Windows 8 Still Behind Vista In Market Share

[Bamboo]

When getting my taxes done this year my tax lady was getting frustrated. I asked if everything was O.K.. She stated she was using a new computer with windows 8 on it and that she hated it.

I laughed.

 

[ManofGod]

Microsoft is one of the worst offenders when it comes to file format cross compatibility. I can take a document I wrote in LibreOffice on my Linux system and open it just fine on my Windows system and if saved to a .doc or .xls can open it on those with LibreOffice or MSOffice. But MS decided to switch to .docx and .xlsx that won't even open on older versions of their own software. There are standard formats put forth by a standard format committee but MS doesn't want to use them.

Cross platform compatibility could be occurring right now if software vendors didn't have a sick up their butt about wanting their files in a proprietary format. It is all about money, not improving technology and making progress for those who need to use it.

The difference in Operating Systems and Applications should be more about how it handles the data and what the interface is like, while making the output files all in a cross platform format. That way users can choose the best hardware/software platform that fits their needs while not having to worry about being able to access their files or another person's files. Right now many are locked into Windows and MSOffice simply because they need to read the files sent to them by a customer or service provider. We had to upgrade MSOffice at work simple because people were sending us files in the newer format, not because it enhanced what we could do with them. It doesn't take much to work with a simple spreadsheet or word processing document but when you can't even open it without getting an invalid format error it is just frustrating. I save my spreadsheets at work in .xls format because I have customers that still run on older MSOffice versions.

Changing things like formats and GUIs just for the sake of making something different is like if Ford decided to put the accelerator pedal on the left in all new cars starting next year. It doesn't make the car work any differently but it would sure make them more difficult to drive after so many years of having it on the right side. Forcing Metro UI on everyone simply because it matches phones and tablets is like forcing the US to switch to driving on the left side of the road simply because they do it in Brittan.

So, instead of downloading the free Microsoft Compatibility pack for MS Office, you decided to upgrade all your computers to the latest MS Office. Mmmmmk......

 

[ManofGod]

When getting my taxes done this year my tax lady was getting frustrated. I asked if everything was O.K.. She stated she was using a new computer with windows 8 on it and that she hated it.

I laughed.

So, did you offer to help her or just simply laugh?

 

[heatlesssun]

Microsoft is one of the worst offenders when it comes to file format cross compatibility. I can take a document I wrote in LibreOffice on my Linux system and open it just fine on my Windows system and if saved to a .doc or .xls can open it on those with LibreOffice or MSOffice. But MS decided to switch to .docx and .xlsx that won't even open on older versions of their own software. There are standard formats put forth by a standard format committee but MS doesn't want to use them.

It’s not uncommon for newer versions of software to implement new file formats that aren’t backwards compatible with older versions of that software. Whenever it comes standards there’s always politics involved and there were always conflicting stories about OOXML and other proposed standards. At any rate OOXML is an open standard that anyone can implement and it is certainly better than the proprietary binary formats that Office used and most modern office automation suites support OOXML. And there is a compatibility layer for Office 2003 to use the OOXML formats.

 

[Red Falcon]

So, instead of downloading the free Microsoft Compatibility pack for MS Office, you decided to upgrade all your computers to the latest MS Office. Mmmmmk......

lol, that's what I was thinking.
We did this when Office 2007 was still very new on the market, and absolutely no one like the interface.

I will say this though, learning the new interface for Office 2007/2010 was well worth it, as it was far more efficient than the classic toolbars from Office 2003 on back.
This, however, is not the case with the move from Win 7 to Win 8.

Yes, the native Modern UI GUI in Win 8 is fast and efficient, as long as one is using a tablet or touchscreen device.
For those who are using keyboards and mice, though, you're all fucked!

 

[Red Falcon]

So, did you offer to help her or just simply laugh?

He's the customer, and last I checked, that's not his job.

 

[ManofGod]

So, since when does anything have to be a persons job in order to help someone?

 

[heatlesssun]

Ubuntu wasn't even released until late 2004.
You really shouldn't talk about Linux, you know absolutely nothing about it.

Linux has evolved leaps and bounds compared to what it was in 2001.
The GUI in Windows has changed, along with some other features (about damn time it caught up with the 21st century), but it's still using that same shitty registry and still has many of the flaws it had in 2001, and is easily just as breakable.

