Windows 8 'bad' for desktop users - Gartner's one-word review

metro does not belong in the corprate world or enterprise world, they certainly want people to use the "core" versions of their OS.. since metro on a server OS is a joke....
 
I installed the RC on my spare PC, and from what I have seen so far The Metro crap is pure BS like total BS no idea what they are thinking putting that in a desktop, for tablets it seems fine. But aside from Metro and no Start Menu which it seems you can just download a app for that the core of win 8 does seem good, like they took the core of Win 7 and made it even better.

I just hope there will be hacks soon enough to just avoid Metro. For now I will stick with Win 7 and might grab a copy of Win 8 to replace WHS

but yea Man Metro wtf are they thinking heh No idea who this Gartner guy is but if hes a well known guy hopefully Microsoft will listen to him and make it so that Metro on desktop is a option
 
I don't think the switch to Metro on Server is to force people to core, because that would mean even Microsoft knows their UI sucks, but I agree Metro has no place in an Enterprise environment other than on tablets. I think Microsoft is just stupid. Every other OS they release seems to make huge blunders (maybe they have 2 rotating OS design teams?), so they are due for one.

I'm just patiently waiting for the employee leaks to start happening, after Windows 8 inevitably fails, when employee's say "I told them so."
 
I'm glad my tech job has (and will have) 0 Windows 8 users; we already get enough calls on our corporate software. :)
 
Yet again, nobody actually explains why its bad on the desktop. I often laugh inside when someone starts talking about why they don't like Windows 8 on the desktop and nobody can EVER tell me a reason that makes any sense. Most of them just say "well I don't want the start menu to be full screen".

And then you have people who post the same shit in every windows 8 thread about every other Windows version sucking which isn't true.

Savi, maybe you could explain why Windows 8 is bad? Instead of saying its BS, crap, shit, wtf, etc. Its become like a running joke at this point.
 
chinesepiratefood said:
Savi, maybe you could explain why Windows 8 is bad? Instead of saying its BS, crap, shit, wtf, etc. Its become like a running joke at this point.
Click to expand...

Theregister link posted provides some reasons from someone employed by pretty well respected company. Not saying that they are always right or that their's is the only opinion but as I posted I've never seen such a negative assessment from an Enterprise perspective.
 
The Register is again full of crap (seriously, what the hell). Here's the actual Gartner report that they link to:

http://blogs.gartner.com/gunnar-berger/windows-8-part-1-a-business-decision/

Sounds pretty positive to me.

Here's a link to the aforementioned third chapter: http://blogs.gartner.com/gunnar-berger/windows-8-part-3-as-seen-through-the-eyes-of-a-desktop-user/

The quote about "in a word: bad" appears nowhere. His main complaints center around discoverability of corner UI (something that depends on training and marketing, neither of which is in place in the Consumer Preview) and access over RDP (existing remote solutions do require some minor changes to make them more usable with Win8, chiefly forwarding the Windows key, but that's something that will come in time and again, isn't in place in this pre-release state)
 
"The fact is most enterprises are still trying to get to Windows 7 and few enterprises are ready for Windows 8.”

And when's the last time enterprise upgraded for every version of a new operating system? Everyone already knew business was not going to adopt W8 in any meaningful numbers.

Bad story is bad.
 
chinesepiratefood said:
Yet again, nobody actually explains why its bad on the desktop. I often laugh inside when someone starts talking about why they don't like Windows 8 on the desktop and nobody can EVER tell me a reason that makes any sense. Most of them just say "well I don't want the start menu to be full screen".

And then you have people who post the same shit in every windows 8 thread about every other Windows version sucking which isn't true.

Savi, maybe you could explain why Windows 8 is bad? Instead of saying its BS, crap, shit, wtf, etc. Its become like a running joke at this point.
Click to expand...

