Will U buy Windows 8?

Will U buy Windows 8?

  • Yes

    Votes: 86 24.8%
  • No

    Votes: 189 54.5%
  • Can't decide yet...

    Votes: 72 20.7%

  • Total voters
    347

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Yes, you have the desktop, for now, but again, Microsoft has made it clear they consider the desktop legacy. How long until they remove the desktop altogether?

Microsoft as much as people want to say that Microsoft said this they haven't, in fact they have said the complete opposite:

We do not view the desktop as a mode, legacy or otherwise—it is simply a paradigm for working that suits some people and specific apps. This is very much like the person who uses a mobile “phone” but really uses it for the mobile browser and mail client and rarely uses apps or the phone. It is like the person who has a brand new tablet but only uses the web browser.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/18/creating-the-windows-8-user-experience.aspx

It would make ZERO sense for Microsoft to ever give up the desktop, it's their greatest asset and will be a tremendous one for years to come. The bottom line is that Microsoft did try a desktop Tablet PC and no one wrote touch apps. And while I myself don't necessarily like the a single source app store in this competitive environment in the age of the iPad, letting a whole new UI paradigm just go willy nilly has a lot of problems when it comes to quality control. If Metro apps ended up being nothing but malware filled turds, Windows 8 would without question fail on tablets.
 

archevilangel

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 15, 2003
Messages
1,824
With tripple monitors in nvidia surround, I'm actually like the start screen. So yes for my desktop. My laptop has barely seen any use, so no for my laptop. I'm planning on buying a surface so yes on that.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
With tripple monitors in nvidia surround, I'm actually like the start screen. So yes for my desktop. My laptop has barely seen any use, so no for my laptop. I'm planning on buying a surface so yes on that.

How do Metro apps work in Surround? This is the only real concern I have with Windows 8 right now and I'm thinking that the drivers will have some way of handling this, like Metro only on a single screen even in Surround. Thanks in advance!
 

c3141hf

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 22, 2004
Messages
2,708
Microsoft as much as people want to say that Microsoft said this they haven't, in fact they have said the complete opposite:



http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/18/creating-the-windows-8-user-experience.aspx

Their actions say otherwise. Of course Microsoft isn't going to come out and say that the desktop is deprecated because then people would flee them in droves. Microsoft traditionally prefers a strategy of embrace, extend, and extinguish. Slowly but surely they will whittle down the desktop until it is no longer there.

Frankly, the arrogance is astounding, even for Microsoft. It is not enough to implement a smartphone interface on a desktop operating system, they have to force people to use it. Microsoft has gone out of their way to force people to use Metro in Windows 8. How much controversy could have been avoided by just having a simple switch that allows you to bypass Metro and use the classic Start Menu?

I know it is possible because Windows Server 2012 allows booting straight to the desktop. But no, Microsoft has arrogantly decided that you WILL use Metro and that if you find Metro hard to use, it is because YOU are using YOUR computer wrong and not because Metro is a lousy design. The fact that almost every criticism of Metro gets a "you're just not using it right" response is testament to this.

A basic rule of interface design is that an interface should be designed around the needs of the user, not the needs or wants of the designer. If a large number of people don't like your interface and find it awkward to use, and your only response is that you're not using it right, then you have a flawed design.

It would make ZERO sense for Microsoft to ever give up the desktop, it's their greatest asset and will be a tremendous one for years to come. The bottom line is that Microsoft did try a desktop Tablet PC and no one wrote touch apps. And while I myself don't necessarily like the a single source app store in this competitive environment in the age of the iPad, letting a whole new UI paradigm just go willy nilly has a lot of problems when it comes to quality control. If Metro apps ended up being nothing but malware filled turds, Windows 8 would without question fail on tablets.

Microsoft is not going to be Apple on the "coolness" factor. It is frankly just sad to watch Microsoft's attempts to be hip. People use Microsoft software out of pragmatism; it is not a cult like Apple.

If Windows RT is going to compete with the iPad, it needs to differentiate itself. It does not. Having Windows is pointless if you cannot run Windows applications. Microsoft could have leapfrogged the iPad in functionality simply by allowing unfettered desktop access on ARM. Sure, programs would have to be ported, but it would be a considerable leap in functionality compared to the iPad.

Not having a walled garden would have given them an advantage as well. Think of the marketing that Microsoft could have done if they had kept Windows 8 open; they could do commercials about Apple's ability to remotely uninstall software without your permission. But instead, they chose to copy Apple.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Their actions say otherwise. Of course Microsoft isn't going to come out and say that the desktop is deprecated because then people would flee them in droves. Microsoft traditionally prefers a strategy of embrace, extend, and extinguish. Slowly but surely they will whittle down the desktop until it is no longer there.

First of all why would Microsoft want to embrace, extend and extinguish its own product. Secondly, Windows 8 is even more functional a desktop an OS than Windows 7 regardless of one's feelings about Metro.