Bad analogy, use something else to compare Windows to, not Linux/UNIX.

The point was who uses legacy versions of desktop Linux anywhere near as old as XP. When it comes to legacy support Microsoft's timelines for that support are eons compared to much of the industry. For a specific desktop OS version to be supported for 13 years is remarkable, it will probably never happen again for any other version of a client OS.

 

[odditory]

Just because you people are unwilling to learn the new UI (and keyboard shortcuts) doesn't make it bad .

Just because people learn it doesn't mean its more usable or efficient than before, especially on a non touch device (which is most PC's). The more people make these kinds of blind statements the more theyre polarizing and turning off even longtime Windows users right along with Microsoft. Youre not helping your cause. Eye rolling doesn't bring people together.

My PC is not a tablet. My PC is not a smartphone. There is less eye travel using a start menu to find programs, there is less cognitive overhead, the fact the start menu is an overlay means not having to lose context and focus versus an abrupt desktop> start screen> desktop transition.

Platform dictates UI. UI doesn't dictate platform. The longer MS insists on trying to take a shortcut into the mobile space with the fever dream of riding to glory on the back of the installed desktop base, the more time and money and opportunity they squander.

Now was not the time for Microsoft to be polarizing.

 

[Red Falcon]

So, since when does anything have to be a persons job in order to help someone?

Since I said so, damn it!

The point was who uses legacy versions of desktop Linux anywhere near as old as XP.

Not many, and do you know why?
Because the Linux kernel and GUIs moved the fuck on with the rest of technology, while XP remained in the dark ages with the exact same functionality, minus some slight tweaks here and there for "security".

When it comes to legacy support Microsoft's timelines for that support are eons compared to much of the industry. For a specific desktop OS version to be supported for 13 years is remarkable, it will probably never happen again for any other version of a client OS.

Because if Microsoft didn't continue to support XP through that abomination called Vista, they would be bankrupt right now.
It wasn't until Windows 7 was released that XP started to realistically lose market share.

In essence, Microsoft was forced to continue supporting their twelve year old OS for financial reasons, not because it was so amazing.
Remember, Windows is proprietary Microsoft software, so when Linux was allowed to moved on, XP stayed nearly the exact same due to it's proprietary nature.

 

[Red Falcon]

but a woman with 2 fancy last names by the name of Julie Larson-Green, distinguished alumna of elite western washington univ, and head of windows design, says that i NEED windows 8.

It doesn't matter what university she went to, distinguished or not, the Windows 8 GUI (and that fucking compiler) are complete shit for keyboard and mouse users.
Why didn't Microsoft give us a desktop/laptop mode and a tablet/touchscreen mode?

Because they are greedy fucks that want to force us to use that damn app store in the Modern UI for apps that will probably only be supported for this version of Windows.
Before you say that's not possible, Microsoft wouldn't do that to us, just look what happened to their gadgets for Vista and 7.

Oh that's right, they aren't supported by Microsoft any further because of "security" reasons.
So anyone who actually paid for those gadgets through Microsoft is fucked!

What does one get for loyalty to Microsoft? The shaft.
At least with Apple they don't try to hide that the user will get the shaft in only two years after a product's release; can't say the same for Microsoft.

 

[Red Falcon]

but a woman with 2 fancy last names by the name of Julie Larson-Green, distinguished alumna of elite western washington univ, and head of windows design, says that i NEED windows 8.

What I was trying to say is that she's a fucking idiot who forced Windows and Microsoft products into a hipster market.
Seeing that pic of Bill Gates in 2002 with Microsoft's original x86 tablet makes me sad, because at that time it was actually a good system with USB and other IO ports that made it useful; in an era when I actually had respect for Microsoft and fully supported them and their products.

Can't say the same for Ballmer and his hipster flunkies now!
Oh how times have changed.

 

[heatlesssun]

Remember, Windows is proprietary Microsoft software, so when Linux was allowed to moved on, XP stayed nearly the exact same due to it's proprietary nature.

XP is a specific version of Windows, specific versions of software don't generally undergo radical changes for stability and compatibility reasons, you move on to a newer version.