I never said Win 8 itself was bad just Metro, :) Basically what Microsoft did is make there own version of a mobile OS such as IOS or Android, which for mobile hardware it looks to be decent to good. But they force desktop users to use a touch OS with a mouse and keyboard, yes the desktop is still there but it is hidden, No start menu means having to take time going thorugh a few pages of Icons to find the right one. its just a mess to navagate. Took me about 5 mins to find out were the power button was, just to restart the PC

so yea the core of Win 8 looks to be good just being forced to navagate a mobile OS with a mouse and keyboard sucks balls. Will spend some more time with it because it does seem to be a good replacement for WHS, I need to do more testing on Storage Spaces though but for my Main PC will just stick with Win 7

does that answer your question?

haileris said:
Gartner is a technology research organisation - pretty famous for their magic quandrants.

http://www.gartner.com/technology/home.jsp
Click to expand...

ah I see thank you :)
 
haileris said:
Theregister link posted provides some reasons from someone employed by pretty well respected company. Not saying that they are always right or that their's is the only opinion but as I posted I've never seen such a negative assessment from an Enterprise perspective.
Click to expand...

The edge UIs are not immediately discoverable, but saying Windows 8 is bad on a desktop because as Arainach mentioned some RDP software may need to be updated to better support Windows 8 is insane.

Windows 8 is insignificant in enterprise, and it has nothing to do with Metro, it is because businesses upgrade very slowly and many are just now upgrading to Windows 7 from XP. Windows 8 was NEVER in the enterprise upgrade timeline, and Microsoft knows this.

By the way, the windows key does register in remote Windows if you maximize the RDP client. (using the Windows Remote desktop app), and even in a remote system once you are familiar with it is quite easy to bring up the charms menu full screen or windowed.
 
Savi said:
they force desktop users to use a touch OS with a mouse and keyboard, yes the desktop is still there but it is hidden,
Click to expand...

It's a single button, and (IIRC) the first one you see on a fresh install. In my time with W8, I've spent maybe 5 minutes in Metro total?

Took me about 5 mins to find out were the power button was, just to restart the PC
Click to expand...

Push the hardware button, wait for shutdown, push again.
 
Savi said:
I never said Win 8 itself was bad just Metro, :) Basically what Microsoft did is make there own version of a mobile OS such as IOS or Android, which for mobile hardware it looks to be decent to good. But they force desktop users to use a touch OS with a mouse and keyboard, yes the desktop is still there but it is hidden, No start menu means having to take time going thorugh a few pages of Icons to find the right one. its just a mess to navagate. Took me about 5 mins to find out were the power button was, just to restart the PC
Click to expand...

1. Use search, complaining about productivity and then performing an act in the least productive way possible doesn't make sense.
2. The desktop is not hidden, there is a tile that says desktop.
3. Finding items on the start screen is as fast or faster than the start menu. The start menu can be very cumbersome to navigate because except for the pinned apps everything else is in folder hierarchy, this is slow because in many cases it will take MORE clicks to open the start menu and find an app in W7 than it does in W8. That is also due in part to the fact that there is no standard followed by developers on arrangement of items in the start menu, 1 dev may have 1 folder, while another has 3 or 4. Last thing on this point - you can pin more items on the start screen than you could in the start menu so there is less scrolling required than in the start menu, especially if you enable the smaller tiles option.
4. You are right, the power options are in a different location than in W7....so what? You now know where it is located. (As if clicking 'Start' to Shutdown makes any sense).
 
chinesepiratefood said:
1. Use search, complaining about productivity and then performing an act in the least productive way possible doesn't make sense.
2. The desktop is not hidden, there is a tile that says desktop.
3. Finding items on the start screen is as fast or faster than the start menu. The start menu can be very cumbersome to navigate because except for the pinned apps everything else is in folder hierarchy, this is slow because in many cases it will take MORE clicks to open the start menu and find an app in W7 than it does in W8. That is also due in part to the fact that there is no standard followed by developers on arrangement of items in the start menu, 1 dev may have 1 folder, while another has 3 or 4. Last thing on this point - you can pin more items on the start screen than you could in the start menu so there is less scrolling required than in the start menu, especially if you enable the smaller tiles option.
4. You are right, the power options are in a different location than in W7....so what? You now know where it is located. (As if clicking 'Start' to Shutdown makes any sense).
Click to expand...

