Windows 8 Upgrade Offer Might Not Be Free

I worked in a computer repair store when Windows Vista was released...The amount of people that couldn't find the Start button was staggering. They would come in angry that everything "looked so different". I can't even imagine what they will think about this.

I am very very glad I am not working in one now with Windows 8 release.
 
FoxhoundOp said:
There is more room for customization than you get with the current start menu.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see this claim substantiated. I'd do it myself right now, but I don't have access to a Windows 8 install at the office.

I'm pretty confident they're about equal in terms of the number of customizable aspects, though the Start Menu may actually have more.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Is that supposed to be a good thing? It's hardly a step forward. Different does not equal better, nor does it equal progress or improvement, at this point it's still just different for the sake of being different.
Click to expand...

The Metro UI is certainly not just for the sake of being different for difference's sake. It's primarily about touch input. And yes, the debate about forcing a UI that's optimized for touch will rage on no matter even if Windows 8 is a huge success.

I think Microsoft did the only thing it could do, it added touch to the core of Windows. More and more people are using touch devices for their computing needs and there's ever more talk of tablets, especially the iPad, entering to corporate world.

We're simply experiencing a paradigm shift in computing, one that's moving away from traditional keyboards and mice and windowed programs to the current tablet model like the iPad. Traditional computing with mice and keyboards isn't going away anytime soon if ever but it's simply no longer enough for Windows to be only about mice and keyboards.

I do see the argument of having a switch between the classic desktop and Metro as reasonable but that brings up a lot of issues especially around how Metro apps would even work.

However I do admit that at one level of the changes are for the sake charge. Windows is an extremely old product by technology standards and the last deep change to the UI was 17 years ago. Metro is controversial and in a way that's good because for the first time in a long time there's something in Windows to talk about that's front and center and radical. And there's conversation about Windows that's more than just about minor incremental change.

With the rise of mobile devices this version of Windows had to be different so it wouldn't be confined to role of the thing dad uses for work.
 
FoxhoundOp said:
There is more room for customization than you get with the current start menu. Besides, if you just can't live without it, you could always just keep using Windows 7. I think keeping legacy options through multiple OS iterations just to please a vocal minority who can't handle change is a good way to end up with a bloated OS with features that should have been removed a long time ago.

People may not like where MS is going with Metro but I think it's respectable that they're making an attempt to do something new instead of releasing yet another iteration of Windows 95.
Click to expand...

Tiles are certainly far more powerful than a list of static icons regardless of how customizable Metro is. We really need to see more Metro apps and utilization of tiles before a good judgment can be made of the UI. As Windows Phone has grown there area lot of very nice apps that use tiles very nicely.
 
heatlesssun said:
The Metro UI is certainly not just for the sake of being different for difference's sake. It's primarily about touch input. And yes, the debate about forcing a UI that's optimized for touch will rage on no matter even if Windows 8 is a huge success.

I think Microsoft did the only thing it could do, it added touch to the core of Windows. More and more people are using touch devices for their computing needs and there's ever more talk of tablets, especially the iPad, entering to corporate world.

We're simply experiencing a paradigm shift in computing, one that's moving away from traditional keyboards and mice and windowed programs to the current tablet model like the iPad. Traditional computing with mice and keyboards isn't going away anytime soon if ever but it's simply no longer enough for Windows to be only about mice and keyboards.

I do see the argument of having a switch between the classic desktop and Metro as reasonable but that brings up a lot of issues especially around how Metro apps would even work.

However I do admit that at one level of the changes are for the sake charge. Windows is an extremely old product by technology standards and the last deep change to the UI was 17 years ago. Metro is controversial and in a way that's good because for the first time in a long time there's something in Windows to talk about that's front and center and radical. And there's conversation about Windows that's more than just about minor incremental change.

With the rise of mobile devices this version of Windows had to be different so it wouldn't be confined to role of the thing dad uses for work.
Click to expand...

Microsoft should have developed a separate version of windows for tablet devices or as a modular add-on for windows 8. That way existing users aren't impacted by Microsoft's decision to target tablet users.

This same sort of arrogance in forcing all users to adapt to a tablet style interface happened when Mark Shuttleworth pushed Unity on all Ubuntu users. Even though Unity has improved many users moved on to other desktop environments or away from Ubuntu entirely.
 
