Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: sigtau on August 11, 2012, 10:47:38 pm
-
I can't believe there hasn't already been a thread for this. Come on, HLP. :ick:
WARNING: WALL OF TEXT BELOW. TL;DR at the bottom.
(Disclaimer: This post is more editorial rather than encyclopedic in nature with cited facts used as much as possible to keep it from looking like useless rambling.)
Now, unless you've been living in a cave, under a rock, or in a submarine with no Internet access whatsoever, you're probably already aware of the next generation of Microsoft's flagship product (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_8), Windows 8. The new OS features oodles of handy new features, such as integrated USB3 support, the ability to save the vital portions of your Windows desktop to a bootable flash drive, and a touchscreen-tablet-centric interface (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_8#Metro), among other things (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_8)--also sporting a substantially lowered price tag (http://www.techradar.com/us/news/software/operating-systems/windows-8-release-date-and-price-all-the-latest-details-1088425). All of this kept in mind, Windows 8 looked like a package filled with awesome--for a Windows release, at least--for the first few stages of development. Then, in recent months, it's all beginning to look rather bleak for consumers and serious PC users (such as gamers) who, after this next release, may feel like they've been alienated or abandoned by Microsoft.
To start with, Windows 8 has dropped (and in some less extreme cases, deprecated) support (http://www.infoq.com/news/2011/09/WinRT) for the Win32 API--essentially, the API (application programming interface) that has been used by developers on the Windows platform for nearly 17 years, is officially gone, and--unless another subsequent release of Windows resurrects this API--when Windows 7 ends its support life, Win32 will no longer be supported or added onto by Microsoft. In short, everything that many serious software developers spent years (nearly two decades) learning is about to disappear and no longer be relevant. Thanks, Microsoft.
(Note: It appears that this isn't going to be breaking compatibility with already-made Win32 applications--at least for the initial release--but it does indicate that Microsoft will be ditching Win32 compatibility very soon if they're no longer allowing developers to use it on their new platform. Put simply: Microsoft is pushing for us to start using the replacement, WinRT, instead of Win32, by pulling the rug out from underneath veteran developers. Not all hope is lost, but building graphical applications for Windows 8 is now going to be a hell of a lot harder.)
Additionally, Microsoft has now implemented a new UI, the most obvious change to Windows 8. Arguably not as bad as the previous point (until you hear that it's now impossible to use anything but the new interface (http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/81197) and restore the old Windows desktop), the Windows 8 interface--now called "Modern UI" as opposed to the original "Metro" (http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/microsoft_trainwreck_edging_towards_modern_ui_to_replace_metro/)--introduces what was originally the Windows 7 Phone/Zune interface to the desktop. Instead of neat icons and a taskbar featuring the legendary Start menu, the Windows 8 interface introduces you to your workspace in the form of tiles that become full-screen when clicked (http://cdn4.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/windows-8-metro.jpg). With the Start menu, taskbar, and traditional desktop gone, the well-known Start menu has been replaced with the new fullscreen Start screen (http://img-us2.generation-nt.com/windows-8-start-screen_01150911.jpg). The interface is highly elegant and very much geared towards tablets and touchscreens, but as a result, appears to be more or less moving away from the traditional mouse and keyboard interface--possibly serving as a source of alienation for many veteran PC users. Additionally , multi-tasking is slightly hindered by the fact that you can only run two apps side by side--but then again, quite a few people use every program maximized--myself included--so this isn't that much of an issue.
As a result of the new interface, Microsoft will now only be deploying apps through the new Windows Store (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Store). This does not mean it's impossible to install apps outside of the store--it's similar to Apple's App Store. Come to think of it, it's exactly like the App Store, because it's still possible to install non-appstore programs onto OS X--obviously, with FSO being an example.
