterprise, where nobody needs or wants a touch screen. By the time Microsoft finally gets around to doing what it should have done before Win8 shipped, it may be too late to get Win8 into Enterprise at all.

Some people have said that Threshold is not, in fact, Win9, but rather will be a free update to Win8.1. I hope so!...;) (But I'm not holding my breath waiting for it.)
 
canna said:
Win 7 includes media center. Win 8 does not. If I have to shell out for the OS and then they have the nerve to ask me to buy extra "OS features" on top of it, then they can pretty much go fucking pound sand with their "upgrade". I'll stick to what I have that works, TYVM.
Click to expand...

I thought the same thing, at first. I took advantage of the 4-month-long introductory sale Microsoft had for Win8--$39.99 got you Win8 Pro (and all subsequent updates, including 8.1) +Media center. I would have thought *everyone* would have jumped on that with both feet.

Even though I've got Media Center, though, I've also got VLC. Believe me, VLC is free, too, and when I watch movies on my computer I do not use Media Center anymore. VLC is demonstrably superior to Media Center. Even if you are still on Win7 I recommend it over Media Center.
 
Some people had zero issues with Vista, and I'm one of them. But, there were MANY that did. :/ And they were loud when they had problems, too.

Windows 8 problems. They are 99% around the Start Screen. Everything else seems to be extremely solid, fast, stable and just a good OS. Throw that Start Screen (and remove Aero Glass...) on there, and people start complaining.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top