Why would windows 8 a catastrophe for everyone?

[maverick786us]

I am excited about the much anticipated OS Windows 8. But after reading numerous articals about windows 8 being a catastrophe for everyone. According to you guys, why would it be a catastrophe? Is it because of its changed UI or because it is designed for tablets and might not suit well with desktops? Please give me your views

 

[Snufykat]

People are scared of change, seems to be the biggest gripe\whine about windows 8. I love the people who gripe about it who have not even tried it.

 

[450]

OP, look up stuff about the Windows 95 launch. Not everyone was happy.

 

[maverick786us]

For advanced users like us is the interface and GUI too basic and simple because MS want to target novice users?

 

[maverick786us]

OP, look up stuff about the Windows 95 launch. Not everyone was happy.

I remember when I was a little kid I first time saw Windows 3.11, that was the first ever GUI I ever experienced and I was impressed with it. When I saw Windows 95 for the first time it was like live at first sight. I didn't have to go through any tutorials in order to work on it

 

[450]

MS is looking to target touch devices and have a unified feel across all of their devices (Xbox, Phone, Tablet, Desktop)

 

[Sycraft]

Basically because Metro (I don't care if they changed the name, I'm calling it that) is shit for the desktop. Windows 8 really wants to be a tablet OS. Well, the desktop isn't a tablet, and the Metro UI bites for it. Now that alone isn't a "catastrophe" but it does suck. Windows 7 is a good OS and from a technical standpoint Windows 8 is better (faster, more optimized, etc). However it is marred by a shitty, shitty interface because MS wants to try to push tablets.

In the long run it could be a catastrophe because Metro is a shitty development environment for a lot of programs. If MS gets what they want and everything goes Metro and cross platform it'll mean a dumbing down of computers, we'll lose access to high end stuff we used to have.

One example would be audio production. Metro has no good system for dealing with the low latency requirements of DAWs.

Basically they went ass backwards with it. Windows 8 should be able to run Metro programs in a window on the desktop, allowing you to run tablet apps on your desktop, should there be a need. Instead they want to try and force Metro as the main thing on the desktop, and try to relegate actual desktop programs to second class status.

 

[Veilrap]

People get angry because they don't like how the Start Screen (metro) looks. Personally, I find it better than the Start Menu as I can still type search and it makes better use of my visual memory for placing shortcuts. It also has the added advantage of being a very effective touch/pen interface in addition to keyboard or mouse.

Development wise Metro is great because it allows developers to write apps that can target with minimum effort desktops, tablets, and phones. Additionally the desktop is still a fully supported ecosystem and the performance in the desktop is even better in general in Windows 8 than 7.

There have been a few issues with hardware but these are likely rooted in the fact that people are running prerelease versions of the OS. For the vast majority of people, drivers will not be an issue as the OS is mostly compatible with drivers for Vista+7.

Windows 8 is a good push forward as it enables a common interface between tablets and desktops without sacrificing usability or functionality.

 

[TechLarry]

People are scared of change, seems to be the biggest gripe\whine about windows 8. I love the people who gripe about it who have not even tried it.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. People are pissed off about stupid, needless change that provides zero benefit to the end user.

They are also getting just a little bit pissed off about Microsoft not listening to it's customers.

 

[TechLarry]

MS is looking to target touch devices and have a unified feel across all of their devices (Xbox, Phone, Tablet, Desktop)

Three of those are fine. However the Desktop isn't a freakin' phone, and they need to get that through their thick, balding head.

 

[XOR != OR]

Three of those are fine. However the Desktop isn't a freakin' phone, and they need to get that through their thick, balding head.

I maintain that there are three generic usage profiles for consumers; phone, tablet and desktop. MS is trying to address all three with a single interface, which is ( imo ) remarkably stupid. As anyone with a smart phone can tell you, you use your phone differently, and for different things, than you use your desktop.

I'll get used to it, simply because I must, but I eagerly await Windows9; Backtrack edition, Return of the Desktop.

 

[heatlesssun]

I'll get used to it, simply because I must, but I eagerly await Windows9; Backtrack edition, Return of the Desktop.

Traditional PC sales are flat, not a growing market. Return to the Desktop (which makes no sense since the desktop is still in Windows) is just not a viable market for Windows anymore, not as it's only market.

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/ci...he-pc-and-the-desk-phone/39749268?tag=nl.e101

I simply don't get why people are thinking that's there not indication after indication after indication that the traditional PC market is considered dying and yet think that hey, if Microsoft creates yet another desktop-centric OS that things will be swell. So many accuse Microsoft of being stupid and short sighted but at least they seem to be willing to accept information about market conditions and trends and simply not just ignoring it.