Microsoft couldn't pay me money to change from Windows 7 to Windows 8. At least not from what I'm seeing from the beta. I'm going to throw up if Microsoft comes out with Windows 8 commercials with people saying "It was my idea". This clearly is just Microsoft's out of touch with desktop users idea.
 
I think Microsoft's marketing approach is going to involve quite a lot of talking about the laurels of Windows 8 on tablets. In fact, I think 100% of the advertising is going cover tablets and the Windows 8 experience on tablets.
 
xX326Xx said:
Microsoft couldn't pay me money to change from Windows 7 to Windows 8. At least not from what I'm seeing from the beta. I'm going to throw up if Microsoft comes out with Windows 8 commercials with people saying "It was my idea". This clearly is just Microsoft's out of touch with desktop users idea.
Click to expand...

There is no edit so I'm going to just quote myself. Microsoft couldn't pay me to upgrade my desktop PC from Windows 7 to Windows 8. I do feel that Windows 8 has a market, I feel that new hardware will make Windows 8 a pleasant experience for some. I just wish Microsoft would listen to feedback at least suggesting visual cues (in desktop mode) so users know where things like the start menu is and how to shut down the system. I get a feeling when sales do not go as well as expected they will introduce these things in something like Windows 8 SP1.
 
1010 said:
Microsoft should have developed a separate version of windows for tablet devices or as a modular add-on for windows 8. That way existing users aren't impacted by Microsoft's decision to target tablet users.

This same sort of arrogance in forcing all users to adapt to a tablet style interface happened when Mark Shuttleworth pushed Unity on all Ubuntu users. Even though Unity has improved many users moved on to other desktop environments or away from Ubuntu entirely.
Click to expand...

Microsoft's goal obviously is to sell more copies of Windows. Maybe what you're proposing is better than Microsoft's approach but I think that it's also arrogant to think that what you're suggesting would prove to be more successful at selling more copies of Windows than Microsoft's solution. Steve Ballmer and Steven Sinofsky have everything riding on Windows 8. I would have to imagine that they must think that Windows 8 is the right way to go because they think it will be commercially successful.
 
wonderfield said:
I think Microsoft's marketing approach is going to involve quite a lot of talking about the laurels of Windows 8 on tablets. In fact, I think 100% of the advertising is going cover tablets and the Windows 8 experience on tablets.
Click to expand...

Not just tablets but other touch screen devices like laptops and hybrid laptop/tablet devices for which there really are no alternatives.
 
DeathPrincess said:
What the hell is wrong with people now. Any opinion different to their own is a "troll", are people that feeble and fragile that they can't stand opposition. Yes I have a different opinion just to piss you off.

Already answered that. Read up.
Click to expand...

Not liking the start screen because you can't customize it is one thing, posting over and over smart ass comments inferring how much more customizable the start menu in W7 is compared to it when skirting around real discussion is trolling.
 
Were Windows upgrades ever free?
Did I miss like some awesome windows 98 to windows me free upgrade party.
I am not really surprised by this news....
 
DeathPrincess said:
I did read that, page. So the total of this "customization" is changing the tile sizes and background color and having different programs on it? Thats not really customization, is it? Customization would be more like a "metro off/on" option, or "disable touch screen optimizations and controls".
Click to expand...

Exactly.
Give me the ability to disable Metro or at least default to the Start Menu when used on a desktop/laptop so that it looks similar to Windows 7.
 
1010 said:
Microsoft should have developed a separate version of windows for tablet devices or as a modular add-on for windows 8. That way existing users aren't impacted by Microsoft's decision to target tablet users.
Click to expand...

This is the real problem.
Metro is optimize for touch screens and downloadable "Apps" which are basically consumer/media consumption tasks. These features just get in the way of normal business use or non-touch screen use.
 
I could live with the start menu but not with what they did to the file manger and control panel. I like 7 because if I need to tweak something it is very easy to get to.

I may buy the upgrade if it is $15 just to have it on hand if something down the road requires it.
 
If marketing to the enthusiast crowd, they may have more luck trying to force upgrades through windows update, and making people pay $15 not to have to "upgrade" to Windows 8 :p
 
I really enjoy my copy of W7...immensely. I have a feeling that I'm gonna be holding onto it for many many years. fwit...
 
heatlesssun said:
The Metro UI is certainly not just for the sake of being different for difference's sake. It's primarily about touch input. And yes, the debate about forcing a UI that's optimized for touch will rage on no matter even if Windows 8 is a huge success.