Frankly, the arrogance is astounding, even for Microsoft. It is not enough to implement a smartphone interface on a desktop operating system, they have to force people to use it. Microsoft has gone out of their way to force people to use Metro in Windows 8. How much controversy could have been avoided by just having a simple switch that allows you to bypass Metro and use the classic Start Menu?

Metro is more of an act of desperation that it is or arrogance. If you haven't heard, this is the post-PC era, Windows is old and tired and full of bugs. People don't want to be stuck with clunky machines and keyboards and mice. They want beautiful easy to use touch apps. PCs and the desktop, they are history.

That's what Microsoft's competitors are saying and it seems to be working at least to some extent. If the desktop goes away, it won't be because Microsoft killed it, but that the market will have moved on. And I simply think that the market won't move on anytime soon if ever. It's in Microsoft's best interest for a long time to come to have a Windows desktop.

I know it is possible because Windows Server 2012 allows booting straight to the desktop. But no, Microsoft has arrogantly decided that you WILL use Metro and that if you find Metro hard to use, it is because YOU are using YOUR computer wrong and not because Metro is a lousy design. The fact that almost every criticism of Metro gets a "you're just not using it right" response is testament to this.

Not that you're not using it right, that you're using it like Windows 7.

Not having a walled garden would have given them an advantage as well. Think of the marketing that Microsoft could have done if they had kept Windows 8 open; they could do commercials about Apple's ability to remotely uninstall software without your permission. But instead, they chose to copy Apple.

Think about all the ads that Apple would have put up about malware.
 

Epicness

Weaksauce
Joined
Jul 1, 2012
Messages
90
Not sure who said it, but saying Metro is the Start Menu, simply opened from the start... Is really interesting.
They're basically combining the Desktop and Start Menu into one. If they'd simply market it like THAT I think you'd have more reception of it.

MS has a history of making usability tweaks that are less than helpful ( example; log in screen changes between xp and vista+ )
Very good example.

Instead of being able to change the domain or username from one simple screen, you have to go Switch User, Other User, and THEN type it in. They're adding two more steps to the process.

I'm not talking about you. Nor am I really talking about me. I'm talking about the users I support.
If I see one flaw in Heatless' reasoning it's this.
You and I can get used to, and adapt to, changing technology with relative ease.

When you deal with thousands of users, you cannot think, "What works good for me, one person- and I'll roll it out". You must, and being good at your job requires this, "What works the best for these thousands of people?"

Users are, mostly speaking, pretty computer-stupid. You change one little thing in an application and they'll complain simply because it's different.
You maintain the technology. Users want the technology to stay the hell out of the way, and when you add even one additional step to a workflow item that they do many times per day: it matters to them.
 

c3141hf

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 22, 2004
Messages
2,708
First of all why would Microsoft want to embrace, extend and extinguish its own product. Secondly, Windows 8 is even more functional a desktop an OS than Windows 7 regardless of one's feelings about Metro.



Metro is more of an act of desperation that it is or arrogance. If you haven't heard, this is the post-PC era, Windows is old and tired and full of bugs. People don't want to be stuck with clunky machines and keyboards and mice. They want beautiful easy to use touch apps. PCs and the desktop, they are history.

That's what Microsoft's competitors are saying and it seems to be working at least to some extent. If the desktop goes away, it won't be because Microsoft killed it, but that the market will have moved on. And I simply think that the market won't move on anytime soon if ever. It's in Microsoft's best interest for a long time to come to have a Windows desktop.



Not that you're not using it right, that you're using it like Windows 7.

First off, a tablet is a PC. It is both personal and a computer, thus it meets the definition. There is no "Post PC Era", that is simply doublespeak from the marketing department.

Tablets are a fad. Of course a new market is going to have higher sales than an established market. Almost everyone has a traditional computer whereas there are still lots of people without tablets. Sales of traditional computers are limited to mostly upgrades and replacements at this point. That doesn't mean that the market is dying.

Simply put, tablets are nice for playing games and checking Facebook but they are lousy when it comes to doing serious work. Let me know when a tablet comes out that allows me to pull down and collate 2,000,000+ sales records from an ODBC data source into an Excel spreadsheet using PowerPivot (or equivalent software) and allows me to do so using only touch. Let me know when a tablet can run the full version of Photoshop or the full version of AutoCAD. Let me know when a tablet can run a fully fledged ERP system that allows for multitasking between the various functions and does not have a loss of productivity over a traditional desktop. It will never happen unless the tablet is paired with a PROPER keyboard, a mouse and a large display at which point it is really isn't much of a tablet anymore.

Think about all the ads that Apple would have put up about malware.

They already tried that and ended up getting egg on their face because, as it turns out, Mac OS X has malware just like Windows. As does iOS. You'll notice they no longer make claims about the Mac not getting viruses. Since Apple does not audit the source code of every application that comes through, they can only do the most cursory of tests. People have managed to successfully sneak forbidden things into the app store before (including a recent one that harvests your address book and sends spam to all your contacts).
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
When you deal with thousands of users, you cannot think, "What works good for me, one person- and I'll roll it out". You must, and being good at your job requires this, "What works the best for these thousands of people?"