Windows 8 has also served as a new springboard for the deployment of Microsoft's new tablet competitor: Microsoft Surface (http://www.microsoft.com/surface/en/us/default.aspx). Imagine a netbook and an iPad combined together, using Windows 8, and bearing the first-party Microsoft logo (i.e. they're somewhat stabbing their OEM partners in the back, yet the OEMs don't seem to care (http://www.forbes.com/sites/briancaulfield/2012/06/20/hp-dell-wont-bail-on-windows-8-after-microsoft-enters-consumer-hardware-business/)). That's pretty much it. :nervous:
Given the fact that it's now impossible to disable the Metro/Modern/whateverthehelltheycallit UI, this may prove as a source of confusion for many novice-ish users who have been using computers in the workplace for years (i.e. our parents or older siblings) with the sudden change. Combined with much fear, uncertainty, and doubt from the consumer market, as well as popular game developers such as Valve (http://www.zdnet.com/valve-windows-8-is-a-catastrophe-for-pcs-7000001634/) (calling it a "catastrophe") and Blizzard (http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/28/windows-8-not-awesome-for-blizzard/) (calling it "not awesome") disagreeing with what Windows 8 is to bring to the table, this may be the beginning of the end as we know it for what you've come to expect, know, and love in Microsoft's flagship OS--which, especially in Windows 7, has turned into quite a bit.
I personally expect to turn this into another Windows Vista for the desktop platform. PC desktops aren't going away any time soon--perhaps they'll be less common--but Microsoft appears to be taking a ham-fisted approach with Windows 8 at making the desktop appear to be deprecated.
What do you guys think about Windows 8 and its apparent bull****? (I know I'm being incredibly biased here, but I'm not very happy with Microsoft at the moment. Bear with me.)
On a completely related note: this may be a boon for Linux users, especially with Valve's apparent port of Steam and the Source engine (and all of its various forks and versions) to Linux--notably, the Linux port of Left 4 Dead 2's fork of the Source engine (the most recent fork of Source, powering Left 4 Dead 2, Portal 2, and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive) outperforms the Windows version (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/08/valves-optimizations-make-linux-port-of-l4d2-outperform-windows-version/) of itself. With AAA quality games coming to platforms like Linux, could this be the chance for Linux to finally put its foot in the door as a consumer OS? Perhaps there won't be a mass-exodus to Linux or other operating systems, but this may be the chance for Linux to raise its 1% to 4.8% market share (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#Market_share_and_uptake) in the desktop environment.
Okay, done ranting. Discuss.
TL;DR version: Windows 8 slaps developers in the face by deprecating Win32 and making it incredibly hard to port non-Windows 8 programs to it; the new interface is shiny and nice but there's no way to go back to the old traditional desktop; the app store is a literal carbon copy of Apple's app store approach; Microsoft's using Windows 8 as an excuse to make a first party tablet computer to compete with the iPad/Samsung tablets; Steam's getting a Linux port because Valve can't stand Windows 8's crappiness, and Source games ironically run better on Linux than they do on Windows.
-
Microsoft is competing with its OEMs.
Microsoft is emulating Apple.
Steve Ballmer is still in charge.
Metro is forced.
I would -SERIOUSLY- consider placing a bet on Microsoft losing market share if they keep this up through Windows 9. I might even consider betting on them becoming an IP shell company.
If Microsoft were to flop, we would be stuck with Apple, and various other manufacturers trying to pull custom ecosystems out of their asses. It could truly signify the death of the PC. On the other hand, Microsoft is showing a desire to emulate Apple, so it may not matter. I'm not sure how to feel.
-
don't worry every other windows is a failure
like vista
they'll fix their **** once they realize how badly they ****ed up
-
All the OEMs will stick it on their brand new machines (cause Windows 8 sounds newer than Windows 7) so eventually it will become big enough that people will have no choice but to support it. MS is simply so big that they can serve the consumers a **** sandwich and expect people to still eat it.
We've seen this happen before with Windows ME and Vista.
-
On the bright side, Windows 9 is looking pretty awesome right about now with all of that said. :rolleyes:
-
All the OEMs will stick it on their brand new machines (cause Windows 8 sounds newer than Windows 7) so eventually it will become big enough that people will have no choice but to support it. MS is simply so big that they can serve the consumers a **** sandwich and expect people to still eat it.