I think Microsoft did the only thing it could do, it added touch to the core of Windows. More and more people are using touch devices for their computing needs and there's ever more talk of tablets, especially the iPad, entering to corporate world.

We're simply experiencing a paradigm shift in computing, one that's moving away from traditional keyboards and mice and windowed programs to the current tablet model like the iPad. Traditional computing with mice and keyboards isn't going away anytime soon if ever but it's simply no longer enough for Windows to be only about mice and keyboards.

I do see the argument of having a switch between the classic desktop and Metro as reasonable but that brings up a lot of issues especially around how Metro apps would even work.

However I do admit that at one level of the changes are for the sake charge. Windows is an extremely old product by technology standards and the last deep change to the UI was 17 years ago. Metro is controversial and in a way that's good because for the first time in a long time there's something in Windows to talk about that's front and center and radical. And there's conversation about Windows that's more than just about minor incremental change.

With the rise of mobile devices this version of Windows had to be different so it wouldn't be confined to role of the thing dad uses for work.
Click to expand...

Given this logic, Microsoft might be better off if they marketed W8 as an operating system designed solely for use with devices that operate via touch screen...and stop portraying it as a desktop/lap top replacement because it's not.
 
ICOM said:
I really enjoy my copy of W7...immensely. I have a feeling that I'm gonna be holding onto it for many many years. fwit...
Click to expand...

Yeah, unless something changes, and Microsoft step back from the brink on W8, I'll be sticking with W7 until security patch support ends, or until W9 comes out, whichever is sooner. (provided W9 or whatever they call it turns out to not be equally bad.)
 
ICOM said:
Given this logic, Microsoft might be better off if they marketed W8 as an operating system designed solely for use with devices that operate via touch screen...and stop portraying it as a desktop/lap top replacement because it's not.
Click to expand...

I'm sitting here in front of my convertible Tablet PC in laptop mode using a keyboard and track pad and it's running all of my Windows desktop apps just fine, indeed some of them seem to run better on this machine than under Windows 7.

As much as people hate this UI the fact is that a few months millions will be using it to run programs just as well as they have on Windows 7. That's just inevitable. And I think that's what's bothering some people. Not that Windows 8 is crap or won't succeed, but that it will with a new UI that and paradigm that they don't like. This is Office 2007 all over again and as each day passes it's becoming more and more clear that much of the issue with being complaining about Windows 8 is that it's different and it's just not that very familiar and comfortable 17 old UI any more.
 
What is the point of Windows8? Apple didn't change their Mac OSX just to get people to use iPhone and Ipad. So Microsoft has to change desktop windows to get people to use Winpads and phones? That is the most boneheaded business move of all time.
Additionally, why do I want to use Win8? There is literally nothing "missing" in windows7 that I feel necessitates a Win8 at this point. I think the future of operating systems is probably a fully realized AI like a siri on steroids. When they get something like this in Windows I'll be interested in upgrading.

Other than "new operating system syndrome" what is Windows7 missing that makes you want a new version?
 
face2palm said:
:rolleyes:
LOL. Those asshats were never relevant.
Click to expand...

You obviously have no clue what you're talking about. Stardock has been very successful, and through all its growth Brad still remains at the helm.

They're a good company, and Gal Civ is still one of the best games of that genre and highly regarded.
 
kraemer007 said:
Other than "new operating system syndrome" what is Windows7 missing that makes you want a new version?
Click to expand...

Windows 8 should have better battery life and performance than Windows 7. One device can serve as both a full function computer and a tablet. And there will be thousands of Metro apps, some of which will be compelling and useful on with both keyboard and mouse only and touch devices.
 
heatlesssun said:
This is Office 2007 all over again and as each day passes it's becoming more and more clear that much of the issue with being complaining about Windows 8 is that it's different and it's just not that very familiar and comfortable 17 old UI any more.
Click to expand...

Many, MANY people called the Office Ribbon inefficient and slow and cumbersome. After a while of using it, they found that it was very much the opposite.