And none of this (except Start screen showing more tiles) explains why Metro on desktop provides anything of value. At best its a hindrance, at worse it totally kills productivity. The old Start menu has a big advantage, it doesn't take up my whole screen when I'm looking for an app. I don't need a full screen context switch while I'm playing video to look for an app.
 
Savi said:
I installed the RC on my spare PC, and from what I have seen so far The Metro crap is pure BS like total BS no idea what they are thinking putting that in a desktop, for tablets it seems fine. But aside from Metro and no Start Menu which it seems you can just download a app for that the core of win 8 does seem good, like they took the core of Win 7 and made it even better.

I just hope there will be hacks soon enough to just avoid Metro. For now I will stick with Win 7 and might grab a copy of Win 8 to replace WHS

but yea Man Metro wtf are they thinking heh No idea who this Gartner guy is but if hes a well known guy hopefully Microsoft will listen to him and make it so that Metro on desktop is a option
Click to expand...

This has to be stupidest reasoning then. My bread and butter is fixing fucked up servers and that with GUI's I could just imagine the disaster zones that core servers will be.
 
MrCrispy said:
And none of this (except Start screen showing more tiles) explains why Metro on desktop provides anything of value. At best its a hindrance, at worse it totally kills productivity. The old Start menu has a big advantage, it doesn't take up my whole screen when I'm looking for an app. I don't need a full screen context switch while I'm playing video to look for an app.
Click to expand...

4 posts explaining the benefits:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/03/evolving-the-start-menu.aspx
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/04/designing-the-start-screen.aspx
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/11/reflecting-on-your-comments-on-the-start-screen.aspx
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/18/designing-search-for-the-start-screen.aspx
 
Except they based those stupid metrics on Home user muppets. Because any admin worth his salt will disable MS bullshit spying.

If search was such a heavily used feature why not get rid of the bullshit metro and just put a search bar right into the taskbar?
 
Last edited:
MrCrispy said:
And none of this (except Start screen showing more tiles) explains why Metro on desktop provides anything of value. At best its a hindrance, at worse it totally kills productivity. The old Start menu has a big advantage, it doesn't take up my whole screen when I'm looking for an app. I don't need a full screen context switch while I'm playing video to look for an app.
Click to expand...

Better utilization of screen space, more search results. On the desktop provides a massive new avenue for app developers to better distribute their apps. Users that only use their computers for consumption the Metro environment will solve most concerns with viruses and malware for those users.I have many many many times said that if for instance you are reading something off the screen and you want to search for it (assuming you don't want to copy and paste) then full screen search can be a hindrance.

As for searching for an app while playing video, you are right you cannot do that but that is a rare occurrence for most people. Further - after the 1 second of searching when your app launches you won't be able to watch the video anyway, unless of course you can actually use said app without actually looking...

Is Windows 7 better for watching video while you search for apps to launch? Yes. But using that as the reason Metro sucks is insane. At worst, W8 is equal to W7 in productivity, at best (depending on usage habits, a user's familiarity with keyboard navigation, etc) it can be more productive.

And that is of course pretending that W8 didn't receive any improvements to the desktop environment (which it did).
 
chinesepiratefood said:
Better utilization of screen space, more search results. On the desktop provides a massive new avenue for app developers to better distribute their apps. Users that only use their computers for consumption the Metro environment will solve most concerns with viruses and malware for those users.I have many many many times said that if for instance you are reading something off the screen and you want to search for it (assuming you don't want to copy and paste) then full screen search can be a hindrance.