But Microsoft is dealing with hundreds of millions of users when it comes to Windows. Why do so many Metro opponents think they see something that Microsoft doesn't. Steven Sinofsky heard these arguments when he lead Office 2007. Different and controversial UIs are nothing new to him and indeed of all people on the world I'm sure he saw this coming. But I think he also can see past it and realize that has some belief that Metro will work on desktops and mice and keyboards for most people. Yes Microsoft makes mistakes, but it's not the first time they've done something that some vocal people said wouldn't work yet did.

I'm not saying Windows 8 and Metro will be successful but I do believe that its not at all the disaster that some are making out to be and that most people won't be able to cope with it and that Metro will be refreshing to millions of average people that just want to enjoy new things on their computers.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Tablets are a fad. Of course a new market is going to have higher sales than an established market. Almost everyone has a traditional computer whereas there are still lots of people without tablets. Sales of traditional computers are limited to mostly upgrades and replacements at this point. That doesn't mean that the market is dying.

I simply see no signs that tablets are a fad at this point, no one looking at it honestly does. For one, they are far from new and I think they've reached the point of refinement that make them useful and enjoyable.

Simply put, tablets are nice for playing games and checking Facebook but they are lousy when it comes to doing serious work. Let me know when a tablet comes out that allows me to pull down and collate 2,000,000+ sales records from an ODBC data source into an Excel spreadsheet using PowerPivot (or equivalent software) and allows me to do so using only touch.

This is doable with Windows 7 tablets and Office 2010 64-bit today though not the best touch experience. With Office 2013 I would think that the experience would be better.

Let me know when a tablet can run the full version of Photoshop or the full version of AutoCAD.

Photoshop users are one of the most loyal customer bases for Windows tablets today. That's a crowd that's REALLY stocked about Windows 8.

Let me know when a tablet can run a fully fledged ERP system that allows for multitasking between the various functions and does not have a loss of productivity over a traditional desktop. It will never happen unless the tablet is paired with a PROPER keyboard, a mouse and a large display at which point it is really isn't much of a tablet anymore.

This everything you're describing is Windows 8's raison d'être. If you don't think that Windows 8 is suitble for dekstops I can't convience of that, only that I do use Windows 8 on a desktop for software development work and have never had a want or need to go use a Windows 7 desktop.

They already tried that and ended up getting egg on their face because, as it turns out, Mac OS X has malware just like Windows. As does iOS. You'll notice they no longer make claims about the Mac not getting viruses. Since Apple does not audit the source code of every application that comes through, they can only do the most cursory of tests. People have managed to successfully sneak forbidden things into the app store before (including a recent one that harvests your address book and sends spam to all your contacts).

Yes but there's absolutely no comparison in the shear number of Windows virues compared to iOS and OS X.
 

c3141hf

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 22, 2004
Messages
2,708
I simply see no signs that tablets are a fad at this point, no one looking at it honestly does. For one, they are far from new and I think they've reached the point of refinement that make them useful and enjoyable.



This is doable with Windows 7 tablets and Office 2010 64-bit today though not the best touch experience. With Office 2013 I would think that the experience would be better.



Photoshop users are one of the most loyal customer bases for Windows tablets today. That's a crowd that's REALLY stocked about Windows 8.



This everything you're describing is Windows 8's raison d'être. If you don't think that Windows 8 is suitble for dekstops I can't convience of that, only that I do use Windows 8 on a desktop for software development work and have never had a want or need to go use a Windows 7 desktop.



Yes but there's absolutely no comparison in the shear number of Windows virues compared to iOS and OS X.

1.You are confusing regular tablets with Tablet PCs. Don't ask me why they call them what they do, they just do.

Tablet - A portable, tablet-shaped personal computer running embedded grade hardware (usually ARM based). Small, thin, uses passive cooling and the only built-in method of input is touch.

Tablet PC - A portable, tablet-shaped personal computer running desktop/laptop grade hardware (usually x86 based) and a desktop/laptop operating system. Thicker, heavier, hotter, and more power hungry that tablets, often with active cooling and fans. Considerably more expensive than tablets (often four figures). Most Tablet PCs are laptops with a rotatable screen to allow it to used as a tablet.

2.There is more malware for Windows because there are more Windows users. Simple economics; if you are a spammer and want the most computers to send your spam, you are going to target the platform 90% of people use rather than the one that 5% use.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
1.You are confusing regular tablets with Tablet PCs. Don't ask me why they call them what they do, they just do.

Tablet - A portable, tablet-shaped personal computer running embedded grade hardware (usually ARM based). Small, thin, uses passive cooling and the only built-in method of input is touch.

Tablet PC - A portable, tablet-shaped personal computer running desktop/laptop grade hardware (usually x86 based) and a desktop/laptop operating system. Thicker, heavier, hotter, and more power hungry that tablets, often with active cooling and fans. Considerably more expensive than tablets (often four figures). Most Tablet PCs are laptops with a rotatable screen to allow it to used as a tablet.