 

[Veilrap]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. People are pissed off about stupid, needless change that provides zero benefit to the end user.

They are also getting just a little bit pissed off about Microsoft not listening to it's customers.

Your argument has no basis. The Start Screen IS an improvement on the start menu in many ways and has the added benefit of providing a familiar interface. The change doesn't affect traditional desktop usage.

And actually they are listening to their customers. There is a vocal faction that opposes metro. However, there are plenty of people who are happy with the changes.

 

[heatlesssun]

And actually they are listening to their customers. There is a vocal faction that opposes metro. However, there are plenty of people who are happy with the changes.

Windows 8 is controversial. But as with most controversies the two ends cancel each other out and the middle just goes with the flow. Many of the complaints about Windows 8 are nonsense, there's a whole new generation of cool devices on the way as well as lots of apps, even PC type games that can well on even an Atom device.

 

[Monkey God]

This has been hashed over a 1000 times already. There's people that like it, theres people that dont like it, and there's heatlesssun, whose very existence seems to hinge on its success.

 

[Snufykat]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. People are pissed off about stupid, needless change that provides zero benefit to the end user.

They are also getting just a little bit pissed off about Microsoft not listening to it's customers.

Have you read the daily gripes about 8? They all seem to devolve into "i don't like change".

 

[XOR != OR]

Traditional PC sales are flat, not a growing market. Return to the Desktop (which makes no sense since the desktop is still in Windows) is just not a viable market for Windows anymore, not as it's only market.

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/ci...he-pc-and-the-desk-phone/39749268?tag=nl.e101

I simply don't get why people are thinking that's there not indication after indication after indication that the traditional PC market is considered dying and yet think that hey, if Microsoft creates yet another desktop-centric OS that things will be swell. So many accuse Microsoft of being stupid and short sighted but at least they seem to be willing to accept information about market conditions and trends and simply not just ignoring it.

I don't really care what analysts say, tradition desktops are simply NOT going away. They fulfill a specific role that no other device to date can handle ( generic computing device ).

Having been in the industry for a few years, I've learned to ignore analyst's doom and gloom though, so I might be considered jaded on this point. But facts are facts, tablets/smart phones aren't as capable as workstations; consumers will still need a workstation/desktop at home.

( and your article reads very similar to the "PAPERLESS OFFICE IS THE FUTURE" articles we got 10-20 years back. Well I work in a "paperless" office, and it's anything but. CIOs are hardly the most reliable source of predicting the future of computing ).

 

[Monkey God]

I don't really care what analysts say, tradition desktops are simply NOT going away. They fulfill a specific role that no other device to date can handle ( generic computing device ).

The thing is companies WANT generic computing devices to go away. Why?
1) so they can sell more specialized hardware and follow apples model of make money for doing no work (app sales fees)
2) because of the influence of the media mafia and other interests who think people having control over their hardware and the information they consume is a bad idea

 

[XOR != OR]

The thing is companies WANT generic computing devices to go away. Why?
1) so they can sell more specialized hardware and follow apples model of make money for doing no work (app sales fees)
2) because of the influence of the media mafia and other interests who think people having control over their hardware and the information they consume is a bad idea

Vendors may want consumers to move away from generic computer devices, but that doesn't necessarily mean they will.

Tablets and smart phones address a very specific need, and they are quite good at filling that need ( and getting better all the time ), but people still use their desktops as well. While I don't doubt that some light consumers can abandon their desktops entirely, that's not going to be the norm.

 

[bigdogchris]

Traditional PC sales are flat, not a growing market.

You continue to say that, and I don't get it. I agree PC sales are probably not growing. That said, there are many times more desktop/laptop computers than tablets. Why would you alienate almost a billion desktop/laptop computers for a market of only a few hundred million, if even that. What you are implying means a nickle is holding up a dollar. Microsoft is going after that nickle rather than worrying about that dollar. If Microsoft assumes that all 950-1 Billion desktop/laptops are going to move to Windows 8, they are clueless. But I suppose they get their money even if people stay on Windows 7 so they don't care.