It's a drastic change, and some things are designed for hardware that isn't out yet (Windows 8 tablets, ARM tablets with Win8). On a desktop, I really enjoy it. On a laptop with a trackpad or eraser pointer thingy, I don't like it. There just isn't enough precision and I'll accidentally go too far and bring up the charms menu when I didn't want to, or the left panel... Then, I have to move for it to disappear and then go back... There are little things that bug me, but I'm still going to upgrade. I use it on the laptop exclusively, and desktop occasionally... I want a tablet to use it with, though.
 
Ur_Mom said:
There just isn't enough precision and I'll accidentally go too far and bring up the charms menu when I didn't want to, or the left panel... Then, I have to move for it to disappear and then go back... There are little things that bug me, but I'm still going to upgrade. I use it on the laptop exclusively, and desktop occasionally... I want a tablet to use it with, though.
Click to expand...

One thing about the charms overlay, it may become visible but it doesn't engage until you actually select an item. So even if the charms menu pops up say while you're trying to close a window, the window button will still work, the charms overlay pops up but it's transparent to the mouse. I don't care for track pads all that much period but it presents no problem for me on may x220t. One thing to note, a number of Windows 8 devices should have some very nice track pads that will use gestures that will for instance allow navigation between open apps by sliding multiple fingers across the track pad. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LP2zGcMS5s

We can debate how good or bad Windows 8 is all day long but without the hardware and Metro apps it's not much of a debate. Windows 8 is designed for new hardware like no other previous generation of Windows has ever been. There's just so much to Windows 8 none of has seen yet. I do think that Release Preview will give us the most of the answers and we'll see what Microsoft has done to improve keyboard and mouse usability. It's no doubt changed pretty significantly in the Release Preview as it did in the Consumer Preview from the Developer Preview.

But again, hardware is what what's really going to drive Windows 8 sales. Consumers like cool gadgets and Windows 8 is going to power cool gadgets that people haven't seen before.
 
heatlesssun said:
And what will the reviews say? The thing is most people using Windows 8 aren't using it on touch capable hardware and there's a ton of new hardware coming out with Windows 8 that's going to slick, laptops will have better battery life than ever and boot faster than ever. And there's going to be thousands of new Metro apps, stuff never before seen on the PC.
Click to expand...

Not trying to be a dick, but if I wanted apps I would buy an Apple product. Since I don't want "apps" and prefer software, also known as programs, I stick to PC. What you are saying makes me dislike the idea of Win8 even more. Basically developers are given a larger platform to make substandard software that can be sold at a low price point to the masses. Sounds like we'll be going backwards even further.
 
I have been using Windows 8 and i love it. Haters will obviously hate. I love the Metro interface. Looks gorgeous on my 27" 2560 x 1440 resolution lcd. Everything is smooth and its only a CP.

Sucks that people are still on the "OMG I CANT TAKE TIME TO LEARN METRO" train.
 
haste. said:
Not trying to be a dick, but if I wanted apps I would buy an Apple product. Since I don't want "apps" and prefer software, also known as programs, I stick to PC. What you are saying makes me dislike the idea of Win8 even more. Basically developers are given a larger platform to make substandard software that can be sold at a low price point to the masses. Sounds like we'll be going backwards even further.
Click to expand...

Metro apps, programs, whatever you want to call them can be as sophisticated as most desktop applications with superior UIs compared to the average desktop application with much less effort to create the same result with typical desktop tools and methods.

Plus one isn't confined to Metro apps. When one wants to use a device casually one can use touch and Metro apps. When one needs to be more productive use a mouse and keyboard and traditional desktop programs, at least with an x86 machine, no need for different devices for different situations.
 
Funny how many people can spend thousands of $$$ on the latest and "greatest" hardware that gives you 400fps on that brand new triple 30" screens at 7680x1560 resolution, but then want to run decade-old software on it cause the new stuff scares their pants off... :cool:

If you can blame Microsoft for one thing, it's that they make this all possible. Yes it is possible to run Windows XP as a main OS on that brand new Ivy Bridge setup, but would you really want to do it? Probably not.

Of all these haters, half of them admit they haven't even tried Windows 8 yet but they still call it Vista 2.0. I've tried Vista and it was slow and bloated, and THAT was it's main problem. Windows 8 on the other hand it light and lightning fast. Its recommended specs are even lower than those of Windows 7!