 

[Red Falcon]

XP is a specific version of Windows, specific versions of software don't generally undergo radical changes for stability and compatibility reasons, you move on to a newer version.

Well when one's only choice, at the time, was Vista, I can certainly see why so many users stuck it out with XP.
I know because I was there at Vista's launch; remember, I used to be like you, a non-Linux, Microsoft-only user.

Even after years of using the abomination Vista in and out of enterprise environments, I can tell you that it had many issues that were only resolved with the release of Windows 7.
Again, it wasn't until the release of Win 7, that XP started to actually lose market share.

XP wasn't an amazing OS, Microsoft was forced to support it, considering Vista was such a flop.
If they didn't, they may not be with us right now.

specific versions of software don't generally undergo radical changes for stability and compatibility reasons, you move on to a newer version.

No, specific versions of Microsoft software don't generally undergo radical changes for stability and compatibility reasons.
This does not apply to Linux/UNIX distros or OS X, and only applies to Microsoft-built software and OSes, so don't go there.

 

[heatlesssun]

Yes, the native Modern UI GUI in Win 8 is fast and efficient, as long as one is using a tablet or touchscreen device.
For those who are using keyboards and mice, though, you're all fucked!

Sitting right now in front of my dual non-touchscreen Windows 8 desktop with a mouse and keyboard and using the default UI, no Start Menu replacements. Not exactly sure how I'm fucked compared to the same hardware running Windows 7. I do use a touch mouse and touch pad when not gaming, gestures are easier and faster to deal with than the hot corners, particularly on a multi-monitor system. Flick gestures to bring up the Start Menu or switch apps are considerably faster than having to point and click on a Start Button or a hot corner.

 

[heatlesssun]

No, specific versions of Microsoft software don't generally undergo radical changes for stability and compatibility reasons.
This does not apply to Linux/UNIX distros or OS X, and only applies to Microsoft-built software and OSes, so don't go there.

Then why are there new versions of Linux and OS X coming out all of the time at a much faster rate than Windows?

 

[Red Falcon]

Sitting right now in front of my dual non-touchscreen Windows 8 desktop with a mouse and keyboard and using the default UI, no Start Menu replacements. Not exactly sure how I'm fucked compared to the same hardware running Windows 7. I do use a touch mouse and touch pad when not gaming, gestures are easier and faster to deal with than the hot corners, particularly on a multi-monitor system. Flick gestures to bring up the Start Menu or switch apps are considerably faster than having to point and click on a Start Button or a hot corner.

Well, you're still using touch devices to use Windows 8.
Now get rid of those and just use a standard keyboard and mouse.

FFS, you act like "I'm using Windows 8 on a standard desktop" then state that you are using touch devices to control the screen-gesture functions.

That's what's called an invalid argument.

 

[Red Falcon]

Then why are there new versions of Linux and OS X coming out all of the time at a much faster rate than Windows?

Because they can adapt to new technologies and functions without the need to wait for 4-5 years before releasing an abomination that no one particularly wants and is then forced to use; in other words, they give us options, something Microsoft doesn't understand.
Also, the new versions are not necessarily "radically different" from the previous versions, not counting Ubuntu, but that's one distro out of hundreds using the Linux kernel.

 

[Red Falcon]

And yet another Windows-related thread has turned into this:

MWHAHAHAHA!!!!

 

[heatlesssun]

Well, you're still using touch devices to use Windows 8.
Now get rid of those and just use a standard keyboard and mouse.

FFS, you act like "I'm using Windows 8 on a standard desktop" then state that you are using touch devices to control the screen-gesture functions.

That's what's called an invalid argument.

What is a standard desktop and what does that have to do with the types of input devices used to control it? Multiple monitors would be less of a "standard" desktop than using a touch input device that's like in EVERY LAPTOP.

 

[heatlesssun]

Because they can adapt to new technologies and functions without the need to wait for 4-5 years before releasing an abomination that no one particularly wants and is then forced to use; in other words, they give us options, something Microsoft doesn't understand.
Also, the new versions are not necessarily "radically different" from the previous versions, not counting Ubuntu, but that's one distro out of hundreds using the Linux kernel.

And it's still a NEW version no matter what. And it looks like Microsoft is going to be in the annual update game as well now.