As for searching for an app while playing video, you are right you cannot do that but that is a rare occurrence for most people. Further - after the 1 second of searching when your app launches you won't be able to watch the video anyway, unless of course you can actually use said app without actually looking...

Is Windows 7 better for watching video while you search for apps to launch? Yes. But using that as the reason Metro sucks is insane. At worst, W8 is equal to W7 in productivity, at best (depending on usage habits, a user's familiarity with keyboard navigation, etc) it can be more productive.

And that is of course pretending that W8 didn't receive any improvements to the desktop environment (which it did).
Click to expand...


Haha assuming Copy and Paste not used. LOL

Why not just stick search on taskbar and have a dynamically expendalbe window with results that doesn't cover your entire screen with Metro especially when you are going between multiple documents or programs and you need to cut/copy and paste.
 
Most people are looking at Windows 8 as an either or proposition, desktops OR tablets, keyboards and mice OR touch OR pen and people who look at it like that are missing the point. Windows 8 is desktop AND tablet, its keyboards and mice AND touch AND pen. It’s about all these form factors and input methods working together and side by side or picking an input method and application that work best for the task at hand in the current environment.

100_0715%202.jpg


When I started to play around with the above configuration last week I recalled that remark that Tim Cook made about Windows 8 a few months ago comparing it a “Refrigerator-Toaster”. After using this “tabletstation” setup for a few days I and an epiphany on me one day when opening my refrigerator. I noticed that on the left of my refrigerator was a freezer. In fact every refrigerator in all the kitchens in all the places I’ve lived since a child was a hybrid machine, some combination of a refrigerator and freezer. Yes, there are standalone freezers and refrigerator but I say it’s a pretty safe bet the in the overwhelming majority of a homes in industrialized nations what most people call a refrigerator is actually a hybrid device.

While Metro isn’t perfect it works well on the desktop and it will improve and the division between what tablets are and PCs are and the line between touch and mouse and all of these things is simply going to blur. Apple is trying to blur the line with iOS and the iPad and touting it as a productivity device, how true that is is another story, but every day I see more and accounts and apps that are about developing the iPad into a productivity platform.
 
heatlesssun said:
Most people are looking at Windows 8 as an either or proposition, desktops OR tablets, keyboards and mice OR touch OR pen and people who look at it like that are missing the point. Windows 8 is desktop AND tablet, its keyboards and mice AND touch AND pen. It’s about all these form factors and input methods working together and side by side or picking an input method and application that work best for the task at hand in the current environment.
Click to expand...

Microsoft is missing the point. The one size shoe fits all philosophy isn't going to suit everyone using different platforms, nor will be a pleasurable experience for them.

You can't fit a round peg into a square hole.
 
nOrVow said:
Microsoft is missing the point. The one size shoe fits all philosophy isn't going to suit everyone using different platforms, nor will be a pleasurable experience for them.
Click to expand...

Some people say this like it's some law of physics. In any case it's pretty subjective and the reality is that few people have actually used Windows 8 in a hybrid fashion. I don't know how one can state how pleasurable others will find something that they never seen let alone used.

If Windows 8 isn't successful, then so be it. But it represent a completely different product to the market than currently exists and it is a logical thing for Microsoft to do beyond creating yet another standalone tablet OS, there's plenty of those kinds of devices in the market today.
 
When I said 'no value to Metro on desktop', I wasn't referring to the Start menu, but to Metro style full screen apps. The decision to force Metro apps to be FS only was a bad one, it just forces everyone to use an app model designed for tablets.

Everything MS is doing in Win 8 is for Metro. The latest post on the B8 blog is about graphical improvements, and its for Metro apps. They are simply ignoring the traditional desktop and desktop users. Why not allow people to run rich Metro apps in windows? Why not allow choice instead of dumbing down an entire OS just so you can demo it running on tablets?

MS will never learn. They tried the 'every device is a Windows pc' and forced the Start menu and tiny UI controls on a mobile phone in Windows CE. Now they are doing the opposite with 'every device is a tablet/phone' nonsense.
 