My two cents: just try it, take your time to get used to it, look past the metro interface and after a while you won't want to go back even on a non-tablet device. I've lost count of the times I've tried to get the charms bar up on my work pc (windows 7) and how I curse every time I have to use the small and hard to navigate start menu.
 
bigddybn said:
Think of all the cool things a touchscreen centric OS can do. Remove anything you'd be slowed down with a mouse for or anything you had to manage or control yourself.

Now take away the touchscreen and hide all your shit.

Welcome to Windows 8.
Click to expand...
Trying to find Windows Update alone was a trial and a half.

While I do like the speed of the apps that Windows 8 uses (for the ones that are appropriate as small apps), I can't help but feel like Windows 8 is bipolar and the desktop is the repressed personality.
 
haste. said:
Not trying to be a dick, but if I wanted apps I would buy an Apple product. Since I don't want "apps" and prefer software, also known as programs, I stick to PC. What you are saying makes me dislike the idea of Win8 even more. Basically developers are given a larger platform to make substandard software that can be sold at a low price point to the masses. Sounds like we'll be going backwards even further.
Click to expand...
That is an incredibly ignorant statement, sorry. Some of the Metro apps are actually better than what would be their contemporary as an "program" on anythign else. Apps are no more substandard by default that any other coded piece of software. They load and run much faster and closing them is as simple as pulling the top of the screen down with the mouse. Does everything need to be an app? No. However, for the things that I saw in the Consumer Preview, I could see using those apps as they were faster and more specialized for what I wanted them for.

Heck, if a Metro app was created for Steam, it might actually be better. You can pretend to be uppity and purist as far as the PC goes, but really, people use them for what they need. Why do something a less efficient way just because you hate change?
 
Eisenblut said:
That is an incredibly ignorant statement, sorry. Some of the Metro apps are actually better than what would be their contemporary as an "program" on anythign else. Apps are no more substandard by default that any other coded piece of software. They load and run much faster and closing them is as simple as pulling the top of the screen down with the mouse. Does everything need to be an app? No. However, for the things that I saw in the Consumer Preview, I could see using those apps as they were faster and more specialized for what I wanted them for.

Heck, if a Metro app was created for Steam, it might actually be better. You can pretend to be uppity and purist as far as the PC goes, but really, people use them for what they need. Why do something a less efficient way just because you hate change?
Click to expand...

That is one heck of a huge *if*. It took 5+ years for a beta-level Steam app to come to Android...and it still isn't feature-complete.

I second the notion that dammit, if I want gimped apps that don't go the whole 9 yards, I'll pull out my phone or my tablet. For a desktop, I want full featured programs.
 
Office ribbon is still horribly inefficient, after 3 years of using ribbon at work im still far faster at office 2003 at home

metro is no faster than the start screen and is horribly jarring to throw my screen away anytime I just want to pop open another program, and I dont use the task bar or desktop shortcuts for the vast majority of these and I don't want to start doing that either

not to mention how cumbersome having to hover then click is to even get to the screen

and how horrible it functions in multi monitor

Win7 for me unless Linux gaming picks up
 
Eisenblut said:
That is an incredibly ignorant statement, sorry. Some of the Metro apps are actually better than what would be their contemporary as an "program" on anything else.
Click to expand...
No, that is a ridiculous statement. Metro apps are flawed by design because they have to be designed to run on a phone, a tablet, and PC, therefore not taking full advantage of either. Do you think full blown Photoshop could be a Metro app? No, it cant.

The win8 strategy is clearly flawed.
 
kraemer007 said:
No, that is a ridiculous statement. Metro apps are flawed by design because they have to be designed to run on a phone, a tablet, and PC, therefore not taking full advantage of either. Do you think full blown Photoshop could be a Metro app? No, it cant.

The win8 strategy is clearly flawed.
Click to expand...

I think we should stop thinking that there'll only be Metro app of everything. Obviously there will be full versions of Photoshop and perhaps a Metro version for the touch users. They're not in the business because they're stupid.
 
Skripka said:
That is one heck of a huge *if*. It took 5+ years for a beta-level Steam app to come to Android...and it still isn't feature-complete.

I second the notion that dammit, if I want gimped apps that don't go the whole 9 yards, I'll pull out my phone or my tablet. For a desktop, I want full featured programs.
Click to expand...

Metro can be used to build full featured programs in most case compared to desktop equivalents. Plus you're still talking needing two separate devices and discounting the ability to use a full function OS without the need for a keyboard and mouse on devices the size of iPad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top