 

[Red Falcon]

And it's still a NEW version no matter what. And it looks like Microsoft is going to be in the annual update game as well now.

Well, for OS X, it's still been on version 10, just with incremental updates, no need to completely overhaul everything that has been done; the same can be said for much of the Linux kernel, though that is in a bit of an area of it's own.
You actually believe they are going to sincerely stick to this game plan for more than a year? lol

What is a standard desktop and what does that have to do with the types of input devices used to control it? Multiple monitors would be less of a "standard" desktop than using a touch input device that's like in EVERY LAPTOP.

A standard desktop is one that uses a keyboard and mouse to control the GUI.
I'm not going to get into the common sense logistics of such a mute point, so please don't go there with defining what a "standard desktop" is, but I will say that if you got rid of those touch input devices, I doubt you would have the same functionality on Windows 8 as you did before.

So basically what you are saying is that individuals with keyboards and mice, specifically desktop and laptop users, now need to purchase additional touch-input devices in order to maximize the Windows 8 GUI.
The fact that yet another input device is needed just to function in Windows 8 complete bullshit on Microsoft's part and is a regression of an OS, not an advancement.

They should have had a desktop/laptop mode and a tablet/touchscreen mode.
But they didn't, they developed a so-called 'hybrid' OS that is simply a glorified tablet OS that is being forced onto desktop and laptop users, and you know it.

 

[jedijeb]

So, instead of downloading the free Microsoft Compatibility pack for MS Office, you decided to upgrade all your computers to the latest MS Office. Mmmmmk......

Wasn't my decision, was our IT guys and he is the biggest MS fanboy I know. He even blocked our internet from accessing the OpenOffice website when I once mentioned it to our VP in a meeting when he complained it was too expensive to put MSOffice on all our computers just so people would have the ability to open and edit a simple spreadsheet they were using at the time. Only a few users then even had more than basic Word on their computers.

 

[jedijeb]

What is a standard desktop and what does that have to do with the types of input devices used to control it? Multiple monitors would be less of a "standard" desktop than using a touch input device that's like in EVERY LAPTOP.

I really hate the touchpad on my laptop, I always use a mouse instead. I really hate when I am typing and the cursor just magically jumps to another part of the document because my palm grazed the touch pad while I was typing.

 

[Deleted member 88227]

How many PCs were sold between Jan 2007 and March 2007 vs how many have been sold between Jan 2013 and now?

 

[Red Falcon]

Wasn't my decision, was our IT guys and he is the biggest MS fanboy I know. He even blocked our internet from accessing the OpenOffice website when I once mentioned it to our VP in a meeting when he complained it was too expensive to put MSOffice on all our computers just so people would have the ability to open and edit a simple spreadsheet they were using at the time. Only a few users then even had more than basic Word on their computers.

Is your IT guy heatlesssun?

 

[heatlesssun]

Well, for OS X, it's still been on version 10, just with incremental updates, no need to completely overhaul everything that has been done; the same can be said for much of the Linux kernel, though that is in a bit of an area of it's own.
You actually believe they are going to sincerely stick to this game plan for more than a year? Lol

There’s a considerable different between the first version of OS X and the current one. For instance, a modern Mac can’t even run the first version of OS X.

A standard desktop is one that uses a keyboard and mouse to control the GUI. I'm not going to get into the common sense logistics of such a mute point, so please don't go there with defining what a "standard desktop" is, but I will say that if you got rid of those touch input devices, I doubt you would have the same functionality on Windows 8 as you did before.

And I’m using a keyboard and mouse on this Windows 8 desktop. I like the touch pad when scrolling through documents and web pages, much smoother than using a mouse scroll wheel, not really sure what that has to do with the Windows 8 UI. As for the touch mouse, not “standard” for a desktop but touch input is very common in Windows and other OSes. Of course if I didn’t have the touch mouse I’d one less input option. As I said the touch mouse comes in handy for something else that’s not “standard” for desktops, multiple monitors. If I had a more “standard” desktop with only one monitor the hot corners work much and the touch mouse wouldn’t be as useful.

So basically what you are saying is that individuals with keyboards and mice, specifically desktop and laptop users, now need to purchase additional touch-input devices in order to maximize the Windows 8 GUI.