 

[Numan]

You continue to say that, and I don't get it. I agree PC sales are probably not growing. That said, there are many times more desktop/laptop computers than tablets. Why would you alienate almost a billion desktop/laptop computers for a market of only a few hundred million, if even that. What you are implying means a nickle is holding up a dollar. Microsoft is going after that nickle rather than worrying about that dollar. If Microsoft assumes that all 950-1 Billion desktop/laptops are going to move to Windows 8, they are clueless. But I suppose they get their money even if people stay on Windows 7 so they don't care.

You're assuming everybody will buy an upgrade as well, otherwise you wouldn't mention they are alienating computers. We all know they won't even if it was super duper awesome as we still have people on these forums that have no reason to format XP off their system.

Besides...XP, Vista, 7, 8...MS gets your money

 

[heatlesssun]

You continue to say that, and I don't get it. I agree PC sales are probably not growing. That said, there are many times more desktop/laptop computers than tablets. Why would you alienate almost a billion desktop/laptop computers for a market of only a few hundred million, if even that. What you are implying means a nickle is holding up a dollar. Microsoft is going after that nickle rather than worrying about that dollar.

Well the numbers are pretty scary on the PC. 100 million tablets to ship this year, that's almost 1/3 of PC shipments and more than desktops in retail.

We live in a what have you done for me lately world. Whether we like it or not businesses both big and small will do things that will piss of some existing customers to appeal to a new and growing set of other customers. Obviously Microsoft needs a tablet product and what they are doing as much as one may hate it is as reasonable as any other alternative. You sometimes have to do what you have to do and there's just not a lot of options here. If Windows is to remain a core and bread and butter product for Microsoft it has to support tablets.

 

[heatlesssun]

You're assuming everybody will buy an upgrade as well, otherwise you wouldn't mention they are alienating computers. We all know they won't even if it was super duper awesome as we still have people on these forums that have no reason to format XP off their system.

Besides...XP, Vista, 7, 8...MS gets your money

The vast majority of Windows users get Windows with new hardware. When people get a hold of these touch screen devices and hybrids and thousands of new apps, none of which will work on Windows 7, those new users are going to see the new stuff and most will either forget the Start Menu, not care, or never knew it was in the first place.

 

[MrCrispy]

Metro on desktop provides zero to minimal benefits and makes things much harder for no good reason. I'm getting tired of -

"People hate change" - no, people hate change that's for the worse
"PC is dead. Long live the tablet" - not gonna happen for at least 5 more years, if ever. Touch is a limited input mechanism that can never replace traditional ones, and building an OS to punish normal input users is just wrong.

 

[Veilrap]

"People hate change" - no, people hate change that's for the worse

Except it's not for the worst. It maintains functionality while changing aesthetics and adding features.

 

[Motley]

Maybe Bill should come back? MS went to shit after Mr Gates left.

 

[CEpeep]

Same reason a bunch of people hated the Ribbon in Office: It was different than the paradigm they had spent years getting used to. Ultimately, the Ribbon is more efficient for about 80% of tasks and it makes sense once you've spent some time integrating it into your normal workflow. Many people are upset at the Windows 8 interface because their experience with it consists of screenshots of someone else using it rather than a hands-on experience with it. Most of the "hate" will drift from Fear of Change into Rage at Change within a few weeks of release and then a lot will gradually taper off as people get used to doing things a different way.

The actual "success" of Metro/Win8 UI rests with developers, not users. If developers can successfully leverage it to create software worth using that behaves consistently across multiple platforms, users will follow, and they will come in droves, since using that software will require an upgrade to Windows 8. Metro is powerful and the ability to create full desktop apps using only Javascript brings a whole new group of developers to the table.

 

[heatlesssun]

Except it's not for the worst. It maintains functionality while changing aesthetics and adding features.

Metro is different and the UI and even execution has a different set of requirements than traditional desktop UIs. For instance, but is made of not being able to window Metro apps and while that is a valid complaint at one level there's LOTS of reasons for this. One thing that no one hatting on Metro about windowing. What happens when you resize a desktop window? The answer is just about everything. There' absolutely no rhyme or reason to how desktop apps behave when resized because it's actually not a trivial problem for UI to scale to any size. Metro on the other hand actually considers the problem in a lot of detail and the notion that thus the arbitrary resizing a Metro app window is mostly avoided since it's not allowed. There are scaling factors that do take in accounted a number of resolutions and allow developers to programmatically handle gracefully scaling issues such as when dealing this that Metro doesn't do automatically like bitmapped resources.

Manipulating and resizing floating windows isn't necessarily the easiest thing to do but a lot of people think that every Windows user just does and that's not exactly true.