This is why I hate the term tablet as it historically hasn't meant this. Indeed the first tablets that I used in the 90's didn't have touch, they we pen based and we didn't call them PCs. I general terns I can accept this but I think in a few months we're going to see devices that don't fit your classification well.

2.There is more malware for Windows because there are more Windows users. Simple economics; if you are a spammer and want the most computers to send your spam, you are going to target the platform 90% of people use rather than the one that 5% use.

I agree and it's one reason why I think a completely open Metro app model would be a disaster. Millions of people with brand new Windows 8 computers looking for cool Metro apps to download from wherever.
 

melteye

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 29, 2000
Messages
1,851
After using and hating Windows 8 Developer & Consumer Preview I gave this latest release a try and I doubt I'll be reinstalling Windows 7... I'm even starting to like Metro :-0

Browsing recipes in the "allrecipe" is much quicker aesthetically pleasing then the website.Neweggs app is also decent for a start. The map app is quite useful as well, I can load it up and find a location faster then using my browser... will be even more convenient when/if I ever have a tablet/phone using the interface.

The start screen used to become very cluttered after installing all my apps and now after less then a minute of "untagging" the start screen is quite clean and I can access everything quickly. I used to be the "start menu search" only type yet now many of my apps are laid out in one screen where I can locate them by memory... I'm becoming more productive with metro then I thought I could. The task manager and file transfer setup in Desktop mode are nice as well.

So... I guess I was wrong in my previous posts about Windows 8. At least for me it's increased the speed at which I can find and use information... my main home is Desktop mode but switching to Metro no longer seems obtrusive and foreign.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
The Newegg Metro app is very nice, much cleaner and concise than the web site and it looks great on a big screen.

The Start Screen is just as fast at launching apps as the Start Menu but the Start Screen does take more manual effort to keep organized, it would be nice if desktop apps would automatically create groups that correspond to the folders that they would create in the Start Menu. That said if you keep it organized it's nice to be able to arbitrarily move groups around as their importance changes.
 

c3141hf

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 22, 2004
Messages
2,708
Another reason not to buy Windows 8 :
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/07/10/protecting-user-files-with-file-history.aspx

Previous Versions has been completely gutted and replaced with something that has half of the functionality.

1.Previous Versions works without an external drive. File History does not.
2.Previous Versions keeps track of changes on all of your files. File History only keeps track of changes of certain files in certain locations.

In reading further, Microsoft has removed the ability to create persistent volume shadow copies for "performance reasons". In other words, they had to water it down so that it would run on slow tablet hardware, just like they did when they removed Aero. No wonder Windows 8 boots so fast; a lot of useful functionality has been completely gutted.

As for the other new desktop features :

1.I replaced my task manager with process explorer a long time ago.
2.Storage spaces is not new; this functionality has existed since Windows 2000 in the form of dynamic disks.
3.Multi-moniter support is nice; Microsoft is finally catching up to Linux (they've only had the ability to have a taskbar on multiple monitors for oh, about 15 years).

Now they just need to make it so that windows are not brought to the foreground when you click on them (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cW9d9RT-tz8 for what I am talking about).
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Another reason not to buy Windows 8 :
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/07/10/protecting-user-files-with-file-history.aspx

Previous Versions has been completely gutted and replaced with something that has half of the functionality.

1.Previous Versions works without an external drive. File History does not.
2.Previous Versions keeps track of changes on all of your files. File History only keeps track of changes of certain files in certain locations.

All directories in libraries are versioned. If you need other directories versioned, simply add them to your libraries. And honestly, what good is a backup of something made on the same drive as the source? Yes, File History forces the use of another drive, that's the POINT. However, when the backup drive isn't available changes are stilled versioned locally and that cache syncs automatically up when the backup drive is reconnected.

But the real beauty comes in the restoration. Backups are great and I can't count how many times I've seen backups that people couldn't use are restore. Simple hit the History button in a directory and you get a source control system like view on the file system and the ability to actually view every version of a file the history viewer and a the ability to restore any version to either the source location or a different one.

How many people actually used Previous Versions? The UI isn't that great. File History is drop dead easy and much more approachable. I've been using it for a few months now as it's a great way to keep up with stuff going the different Windows 8 test versions.

If one hates Windows 8 that's fine, but it's kind of silly to attack the thing that Windows 8 beats Windows 7 at easily, and the file storage, backup and recovery capabilities in Windows 8 are hands down superior to Windows 7.

As for the other new desktop features :

1.I replaced my task manager with process explorer a long time ago.
2.Storage spaces is not new; this functionality has existed since Windows 2000 in the form of dynamic disks.
3.Multi-moniter support is nice; Microsoft is finally catching up to Linux (they've only had the ability to have a taskbar on multiple monitors for oh, about 15 years).

Now they just need to make it so that windows are not brought to the foreground when you click on them (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cW9d9RT-tz8 for what I am talking about).

And when something in Windows 8 might actually be better, well no it's not because it was already in Windows though not really or Linux had it 1970.
 