Laptops already have touch input devices. If you have only on screen then the touch gestures aren’t as efficacious then with multiple monitors.

The fact that yet another input device is needed just to function in Windows 8 complete bullshit on Microsoft's part and is a regression of an OS, not an advancement.

It’s not needed, it’s an option. One that some may find to be superior on the desktop than point and click only Windows. As I pointed out accessing the Start Screen with a gesture is faster than pointing and clicking the Start Button and bringing up the Start Screen, especially with multiple monitors, much less mouse travel.

They should have had a desktop/laptop mode and a tablet/touchscreen mode.
But they didn't, they developed a so-called 'hybrid' OS that is simply a glorified tablet OS that is being forced onto desktop and laptop users, and you know it.

I know that I can use Windows 8 on a desktop and the experience isn’t that different from using desktop applications on Windows 7. On a tablet Windows 8 works much better than 7. Metro applications on the desktop is obviously quite different than Windows 7 since they don’t exist on 7, but there’s a number of Metro apps that I use on the desktop and it’s not really a problem that they are full screen. Kindle, Nook, Netflix, some games, etc. are things that I typically want full screen anyway. I wouldn’t normally use a Metro web browser on a desktop, so that’s why I use the desktop version. On a tablet or laptop where screen real-estate is low, I use the Metro browser typically as full screen is generally the way I use apps on smaller screens.

 

[heatlesssun]

How many PCs were sold between Jan 2007 and March 2007 vs how many have been sold between Jan 2013 and now?

Probably a good deal more in 2013. Whenever this adoption rate issue is raised it's still quite possible that there's more 8 machines and upgrades going on in absolute numbers than Vista.

 

[Red Falcon]

There’s a considerable different between the first version of OS X and the current one. For instance, a modern Mac can’t even run the first version of OS X.

That's because OS X 10.0 was specifically designed and compiled for the PowerPC architecture, but Apple has always had an x86 compilation of OS X from 10.0 on, it was just never released to the public until 10.4 officially, and 10.5 had universal binaries (PPC and x86) were used.
The overall architecture of OS X hasn't really changed that much though, at least in the overall design; features and software/hardware/cloud/sync support has been added through the revisions, but the OS on a whole hasn't changed.

Do you even know what you are talking about?
Don't even mention Linux/UNIX or OS X anymore, you know absolutely nothing about any of them and your opinions of them are completely irrelevant and hold no weight.

Maybe if you learned a thing or two about them, then it would be a worthwhile discussion.
But until then, just stick to Windows and Microsoft applications.

I know that I can use Windows 8 on a desktop and the experience isn’t that different from using desktop applications on Windows 7. On a tablet Windows 8 works much better than 7. Metro applications on the desktop is obviously quite different than Windows 7 since they don’t exist on 7, but there’s a number of Metro apps that I use on the desktop and it’s not really a problem that they are full screen. Kindle, Nook, Netflix, some games, etc. are things that I typically want full screen anyway. I wouldn't normally use a Metro web browser on a desktop, so that’s why I use the desktop version. On a tablet or laptop where screen real-estate is low, I use the Metro browser typically as full screen is generally the way I use apps on smaller screens.

omg... in one ear, out the other.
It has nothing to do with the programs running, it has to do with how the GUI was arranged.

How come you ALWAYS go back to the point of specifically running the applications on Windows 7 vs Windows 8???
We weren't even talking about running applications and it was never even mentioned or brought up.

Running applications isn't the issue, it's the horrid GUI and the fact that having a touchscreen is basically required to be functional at all in it.
At least 3rd party applications like Start8 and Classic Shell exist to alter the GUI to be more productive for keyboard/mouse users.

 

[rudy]

Those start menu upgrades everyone talks about, I really don't get it it does very little if anything to change the function, the only thing you gotta know is to hit the windows key in windows 8. Having a start button there is redundant and meaningless. I really cant understand why everyone here fixates on that so freaking much.

The problem with not having a start button in windows 8 was about noobs who cant figure out what to do, but at a place like this people should be able to figure out how to press the windows button, or better yet like me bind one of the extra buttons on the mouse to the windows key.