MrCrispy said:
When I said 'no value to Metro on desktop', I wasn't referring to the Start menu, but to Metro style full screen apps. The decision to force Metro apps to be FS only was a bad one, it just forces everyone to use an app model designed for tablets.
Click to expand...

Use desktop applications.

Everything MS is doing in Win 8 is for Metro. The latest post on the B8 blog is about graphical improvements, and its for Metro apps. They are simply ignoring the traditional desktop and desktop users.
Click to expand...

W8 has made changes to the desktop, but for whatever reason they are not advertising those as much as they have the Metro stuff. One of the more obvious things I can think of is the changes they have made to multi-display desktops. Having gone back to W7 due to stability concerns, this is one feature I miss on a daily basis.

Why not allow people to run rich Metro apps in windows? Why not allow choice instead of dumbing down an entire OS just so you can demo it running on tablets?
Click to expand...

Hold this thought.

MS will never learn. They tried the 'every device is a Windows pc' and forced the Start menu and tiny UI controls on a mobile phone in Windows CE. Now they are doing the opposite with 'every device is a tablet/phone' nonsense.
Click to expand...

So what you want is every device to be a tablet? This statement is in direct opposition to what you've just said.

You're getting two completely different envronments. Desktop and Metro, and depending upon what you want to do, you get the best of both. If you're on a tablet, you can stay in Metro 90% of the time and still have the flexibility to go to the desktop if you need to. Likewise, if you're on a desktop and only want basic computing, you can go to Metro and get that.

The same way you don't want the Metro environment, the same UI concepts you get in Metro would carry over into windowed applications rendering them a point of contention. Keep Metro stuff in Metro and desktop stuff on the Desktop.

Honestly, the only thing I think MS missed the boat on with W8 is the fact that I can't boot directly into the desktop, I HAVE to boot into Metro so that 3 seconds later I'll click the Desktop button and do what I need to.
 
Last edited:
MrCrispy said:
When I said 'no value to Metro on desktop', I wasn't referring to the Start menu, but to Metro style full screen apps. The decision to force Metro apps to be FS only was a bad one, it just forces everyone to use an app model designed for tablets.
Click to expand...

But most people run even desktop apps full screen the majority of the time and people switch been them.

MrCrispy said:
Everything MS is doing in Win 8 is for Metro. The latest post on the B8 blog is about graphical improvements, and its for Metro apps.
Click to expand...

This is incorrect. The demos they show in the demo are desktop apps. You couldn't really compare performance increases over Windows 7 using Metro apps.

MrCrispy said:
They are simply ignoring the traditional desktop and desktop users. Why not allow people to run rich Metro apps in windows? Why not allow choice instead of dumbing down an entire OS just so you can demo it running on tablets?
Click to expand...

Metro apps have different goals than desktop apps. They have tighter security, are smaller and less power hungry than desktop apps.
 
BigJayDogg3 said:
You're getting two completely different envronments. Desktop and Metro, and depending upon what you want to do, you get the best of both. If you're on a tablet, you can stay in Metro 90% of the time and still have the flexibility to go to the desktop if you need to. Likewise, if you're on a desktop and only want basic computing, you can go to Metro and get that.
Click to expand...

This is the beauty of Windows 8 and it really does take hardware that most people don't have to appreciate. When people start to get their hands on devices like the Surface this power of using whatever program with what ever input method becomes much clearer.

BigJayDogg3 said:
Honestly, the only thing I think MS missed the boat on with W8 is the fact that I can't boot directly into the desktop, I HAVE to boot into Metro so that 3 seconds later I'll click the Desktop button and do what I need to.
Click to expand...

But this only happens on a cold boot and there's just no reason for most people to do that much these days.
 
chinesepiratefood said:
Yet again, nobody actually explains why its bad on the desktop.
.
.
Savi, maybe you could explain why Windows 8 is bad? Instead of saying its BS, crap, shit, wtf, etc. Its become like a running joke at this point.
Click to expand...