We've seen this happen before with Windows ME and Vista.
The environment is a little different now. Apple is a well-known and respected (by average joe) alternative. Linux has matured to the point where it is actually sustainable for an OEM to ship only Ubuntu. Various software devs are jumping ship and supporting Mac and Linux. Microsoft has shown a clear willingness to screw with its OEMs.
Interesting times may be ahead.
-
This is good, Microsoft is just begging for a bullet to the head AND giving Linux a chance to fire it.
The change is gonna suck, but the aftermath will be well worth it if Linux plans "it's" moves accordingly.
-
Considering that the likely consumer alternative to Microsoft-and-OEM is Apple and probably not Linux-and-OEM I'd rather have Microsoft stop scaring us like this and have linux definitely continue to live in the shadows. :shaking:
-
The environment is a little different now. Apple is a well-known and respected (by average joe) alternative. Linux has matured to the point where it is actually sustainable for an OEM to ship only Ubuntu. Various software devs are jumping ship and supporting Mac and Linux. Microsoft has shown a clear willingness to screw with its OEMs.
Interesting times may be ahead.
The problem, as always, is software. Not many people are going to be willing to give up all their old software. That's pretty much how Windows became so big. So it's all a matter of how much software Windows 8 breaks.
To be honest, this is basically a gift for ReactOS (http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html) if they can get things working quickly enough. But I really don't see a huge switch to Apple happening unless MS are being massively more idiotic than even the stuff I've read about Windows 8 suggests.
-
Interesting and very important question: How many people who are railing against Windows 8 have actually used any of the FREE (http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/release-preview) previews that MS have released so far?
edit: equally important clarification: by "used", I mean for a significant length of time and in some sort of reasonable capacity.
-
Your question is invalid. It's just too damned hard to use Windows 8 for a significant length of time... :lol:
-
Interesting and very important question: How many people who are railing against Windows 8 have actually used any of the FREE (http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/release-preview) previews that MS have released so far?
edit: equally important clarification: by "used", I mean for a significant length of time and in some sort of reasonable capacity.
Used the consumer preview exclusively for a couple of days (actually bothered to install to HD). Still hate it.
-
Heh...here I am all the way back on XP, I still haven't managed to upgrade the family machine from Vista to 7, and now apparently 8 is an utter cluster****. Fun fun. :D
-
Your question is invalid. It's just too damned hard to use Windows 8 for a significant length of time... :lol:
The question is more valid than the opinions of people railing against something that have absolutely no ****ing clue about
Used the consumer preview exclusively for a couple of days (actually bothered to install to HD). Still hate it.
Only for a couple of days in a setup designed to give you an easy out if need be? Of course you're going to fall into the party line.
-
Used the consumer preview exclusively for a couple of days (actually bothered to install to HD). Still hate it.
Only for a couple of days in a setup designed to give you an easy out if need be? Of course you're going to fall into the party line.
If it can't impress me in two days, how the **** is it going to impress average joe in a Best Buy in ten minutes? I gave Windows 8 far more chance than its target audience is going to give it. I actually went in with an open mind. I enjoy trying new and different UIs. I was open to, and still am open to, GNOME 3 and Unity. Hell, I actually enjoy them. Those two have been berated furiously within the Linux world.
-
Well the desktop and desktop programs are still there.... just hidden and tucked away behind a Metro..... oh wait, Modern (lol) button.
Windows 8 PCs.... trying to turn every PC into an iPad - while hiding everything that made Windows good out of sight.
Frankly... they shoulda gone ahead and released this whole mess as "Windows Touch" and everything woulda been alright. ;)
The one thing that has people pissed is that it is pitched as Windows 7 successor when it is questionable whether it can fill that role.
Heck.. as someone who uses WACOM tablets everyday even I am propably going to stay with Windows 7, as Windows 8 doesn t even get pen computing right at this point (pissing off the fiercely loyal pen computing community that is heavily present in the medical field and education and relies on these devices for their work for over a decade)...