There are many problems and poor decisions in windows 8, but the reality is that you guys are always focused on the things that aren't even the problem and should have almost no effect on you.

 

[heatlesssun]

Don't even mention Linux/UNIX or OS X anymore, you know absolutely nothing about any of them and your opinions of them are completely irrelevant and hold no weight.

All I said was that the original version of OS X doesn’t run on new Macs which is correct.

omg... in one ear, out the other.
It has nothing to do with the programs running, it has to do with how the GUI was arranged.

How come you ALWAYS go back to the point of specifically running the applications on Windows 7 vs Windows 8???
We weren't even talking about running applications and it was never even mentioned or brought up.
Running applications isn't the issue, it's the horrid GUI and the fact that having a touchscreen is basically required to be functional at all in it.
At least 3rd party applications like Start8 and Classic Shell exist to alter the GUI to be more productive for keyboard/mouse users.

Because running programs is the most important and primary activity that people perform on a computer. Interaction with those programs is the large bulk of the UI experience. To say that the Windows 8 UI is horrible with a mouse and keyboard when the vast amount of time the mouse and keyboard interaction is no different than Windows 7 is hyperbole.

 

[Red Falcon]

All I said was that the original version of OS X doesn’t run on new Macs which is correct.

There actually is a version of OS X 10.0 that will run on x86 processors, it was just never released to the public, so again, that's an incorrect statement.
You also said:

There’s a considerable different between the first version of OS X and the current one.

Which there isn't, so again, you don't know what you are talking about.

Because running programs is the most important and primary activity that people perform on a computer. Interaction with those programs is the large bulk of the UI experience.

Yes, but it's the getting to the programs and how they are organized that is the issue.

To say that the Windows 8 UI is horrible with a mouse and keyboard when the vast amount of time the mouse and keyboard interaction is no different than Windows 7 is hyperbole.

There is a considerable difference in how the Windows 8 GUI interacts with a mouse and keyboard (ex. swipe functions) than how the Win 7 GUI does.
Are you kidding me? Do you even know anything about Windows now?

 

[heatlesssun]

There actually is a version of OS X 10.0 that will run on x86 processors, it was just never released to the public, so again, that's an incorrect statement.
You also said:

Which there isn't, so again, you don't know what you are talking about.

You're counting an unreleased test version of an OS that was never supported in production. In that case Windows 7 runs on ARM CPUs, which it does but it was never released and I don't think anyone would say that Windows 7 runs on ARM processors since there's nothing that officially supports it.

And I have no idea why you think that there isn't considerable difference between the original OS X version and the current one. Most OS X experts would say that there is considerable difference.

Yes, but it's the getting to the programs and how they are organized that is the issue.


There is a considerable difference in how the Windows 8 GUI interacts with a mouse and keyboard (ex. swipe functions) than how the Win 7 GUI does.
Are you kidding me? Do you even know anything about Windows now?

Swiping has no meaning in the context of point and click only devices, thus the hot corners with point and click devices. The only hot corner related to accessing programs is the bottom left one which corresponds to the Start Button.

Most people probably have their most common desktop programs pinned to the task bar. That looks and works identically between 7 and 8. Lesser used programs pinned to the Start Screen works very much like program favorites pinned to the Start Menu. Using the Windows Key and the keyboard to type a programs name functions very much as it did in Windows 7.

 

[tec805]

This could easily be done with mini HDMI and bluetooth. Why would requirement would the dock solve that HDMI and bluetooth wouldnt?

As for how different it is, thats a valid point but how many people in a BYOD situation will lug a desktop into work? In some organizations leaving it there would also not be an option so they'd be on the hook to bring it home with them with every night or at the very least it'd need to be locked up so no one could walk off with it.

Right now most organizations going BYOD people bring laptops, but now that its possible to actually use a tablet for work I think its a fair bet to assume tablets will actually be used for work in the coming years.

At first I thought he was being funny. Replace a workstation with a tablet? <snip snide remark before posting> What kind of "work" gets done at your place of business that could be done on tablets and employees are told to bring their own? I'm sure if all the employees did was check email, surf the web and play Angry Birds they could do just fine, but in the real world...