People HAVE been explaining it to you ad-nauseum for the past couple of months, which leads to the same arguments over and over and over and over and over and over again. And so, here we go again, you goading someone to 'explain" what's so bad, only to watch you reiterate how wonderful Windows 8 actually is.
 
maw said:
People HAVE been explaining it to you ad-nauseum for the past couple of months, which leads to the same arguments over and over and over and over and over and over again. And so, here we go again, you goading someone to 'explain" what's so bad, only to watch you reiterate how wonderful Windows 8 actually is.
Click to expand...

I think what he means is that people will say something "Metro is too jarring" or "Metro is too inefficient with a mouse and keyboard". And people like us will say something like "You get used to it and when you do it's not jarring and just as efficient with a mouse and keyboard."

It's really just all opinion and what you're willing and able to adjust to.
 
BigJayDogg3 said:
Use desktop applications.

Honestly, the only thing I think MS missed the boat on with W8 is the fact that I can't boot directly into the desktop, I HAVE to boot into Metro so that 3 seconds later I'll click the Desktop button and do what I need to.
Click to expand...

Except Windows 8 also boots faster than 7. For me the 3 seconds are more than compensated for :)
 
Microsoft first tried to shoehorn a Desktop OS (Windows XP/7) onto Tablets. Miserable Failure.

Now Microsoft is trying to shoehorn a Tablet OS onto Desktops. It is very clear to me that this is also a Miserable Failure.

Ballmer should be fired. Really, he should. This whole debacle indicates clearly that Microsoft has done ZERO useability studies on Windows 8 with Desktop/Laptop computer users.

Shareholders should be very, very pissed right now. Microsoft has basically three things that keep it alive. Windows, Office and Servers. They have effectively killed 33% of their market value.

I'll say it again. Ballmer should be fired. He allowed this. He is responsible.

To Clarify: I'm speaking of the OS's at the Interface level. I like what's under the hood of Windows 8. If only it didn't have such an ugly, inefficient hood.
 
Last edited:
bigdogchris said:
I don't think the switch to Metro on Server is to force people to core, because that would mean even Microsoft knows their UI sucks, but I agree Metro has no place in an Enterprise environment other than on tablets. I think Microsoft is just stupid. Every other OS they release seems to make huge blunders (maybe they have 2 rotating OS design teams?), so they are due for one.

I'm just patiently waiting for the employee leaks to start happening, after Windows 8 inevitably fails, when employee's say "I told them so."
Click to expand...

I really don't understand this push for Core at all. Why the hell would you want to make things harder?

May as well go back to Novell.
 
chinesepiratefood said:
Yet again, nobody actually explains why its bad on the desktop. I often laugh inside when someone starts talking about why they don't like Windows 8 on the desktop and nobody can EVER tell me a reason that makes any sense. Most of them just say "well I don't want the start menu to be full screen".

And then you have people who post the same shit in every windows 8 thread about every other Windows version sucking which isn't true.

Savi, maybe you could explain why Windows 8 is bad? Instead of saying its BS, crap, shit, wtf, etc. Its become like a running joke at this point.
Click to expand...

Come on man. The reasons are pretty damned clear by now. Exactly WTF are you after?

Just read what people are saying. You don't need an Executive Summary.
 
TechLarry said:
I really don't understand this push for Core at all. Why the hell would you want to make things harder?

May as well go back to Novell.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. Configuring all the settings and features on a server is something the GUI helps with tremendously. I don't mind dropping to CLI for a few esoteric settings, but the thought of doing all of the needed settings and maintenance of my web server using only Powershell is just.. ugh!
 
TechLarry said:
This whole debacle indicates clearly that Microsoft has done ZERO useability studies on Windows 8 with Desktop/Laptop computer users.
Click to expand...

heatlesssun said:
I think what he means is that people will say something "Metro is too jarring" or "Metro is too inefficient with a mouse and keyboard". And people like us will say something like "You get used to it and when you do it's not jarring and just as efficient with a mouse and keyboard."