 

[heatlesssun]

The actual "success" of Metro/Win8 UI rests with developers, not users. If developers can successfully leverage it to create software worth using that behaves consistently across multiple platforms, users will follow, and they will come in droves, since using that software will require an upgrade to Windows 8. Metro is powerful and the ability to create full desktop apps using only Javascript brings a whole new group of developers to the table.

Exactly, and developers, not users, are the reason there is no Metro off switch because it would completely undermine developers' confidence in Metro. Why would developers develop for something that completely optional only to have Microsoft toss it aside like they have many other things over the years. If Microsoft didn't go all in on it no one would care.

 

[wonderfield]

Except it's not for the worst. It maintains functionality while changing aesthetics and adding features.

Aesthetics have a profound impact on how much or how little users can tolerate graphical user interfaces. You would not, for instance, find bright fuschia window borders to be as tolerable as a dull gray. The less you tolerate the aesthetics, the poorer the experience you'll have.

 

[zero2dash]

Traditional PC sales are flat, not a growing market. Return to the Desktop (which makes no sense since the desktop is still in Windows) is just not a viable market for Windows anymore, not as it's only market.

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/ci...he-pc-and-the-desk-phone/39749268?tag=nl.e101

I don't really put much salt into a blog post "reporting" some nameless 62% of polled CIO's saying anything.

So your solution (which MS has now done) is to just release 1 product that better covers tablets and also works with a keyboard+mouse, even if it pisses off and alienates the majority of the desktop userbase that currently runs your software? If that's such a swell idea, then why the hell didn't Apple, purveyors of all ideas great and futuristic, do it first? Because they're not dumb, that's why. They'll never do it and they won't try to patent it either.

I know you hold more Windows related tablet experience than I do --- so I can't dispute your experience. And I'll accept your sentiments on Win7 on a tablet as being poor, just because I have no experience, while you claim to have experience and I have no reason to not believe you.

I know you like Windows 8, but it's one of the dumbest things Microsoft has ever done. Period. Even Apple was smart enough to leave their desktop segment alone and rather focus on updating the experience for their touch devices with iOS. As much as I dislike Apple, I'd never say they were stupid, because they're not. Meanwhile, Microsoft completely removing a desktop and Start menu that people have been accustomed to for over 15 years now is utterly fucking dumb. They could have taken the WP7 base and tweaked it for tablets; they didn't want to. They could have (and IMHO should have) given desktop users the option to use a standard Explorer desktop with a Start menu; hell, they could have even boiled it down to putting a lick of sense into the OS during install to say "Hey! I notice you're using a keyboard+mouse, do you want the new Metro experience, or the desktop/Start menu you're used to?" But no, that would have been far too cruel to the cause of forcing a touch interface on people who have no touch devices.

Does that mean that Apple needs to get rid of the dock and Spotlight in favor of some newfangled UI...just because? No. Just like it doesn't mean that MS had to get rid of the damn Start menu and the desktop either.

 

[CEpeep]

Does that mean that Apple needs to get rid of the dock and Spotlight in favor of some newfangled UI...just because? No. Just like it doesn't mean that MS had to get rid of the damn Start menu and the desktop either.

Siri is the "new" Spotlight, it just hasn't moved to Mac OS yet. I'll be surprised if Spotlight's not overhauled in 10.9. Apple's already been testing the waters with Launchpad as a possible dock replacement. It will probably have parity with the dock in 10.9, but I doubt they will replace it completely.

 

[heatlesssun]

Microsoft completely removing a desktop and Start menu that people have been accustomed to for over 15 years now is utterly fucking dumb. They could have taken the WP7 base and tweaked it for tablets; they didn't want to.

The Windows is the dominate product in a market in decline. OS X isn't a dominate product and iOS rules the tablet world at the moment. Microsoft is behind the curb and in trouble, Apple is not. Microsoft has to take more risk to make up for mistakes and being late. Apple doesn't.

The desktop is still the and the Start Menu is old. Why not put a home screen on a PC that presents notifications? What is so superior about a tiny list of static icons that are merely shortcuts? Part of Windows and PCs problems is that they've STOOD STILL while the world is more mobile and has devices that can tell them at a glace everything that's going one. Meanwhile, yeah, PCs are still good at spreadsheets.

If Windows PCs were growing at a healthy rate of 5% or more then these changes wouldn't have been made. PCs aren't growing and there's as much risk if not more to Windows if radical shifts aren't made in a changing world. When Windows 7 was launched the tablet market was effectively zero, now it's going to eclipse desktops this year. That's astonishing and that 15 year old Start Menu sat by why this happened.