Last edited:

c3141hf

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 22, 2004
Messages
2,708
All directories in libraries are versioned. If you need other directories versioned, simply add them to your libraries. And honestly, what good is a backup of something made on the same drive as the source? Yes, File History forces the use of another drive, that's the POINT. However, when the backup drive isn't available changes are stilled versioned locally and that cache syncs automatically up when the backup drive is reconnected.

But the real beauty comes in the restoration. Backups are great and I can't count how many times I've seen backups that people couldn't use are restore. Simple hit the History button in a directory and you get a source control system like view on the file system and the ability to actually view every version of a file the history viewer and a the ability to restore any version to either the source location or a different one.

How many people actually used Previous Versions? The UI isn't that great. File History is drop dead easy and much more approachable. I've been using it for a few months now as it's a great way to keep up with stuff going the different Windows 8 test versions.

If one hates Windows 8 that's fine, but it's kind of silly to attack the thing that Windows 8 beats Windows 7 at easily, and the file storage, backup and recovery capabilities in Windows 8 are hands down superior to Windows 7.

I'm not using previous versions as a backup against hardware failure, I'm using it as a way to be able to revert changes to files or to restore files that are inadvertently deleted.

I want every file on the disk versioned. Are you suggesting that I put my windows folder into a library? Why should I have to waste time doing that?

But Microsoft is dealing with hundreds of millions of users when it comes to Windows. Why do so many Metro opponents think they see something that Microsoft doesn't. Steven Sinofsky heard these arguments when he lead Office 2007. Different and controversial UIs are nothing new to him and indeed of all people on the world I'm sure he saw this coming. But I think he also can see past it and realize that has some belief that Metro will work on desktops and mice and keyboards for most people. Yes Microsoft makes mistakes, but it's not the first time they've done something that some vocal people said wouldn't work yet did.

This is exactly the kind of arrogance that I am talking about. Steven Sinofsky is an ivory tower elitist who has never worked a day in frontline IT. To people like Sinofsky, you are just a lowly user. To challenge the telemetry, the equivalent of the holy gospel, is tantamount to heresy. User feedback is irrelevant. We are doing it this way and you WILL like it.

To this day, I am still having to deal with frustrated users who cannot find the functions they need in Office 2007/Office 2010. If Steven Sinofsky had worked a single day in frontline IT, he would have realized that consistency is more important than trying to re-invent the wheel. If you want a completely new interface, release it as a separate product rather than an upgrade to an existing proudct; people using software expect incremental upgrades, not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
I'm not using previous versions as a backup against hardware failure, I'm using it as a way to be able to revert changes to files or to restore files that are inadvertently deleted.

I want every file on the disk versioned. Are you suggesting that I put my windows folder into a library? Why should I have to waste time doing that?

That's what a system backup is for.

This is exactly the kind of arrogance that I am talking about. Steven Sinofsky is an ivory tower elitist who has never worked a day in frontline IT. To people like Sinofsky, you are just a lowly user. To challenge the telemetry, the equivalent of the holy gospel, is tantamount to heresy. User feedback is irrelevant. We are doing it this way and you WILL like it.

Well me, who is Microsoft supposed to listen to? Sure, I'm just one out of 1.5 billion Windows users, in that large of a population anyone or even a groups of millions is lowly. You try to do the things that you think will satisfy the most you can. It wouldn't be really any different if you ran Windows development and were faced with resource constraints, budgets, timelines, shareholders and competitive pressures. You'd pick and chose you're battles like anyone.

To this day, I am still having to deal with frustrated users who cannot find the functions they need in Office 2007/Office 2010. If Steven Sinofsky had worked a single day in frontline IT, he would have realized that consistency is more important than trying to re-invent the wheel. If you want a completely new interface, release it as a separate product rather than an upgrade to an existing proudct; people using software expect incremental upgrades, not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

How many companies had a successful product and kept is consistent to the point that someone came around, did something fresh and new and put them out of business? Indeed isn't one of the criticisms leveled and Microsoft is that they are too slow to adapt and change and there products are tired and old and aren't updated quickly enough compared to companies like Apple and Google that many think are blowing right past Microsoft?
 

c3141hf

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 22, 2004
Messages
2,708
That's what a system backup is for.

Restoring from Previous Versions is faster than using a system backup.

Well me, who is Microsoft supposed to listen to? Sure, I'm just one out of 1.5 billion Windows users, in that large of a population anyone or even a groups of millions is lowly. You try to do the things that you think will satisfy the most you can. It wouldn't be really any different if you ran Windows development and were faced with resource constraints, budgets, timelines, shareholders and competitive pressures. You'd pick and chose you're battles like anyone.

They should listen to the people who actually deal with and work with end users.

How many companies had a successful product and kept is consistent to the point that someone came around, did something fresh and new and put them out of business? Indeed isn't one of the criticisms leveled and Microsoft is that they are too slow to adapt and change and there products are tired and old and aren't updated quickly enough compared to companies like Apple and Google that many think are blowing right past Microsoft?

Macs have been using the same interface since 1985. The changes since then have been in the form of layers that have been added on (such as the dock). They have never changed the UI as radically as 3.1 > 95 or 7 -> 8.