To all the W8 supporters that think everyone should be running it for whatever reason, how many of you support large amounts of computers in a multitude of environments? How many machines do you have that are used by an everchanging staff with unique credintials? How many times do you like installing apps? If you've moved users to 8 how many of them still like you (or did you migrate them because they didn't like you?) Just silly. Of course I'd make more money from all the additional hours (until I got fired for "upgrading" my users).

I don't work for the OS, my users shouldn't have to "deal with" the OS, it should be as transparent as possible to allow them to use the apps they need to complete their task in as optimal amount of time as possible (which mostly includes having enough horse-power, which you won't find on any of todays or tomorrows tablets). I've never had a user tell me their computer was too fast and the only place a tablet was useful was in a doctors office that the doc wanted to carry it around to look up data (I had her running on a Sahara from TabletKiosk since 2009). I'm not against tablets, but I can tell when something is useful versus someone just wanting to be part of the new fad. Also touchscreen workstations will never be a useful reality. Keep them on the cash registers (yep, had them back in 2000 in a gift shop) and the toys and phones.

I don't use Windows to sell my users Metro apps, I use Windows to get stuff done. W8 takes more effort for no realistic gain. MS should be going in the opposite direction if users were their #1 priority (yeah, I know, silly me).

 

[Red Falcon]

You're counting an unreleased test version of an OS that was never supported in production. In that case Windows 7 runs on ARM CPUs, which it does but it was never released and I don't think anyone would say that Windows 7 runs on ARM processors since there's nothing that officially supports it.

1) OS X 10.0-10.3 had x86 binaries, while never released to the public, Apple did release 10.4 with Intel binaries and 10.5 with universal binaries for x86 and PPC. It was tested and was supported in production, just not to the public until 10.4.

2) Windows 7 does not run on ARM processors and if it does, please show me the source of this. Windows RT does not count since it is not a full/real version of Windows, it is a very watered-down variant with incredibly limited functionality. There was no functionality difference from 10.4 (x86) and 10.4 (PPC), so you can't directly compare the two without comparing apples to oranges.

And I have no idea why you think that there isn't considerable difference between the original OS X version and the current one. Most OS X experts would say that there is considerable difference.

Improvements in the microkernel perhaps, and definitely in the GUI, but the OS as a whole has very much stayed the same, save for the added features I pointed out above.
These are not radical revisions or version changes, unlike the move from Xp to Vista, and 7 to 8.

Swiping has no meaning in the context of point and click only devices, thus the hot corners with point and click devices. The only hot corner related to accessing programs is the bottom left one which corresponds to the Start Button.

Most people probably have their most common desktop programs pinned to the task bar. That looks and works identically between 7 and 8. Lesser used programs pinned to the Start Screen works very much like program favorites pinned to the Start Menu. Using the Windows Key and the keyboard to type a programs name functions very much as it did in Windows 7.

Why not have the Start button and applications menu?
It worked great for years, now everything has to be done with damn keyboard shortcuts, even for the administrative tools.

Did Microsoft finally realize how volatile and how easily breakable their OS is, so they have to go out of their way to hide these tools to the general user?
Yes, I get that one can make shortcuts, but why not have the option built into the menu from the get-go for power users and administrators?

I'll say it again, if I wanted to have an OS that forces users to use keyboard shortcuts, I'd be using OS X.
And I will back OS X in the fact that many of its keyboard shortcuts are actually handy, the ones in Windows 8 already had easily accessible links from Windows 7, but Microsoft decided to do away with what was tried and true and worked, with their weak OS X wannabe OS.

 

[tec805]

Why is there no edit option when I notice my spelling mistakes?

 

[Red Falcon]

^ There is no edit button on the News section.

 

[heatlesssun]

1) OS X 10.0-10.3 had x86 binaries, while never released to the public, Apple did release 10.4 with Intel binaries and 10.5 with universal binaries for x86 and PPC. It was tested and was supported in production, just not to the public until 10.4.

In April 2002, eWeek announced a rumor that Apple had a version of Mac OS X code-named Marklar, which ran on Intel x86 processors. The idea behind Marklar was to keep Mac OS X running on an alternative platform should Apple become dissatisfied with the progress of the PowerPC platform.[45] These rumors subsided until late in May 2005, when various media outlets, such as the The Wall Street Journal[46] and CNET,[47] announced that Apple would unveil Marklar in the coming months.