 

[Veilrap]

So your solution (which MS has now done) is to just release 1 product that better covers tablets and also works with a keyboard+mouse, even if it pisses off and alienates the majority of the desktop userbase that currently runs your software?

There's no evidence to back your statement that Metro pisses off the majority of desktop users. People I've met in real life have had mixed to positive opinions on the new start screen.

 

[Monkey God]

Well the numbers are pretty scary on the PC. 100 million tablets to ship this year, that's almost 1/3 of PC shipments and more than desktops in retail.

The vast majority of those "tablets" are iPads and e-readers. Kudos to Microsoft for wanting to break into this market, but if you think an iPad or an e-reader is a "desktop replacing tablet" you are incorrect. They perform other functions better than a desktop can. Also, Win8 as it is, cannot compete with an iPad. Apple dominates this market, and the android readers dominate the lower strata of the market, mainly by cost. Microsoft can't compete with the entrenched iPad by function, and the android readers are very inexpensive, so MS cant compete there as well.

http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1980115

Microsoft is taking a huge risk by engaging the 800lb Apple Gorilla, and the nimble e-readers at the same time, while alienating the entrenched Windows PC market.

 

[stevedave]

Windows 8 has its place......But its place is not a replacement of Windows 7.


For desktop users it provide very little if any advantage.


I won't be using windows 8 unless I get it for free.

 

[heatlesssun]

The vast majority of those "tablets" are iPads and e-readers. Kudos to Microsoft for wanting to break into this market, but if you think an iPad or an e-reader is a "desktop replacing tablet" you are incorrect. They perform other functions better than a desktop can. Also, Win8 as it is, cannot compete with an iPad. Apple dominates this market, and the android readers dominate the lower strata of the market, mainly by cost. Microsoft can't compete with the entrenched iPad by function, and the android readers are very inexpensive, so MS cant compete there as well.

But Microsoft isn't really going head to head with the iPad or Android with Windows 8, that's relly more the role of Windows RT. And while cost and lack of Metro apps are issues, Windows 8 running on a tablet hardware easily matches everything an iPad or Android does, even battery life it looks with Clover Trail Atoms. In any case, this is a new OS and there's a lot of new hardware to go with it and it's going to take some time to see all of this stuff pans out, there's just so many things to examine.

Microsoft is taking a huge risk by engaging the 800lb Apple Gorilla, and the nimble e-readers at the same time, while alienating the entrenched Windows PC market.

But the PC market is flat, virtually no growth and may very well be going negative. If the traditional PC market was growing at a healthy clip then Windows 8 would be a different product.

 

[MJZ]

I use Windows 7 in Parallels and Bootcamped and Windows 8 is basically Windows 7, with the Start Menu replaced by Metro Tiles.

It really isn't Earth shattering and I am mostly excited about the OS for the Ultrabook/Tablet integration - which is what they should have been in the first place!

 

[XOR != OR]

But Microsoft isn't really going head to head with the iPad or Android with Windows 8, that's relly more the role of Windows RT. And while cost and lack of Metro apps are issues, Windows 8 running on a tablet hardware easily matches everything an iPad or Android does, even battery life it looks with Clover Trail Atoms. In any case, this is a new OS and there's a lot of new hardware to go with it and it's going to take some time to see all of this stuff pans out, there's just so many things to examine.

The spin is strong with this one.

So MS isn't competing with android or ipads, except where it is. And even though it's not competing ( or is, depending on which part of your postwe read ), it can still do everything that android and ipads can do, except what it can't ( applications, cost, market inertia ).

 

[MJZ]

You continue to say that, and I don't get it. I agree PC sales are probably not growing. That said, there are many times more desktop/laptop computers than tablets. Why would you alienate almost a billion desktop/laptop computers for a market of only a few hundred million, if even that. What you are implying means a nickle is holding up a dollar. Microsoft is going after that nickle rather than worrying about that dollar. If Microsoft assumes that all 950-1 Billion desktop/laptops are going to move to Windows 8, they are clueless. But I suppose they get their money even if people stay on Windows 7 so they don't care.

PC growth is slowing BECAUSE of the Tablet market.

Many devices occupy the same consumer space to many, and so Grandma doesn't need an Ultrabook & a Tablet. Just an iPad will do, and will be even better for her needs.

In some ways, this is why Blackberry died, another product came and replaced it. PCs aren't going to suffer this fate, but it's marketshare is certainly going to be bitten into hard.