Even the "Launchpad" is nothing new; they had that back in the 90s with At Ease.
 

Wrench00

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 30, 2003
Messages
3,423
No it doesn't, however the general public has not seen even the betas of Windows 8 and none of has seen top line Metro apps or any new Windows 8 hardware. There's simply too many variables for anyone to conclude if Windows 8 will be useful or not a this and Metro, while maybe the biggest part of Windows 8, certainly isn't the only part.



The first thing that should be noted about Vista's failure is that it was commercially successful though obviously not to the degree that Microsoft would have liked and certainly Vista was a PR disaster.

And as much as people want to call Windows 2 Vista 2.0 the only parallel between the two products has been a vocal negative sentiment from some tech types. And Vista issues were far deeper than Windows 8. Drivers, performance, stability, compatibly issues with Vista were far worse then Windows 8 in it's testing phase. By most accounts that I've experienced personally and have read about Windows 8 has few issues with compatibility, drivers, stability and the performance is overall is better than Windows 7.

A much better comparison would be between Windows 8 and Office 2007. Two dominate products with long established UIs that hadn't changed in nearly two decades sporting dramatically different UIs from their prior versions with no built in way to go back to the old UI. The high level complaints between Windows 8 and Office 2007 are practically the same. Not as productive and efficient. Too big of change that users won't understand. Takes up too much space. If there's not an option to go back to the old UI the product will fail.

I guess you can call Vista commercial success. I guess selling Windows Vista COA is considered a success, since 99% non home users Downgraded with downgrade rights.
Even consumers avoiding geting windows vista pc's. I just don't see many of them around. I guess you can call that a commercial success. Its been and always be a flop thats why Vista has a short eol compared to xp and 7,.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Restoring from Previous Versions is faster than using a system backup.

Using Previous Versions though to deal with rolling back programs isn't necessarily a quick and easy thing to do.


They should listen to the people who actually deal with and work with end users.

Just because someone isn't doing exactly what you want doesn't mean that they aren't listening.

Macs have been using the same interface since 1985. The changes since then have been in the form of layers that have been added on (such as the dock). They have never changed the UI as radically as 3.1 > 95 or 7 -> 8.

Even the "Launchpad" is nothing new; they had that back in the 90s with At Ease.

But the Mac isn't Apple's flagship product and it's not meant to be a kitchen sink solution. For better or worse, the mantra of Widows has been to be a jack of trades OS and in the case of Windows that's actually worked better than the old saying goes about jacks of all trades.

Microsoft has for a long time seen tablets and touch as the future, long before this generation of mobile OS devices. Microsoft should have done this YEARS ago but was so worried about the blow back and fear of risk when it could just do another desktop version of Windows and print the money that they simply waited to long to do the things they new they had to do and never did. I'm not saying that Windows 8 is the best answer but Microsoft is in a LOT of trouble most people feel in the coming years in the mobile space and their lack luster efforts so far.

Microsoft simply isn't in the position to do the things it always has and have the success it has in doing that. It's now been forced to on more risk than I'm sure they're comfortable with but they need a game changer and they need it yesterday. Windows 8 may fail but another incremental desktop centric OS would have surely failed, at least in the effort to get something, anything going in the mobile space beyond laptops.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
I guess you can call Vista commercial success. I guess selling Windows Vista COA is considered a success, since 99% non home users Downgraded with downgrade rights.
Even consumers avoiding geting windows vista pc's. I just don't see many of them around. I guess you can call that a commercial success. Its been and always be a flop thats why Vista has a short eol compared to xp and 7,.

Wikimedia_OS_share_pie_chart.png


So has big of a failure as Vista was it is only eclipsed as a version by the two greatest selling OSes of all time almost three years after everyone should have dropped it like a hot potato when 7 came out.

This is why it's difficult to label Windows 8 as a failure at this point. Yes, the UI is controversial but it certainly doesn't seem to have the technical issues that Vista had.
 
D

Deleted whining member 223597

Guest
I thought iPads and iPhones both just run iOS....

Anyways, no I won't get it because I have nothing to gain as a gamer and nothing to gain in other areas either. Windows 9 it is.
 

DeathPrincess

Fully [H]
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
18,205
So has big of a failure as Vista was it is only eclipsed as a version by the two greatest selling OSes of all time almost three years after everyone should have dropped it like a hot potato when 7 came out.

This is why it's difficult to label Windows 8 as a failure at this point. Yes, the UI is controversial but it certainly doesn't seem to have the technical issues that Vista had.

That chart is useless to compared to actual real world sales of things. You don't know how many people they tested, and how accurate that data is, plus it's not every computer sold, it's a specific website.

1. Android phones outsell i type phones significantly...yet apparently they have a third of the userbase going by this chart...
2. Windows 7 sells 100x more copies than all the i smartphones sold ever, but only has 4x the usage...? :confused:

The only accurate part is probably the Linux stat. :D
As we know there are only 3 users of linux, that means that the whole chart was done with 180 people...
 