It's really just all opinion and what you're willing and able to adjust to.
Click to expand...

*ahem*
 
maw said:
My thoughts exactly. Configuring all the settings and features on a server is something the GUI helps with tremendously. I don't mind dropping to CLI for a few esoteric settings, but the thought of doing all of the needed settings and maintenance of my web server using only Powershell is just.. ugh!
Click to expand...

I've had the (dis) pleasure of setting up a couple of Core Hyper-V machines for a cluster - absolute nightmare full of half documented steps (at the time anyway).

The reason is partly because of memory footprint and the desire to show that Windows isn't bloated. Security is also part of the reason. Also probably an admiring glance to the ease in which you can chain CLI commands together in nix systems. But I agree I think they are forgetting what a core Windows strength - it was accessible. I bloody hate powershell - Exchange configuration takes me twice as long as before I am sure!

In theory you should be able to use remote GUI tools pointed at the server host. Assuming its network isn't crapped out of course :)
 
heatlesssun said:
I think what he means is that people will say something "Metro is too jarring" or "Metro is too inefficient with a mouse and keyboard". And people like us will say something like "You get used to it and when you do it's not jarring and just as efficient with a mouse and keyboard."

It's really just all opinion and what you're willing and able to adjust to.
Click to expand...

In an Enterprise, the desktop really has one function. To get to your apps such that you can create / amend / delete data. If its harder its bad for a business. If its different then one must weigh up the productivity gains to be made to move to adjust. This is half of the arguement against the adoption of Linux - the retraining on the new OS and apps. Maybe this is part of the reason why Mac is being talked about now in the Enterprise - if you are gonna need to adopt why not go for it big time, and btw Office is available so no retraining exercise there. There are EA's I know that would argue why a business even needs all this fancy cr@p - simple screen with icons and a mouse. Get to your apps. Work :)

Its certainly going to be interesting times. Away from Metro I see some nice improvements in SMB but is there anything compelling?
 
BigJayDogg3 said:
"The fact is most enterprises are still trying to get to Windows 7 and few enterprises are ready for Windows 8.”

And when's the last time enterprise upgraded for every version of a new operating system? Everyone already knew business was not going to adopt W8 in any meaningful numbers.

Bad story is bad.
Click to expand...

Yep. The corporate world tends to skip versions of the desktop OSes.

Windows NT 4.0 - Heavily used
Windows 2000 - Found a lot of use on the server side and some on the desktop, but not nearly as much as Windows XP.
Windows XP - Dominated the corporate environment for a very long time.
Windows Vista - Most businesses skipped this one entirely
Windows 7 - Seeing a fair amount of adoption as XP ages out.
Windows 8 - Will most likely be skipped. Businesses will wait for all the issues to get sorted out and the interface to get overhauled in Windows 9.
 
Dan_D said:
Yep. The corporate world tends to skip versions of the desktop OSes.

Windows NT 4.0 - Heavily used
Windows 2000 - Found a lot of use on the server side and some on the desktop, but not nearly as much as Windows XP.
Windows XP - Dominated the corporate environment for a very long time.
Windows Vista - Most businesses skipped this one entirely
Windows 7 - Seeing a fair amount of adoption as XP ages out.
Windows 8 - Will most likely be skipped. Businesses will wait for all the issues to get sorted out and the interface to get overhauled in Windows 9.
Click to expand...

My last 2 clients (150k seats, 15k seats) were looking NOT to skip, because they felt the uplift required in making the jump created such a massive technology investment and business change program (forklift approach) as opposed to the mantra of continual change to an agreed release plan. Whether that plan survives future internal review or indeed if that is representative of today's thinking I don't know (as per my last post they might change their mind if the level of change is not balanced out by the advantages in productivity, mobility or otherwise that the new product offers).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top