On June 6, 2005, Steve Jobs confirmed these rumors when he announced in his keynote address at the annual Apple Worldwide Developers Conference that Apple would be making the transition from PowerPC to Intel processors over the following two years, and that Mac OS X would support both platforms during the transition. Jobs also confirmed rumors that Apple had versions of Mac OS X running on Intel processors for most of its developmental life. The last time that Apple switched CPU families—from the Motorola 68K CPU to the IBM/Motorola PowerPC—Apple included a Motorola 68K emulator in the new OS that made almost all 68K software work automatically on the new hardware. Apple had supported the 68K emulator for 11 years, but stopped supporting it during the transition to Intel CPUs. Included in the new OS for the Intel-based Macs is Rosetta, a binary translation layer which enables software compiled for PowerPC Mac OS X to run on Intel Mac OS X machines. Apple dropped support for Classic mode on the new Intel Macs. Third party emulation software such as Mini vMac, Basilisk II and SheepShaver provides support for some early versions of Mac OS. A new version of Xcode and the underlying command-line compilers support building universal binaries that will run on either architecture.[48]

So Apple was working on a lot of stuff for a while with OS X but was no official support for x86 until 2006.

2) Windows 7 does not run on ARM processors and if it does, please show me the source of this.

Didn't Microsoft show what was essentially Windows 7 on ARM at CES 2011, Start Button and Menu as you think all that Windows 7 is anyway: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvzJmRBS84w

Improvements in the microkernel perhaps, and definitely in the GUI, but the OS as a whole has very much stayed the same, save for the added features I pointed out above.
These are not radical revisions or version changes, unlike the move from Xp to Vista, and 7 to 8.

So what about XP to 7? Is that the " same" OS? Or are you looking only at the UI?

Why not have the Start button and applications menu?
It worked great for years, now everything has to be done with damn keyboard shortcuts, even for the administrative tools.

The Start Button is still there in multiple places. To the right in the Charms menu, on the keyboard, the bottom left corner and all Windows 8 tablets have a Start Button at the bottom center of landscape orientation. There are 4 Start Buttons in Windows 8, it's as though people that criticize Windows 8 about the lack of Start Button have never used it, how the hell do you miss 4 Start Buttons?

Did Microsoft finally realize how volatile and how easily breakable their OS is, so they have to go out of their way to hide these tools to the general user?

There are 4 Start Buttons. Even the one that you are thinking about can be hidden on an auto hide task bar.

Yes, I get that one can make shortcuts, but why not have the option built into the menu from the get-go for power users and administrators?

Right click in the bottom right hot corner, Power Menu.

And I will back OS X in the fact that many of its keyboard shortcuts are actually handy, the ones in Windows 8 already had easily accessible links from Windows 7, but Microsoft decided to do away with what was tried and true and worked, with their weak OS X wannabe OS.

The same keyboard shortcuts in Windows 7 are available in Windows 8. After extensive personal testing of the 7 shortcuts, they all work 8 as far as I know but of course the new ones in 8 weren't in 7.

 

[Red Falcon]

Yes, "official" support for x86 (i.e. to the public) didn't begin until 2006 when Apple made the shift from PPC to x86 (Intel) processors.
But there was always a working compilation of OS X from 10.0 on that ran, named Marklar as stated in the article, on an alternate processor architecture, namely x86; this was around 1999 or 2000, before the announcements in 2002 and 2005 came to light and public use and knowledge.

As for that video you posted about Windows 7 running on ARM, I wish that they had actually released that version, I would have certainly bought a copy of it.
Microsoft should have released a full version of Windows on ARM, rather than that junk called Windows RT.

Thanks for sharing that, even if it was just a beta, they should have done more with it.
I really wouldn't have such a problem with Microsoft if they had just gone a few extra steps on Windows 8 (even though the compiler still sucks, lol).

Why doesn't Microsoft release a full version of Windows 7/8 on ARM?

 

[faugusztin]

Why doesn't Microsoft release a full version of Windows 7/8 on ARM?

Windows RT is the full version of Windows 7/8 on ARM. They just locked it down to "Metro" apps. Did you miss all the desktop apps on RT after the jailbreak came out ?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2092348