Numan

Gawd
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
798
To this day, I am still having to deal with frustrated users who cannot find the functions they need in Office 2007/Office 2010. If Steven Sinofsky had worked a single day in frontline IT, he would have realized that consistency is more important than trying to re-invent the wheel. If you want a completely new interface, release it as a separate product rather than an upgrade to an existing proudct; people using software expect incremental upgrades, not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Some people can't figure out stuff after 5 years, they will NEVER figure out anything new. They are perma-tards when it comes to simple adaptation or they are 65+ and are too set in their ways to give a damn. If people cannot figure out how to click the larger pastel blue square because they were used to clicking on the smaller bitmapped square then they need a helmet. Either they have learning issues or they cannot be bothered to learn simple things and would rather be angry that the world doesn't bend to their exact needs and no amount of retraining will do much because they simply don't want to.

If people cannot figure out "the new AOL" then they should have as much problems using an iThing because neither of them are difficult.
 

XOR != OR

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
11,549
Some people can't figure out stuff after 5 years, they will NEVER figure out anything new. They are perma-tards when it comes to simple adaptation or they are 65+ and are too set in their ways to give a damn. If people cannot figure out how to click the larger pastel blue square because they were used to clicking on the smaller bitmapped square then they need a helmet. Either they have learning issues or they cannot be bothered to learn simple things and would rather be angry that the world doesn't bend to their exact needs and no amount of retraining will do much because they simply don't want to.

If people cannot figure out "the new AOL" then they should have as much problems using an iThing because neither of them are difficult.
Never worked desktop support in IT, eh? I don't argue with your description, it's fairly accurate. Now, here's the kicker; you have to support 100 of them. A 1000 of them. You have to assist them in accomplishing their tasks. You can't tell them what you are really thinking, and you can't refuse ( short of refusing a paycheck of course ) to help them.

Oh sure, you can get frustrated. And you can recommend training programs to get everyone up to speed. Maybe you'd even be able to sell that to the decision maker, who'd see the benefit of a highly trained ( and fictitious ) staff. Maybe they'd get training, and what a let down that would be for you. Because NOW, instead of a highly functional user that only calls you for "real" issues, you have the same type of user, but they are trying to do the fancy stuff that you, yourself, rarely do. And damn, are they messing things up.

Welcome to IT. Drink early, drink often.
 

Numan

Gawd
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
798
Never worked desktop support in IT, eh? I don't argue with your description, it's fairly accurate. Now, here's the kicker; you have to support 100 of them. A 1000 of them. You have to assist them in accomplishing their tasks. You can't tell them what you are really thinking, and you can't refuse ( short of refusing a paycheck of course ) to help them.

Oh sure, you can get frustrated. And you can recommend training programs to get everyone up to speed. Maybe you'd even be able to sell that to the decision maker, who'd see the benefit of a highly trained ( and fictitious ) staff. Maybe they'd get training, and what a let down that would be for you. Because NOW, instead of a highly functional user that only calls you for "real" issues, you have the same type of user, but they are trying to do the fancy stuff that you, yourself, rarely do. And damn, are they messing things up.

Welcome to IT. Drink early, drink often.

Sounds....er, fun? Not really! :)

In my department (not large, under a dozen) I've become the 'goto guy' for all sorts of computer issues and most of them are usually small things somebody forgot the steps for or things that are, "Oh you HAVE to hit CTRL V to paste? I only use the mouse to do that!" and since I'm not in any form of help desk role I CAN politely tell them what I think. :D

I'm waiting for the incoming onslaught of questions for when we do upgrade to Windows 7 and let's face it, it's not nearly as big of a change/shock as Windows 8 is, sort of what I was thinking of when I rambled off my last reply. I'm sure a lot of enterprises won't be upgrading anytime if they just got on the Win7 train. I know this place isn't. Hell I'm stuck on XP with IE7!

I guess my TLDR version is morons gona be morons, haters gona hate and we shouldn't let that stop any sort of UI changes or advancements.

I think I wouldn't like Windows 8 if I didn't have a mousewheel as it scrolls horizontally on the Start screen. Scrolling the old school mouse way isn't nearly as painful in the RP as it was in the CP. The Desktop lets me pin everything like Win7 does so I'm quite content there. Win+i is fine for me to reset/shutdown. I guess the changes in Win8 don't irk me nearly as much as others and the irks I did have I've adapted to after using it for a day so they are as comfortable for me as the irks I've gotten used to in WinXP/Vista/7.
 

XOR != OR

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
11,549
I guess my TLDR version is morons gona be morons, haters gona hate and we shouldn't let that stop any sort of UI changes or advancements.
I don't care about the haters, but you absolutely must take into account your users ( morons ). Based on my experiences with users, I feel 8 is going to alienate them. But even that, itself, is fairly meaningless without options. The problem for MS is that users DO have a viable option; the mac. Apple makes a clean interface ( although it bugs me ) that many people like and that ( and this is the important bit ) offers them the desktop paradigm they expect.

I foresee Apple making some decent inroads when 8 is released. If they are smart, they'll drop their prices to be competitive with the low-mid range of PC hardware.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
I guess the changes in Win8 don't irk me nearly as much as others and the irks I did have I've adapted to after using it for a day so they are as comfortable for me as the irks I've gotten used to in WinXP/Vista/7.

What you've described was my experience. I simply have no idea what others are saying sometimes about their experiences in Windows 8 because it simply doesn't line up with how things work for me.

It's bizarre given the incredible advancement and changes in technology in just the last five years, smart phones, tablets, social networks, that a new UI is considered such an impossible thing for people to pick up. Millions of people seem to have adapted to much more change than this in recent years in the tech world.
 

XOR != OR

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
11,549
What you've described was my experience. I simply have no idea what others are saying sometimes about their experiences in Windows 8 because it simply doesn't line up with how things work for me.

It's bizarre given the incredible advancement and changes in technology in just the last five years, smart phones, tablets, social networks, that a new UI is considered such an impossible thing for people to pick up. Millions of people seem to have adapted to much more change than this in recent years in the tech world.
You run into this phenomena quite often in IT. It's nothing more than people holding different perspectives for different devices. Cell phones, tablets, ect..change. Fast. The phone you have now will not look like the phone you get next, nor the phone you had before. So people learn to expect this out of mobile technologies. Even with that expectation, people still grumble about it. However, the smart phone industry is still growing, so you can still reasonably expect your next smart phone to do neat things that the previous didn't. That helps blunt that edge.

Workstations are a different animal, however. Users hold the workstation to a more stable expectation. Especially in a corporate environment. They don't care about the underlying mechanics. They don't care about GUI changes. They care about accessing their applications with as little muss and fuss as possible. Windows 8 offers nothing to enhance their experience in this regard. Indeed, for most users, it will actually introduce more steps to get to their apps.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Windows 8 offers nothing to enhance their experience in this regard. Indeed, for most users, it will actually introduce more steps to get to their apps.

But there are no extra steps to launch apps in Windows 8 versus Windows 7 if they are pin to the taskbar in the case of desktop apps or the Start Screen.
 

XOR != OR

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
11,549
But there are no extra steps to launch apps in Windows 8 versus Windows 7 if they are pin to the taskbar or Start Screen.
Right, "if". I can only speak from my experience, but a vast majority of users launch applications from the desktop. Which means users will log on, then have to go to the desktop, then they can launch their apps.

I wouldn't even give good odds on the number of users that will change this habit when shown differently.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Right, "if". I can only speak from my experience, but a vast majority of users launch applications from the desktop. Which means users will log on, then have to go to the desktop, then they can launch their apps.

I wouldn't even give good odds on the number of users that will change this habit when shown differently.

Getting to the desktop is only one additional click or key press after initial boot up, from sleep or hibernation you simply go back to where you were. And if the application you want is pinned in the Start Screen and is a desktop then it's not any different. A lot of people would click on their main app like Outlook or whatever and go about their business.

I've been looks for all of these extra steps people talk about and in the context of launching and using desktop apps they just aren't there. Now granted when Metro apps are thrown into the mix there is the extra complexity of side navigation. This is where the main usability issues I think will be with Windows 8, the notion of Metro side by side yet separated from the desktop.
 

XOR != OR

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
11,549
Getting to the desktop is only one additional click or key press after initial boot up, from sleep or hibernation you simply go back to where you were. And if the application you want is pinned in the Start Screen and is a desktop then it's not any different. A lot of people would click on their main app like Outlook or whatever and go about their business.
I can only tell you what I've seen in my own users. One extra click would be bad enough ( no, not kidding. And yes, I wish I were ), but when you throw in to the mix that the start menu isn't graphical present on the desktop...a lot of people are going to be put out.

Let me give you an example of how my users use their computers. They turn it on. They log in. They double click on the appropriate desktop icon. They work in their app(s). They then shutdown the computer ( 50/50 on this one, as some users do it religiously and others never shutdown. ).

Most users position desktop icons in a way that makes sense to them. Add/remove a single icon, they notice the gap. Rename one of their primary icons, they can't find it.

These are the kinds of users we're talking about here. A lot of this is probably muscle memory for them, so ANY change, no matter how small, will be rebelled against.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
These are the kinds of users we're talking about here. A lot of this is probably muscle memory for them, so ANY change, no matter how small, will be rebelled against.

I've been doing business software development for 20 years and while I've seen and heard plenty of complaints about IT changes (introducing change is what I do for living) I can't think of a single person I've worked with over the years, no matter how resistant to change they might have been, is as brittle to it as you're describing.

I work for a big bank and right now the amount of change businesses here are having to deal with is staggering. The Start Menu would be the least of it.

The people you are describing sound like they'd have a stroke if the roll of toilet paper changed.
 

mdmcaf

Weaksauce
Joined
Jan 23, 2011
Messages
68
I feel stuck in the unfortunate situation of having to get it (luckily I have a TechNet subscription) so that I'll be able to support people that use Windows 8. I'll probably install it on my laptop to get used to the interface and features and such...but I don't plan on putting it on my main desktop.
 
Top