Windows 8 isn't even a "Tablet OS" ... for that it would need proper support for pen only devices (using a pen in Metro is about as clumsy as using a mouse and at this point (in the preview) some OS dialogue options are outright broken for pen input resulting in an inexcusable showstopper until you connect a mouse)... nope, it is sadly an "in your face/no excuses - Touch OS" with a tucked away legacy desktop.
-
Interesting and very important question: How many people who are railing against Windows 8 have actually used any of the FREE (http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/release-preview) previews that MS have released so far?
edit: equally important clarification: by "used", I mean for a significant length of time and in some sort of reasonable capacity.
I did use the previews but I quickly returned back to Win7 as I didn't like Win8.
Win8 is a mess. I suppose it works fine for phones and tablets, but in PC it's definitely an incoherent mess. I do not know how things are in the final version, but the last public preview still didn't even have all bundled applications using Metro (yes, I said Metro, screw you), but instead reverted to the legacy desktop that is now void of everything, even start menu.
Luckily I don't see companies adopting Win8 because they would have to train their employees to use it. The UI is too different now. Even though in theory all Win7 compatible apps should work in Win8, I doubt this is the case with the coded by monkeys software that companies use.
I'll definitely be sticking with Win7 unless in the future Win8 has something I really want that Win7 doesn't. At the moment that is not the case.
-
(Note: It appears that this isn't going to be breaking compatibility with already-made Win32 applications--at least for the initial release--but it does indicate that Microsoft will be ditching Win32 compatibility very soon if they're no longer allowing developers to use it on their new platform. Put simply: Microsoft is pushing for us to start using the replacement, WinRT, instead of Win32, by pulling the rug out from underneath veteran developers. Not all hope is lost, but building graphical applications for Windows 8 is now going to be a hell of a lot harder.)
Please do not start spreading FUD. Win32 is not going to go away any time soon. MS will have to continue to support it for decades to come; they're not going to declare it totally obsolete anytime soon.
That being said, it's a move I completely agree with. Win32 was getting a bit long in the tooth, with compatibility stuff like WinSxS and WoW64 bolted onto it to keep it usable on current machines.
Your "slap in the face" is only one if you have only recently started to develop things. The writing has been on the wall ever since the first Longhorn designs. If you were unable to see it, too bad for you.
Secondly, MS' goal is to unify the development process, so that there is no fundamental difference between writing for the new Windows Mobile, and writing for the Windows Desktop. Apple will do pretty much the same in coming years.
-
also sporting a substantially lowered price tag (http://www.techradar.com/us/news/software/operating-systems/windows-8-release-date-and-price-all-the-latest-details-1088425).
Now those prices are mighty tempting. One could buy a cheap upgrade and just shelve it until Win8 gets enough first and third party tweaks to become useful. :D
-
Funny, the UI doesn't appear "radically" different from where I'm sitting:
(http://www.hexellent.com/files/26/Win8.jpg) (http://www.hexellent.com/files/26/Win8.jpg)
vs.
(http://www.hexellent.com/files/26/Dai5.jpg) (http://www.hexellent.com/files/26/Dai5.jpg)
edit: Those lower prices are open to everyone with a qualifying product, not just new PC buyers? I was thinking about maybe waiting for the first service pack before pulling the trigger, but if that's the case then I might just push up the timetable...
-
Used the start menu on Win8 recently?
-
Heh...here I am all the way back on XP, I still haven't managed to upgrade the family machine from Vista to 7, and now apparently 8 is an utter cluster****. Fun fun. :D
:brofist:
-
Used the start menu on Win8 recently?
No, why?
-
While there are some issues with the user interface, for instance the hot corners implementation on multiple screens, most of the backlash seems to be the old Microsoft bashing wank.
I'd be willing to bet if either Google or Apple were launching the exact same system, people would say it was "magical" or something...
-
As I said above (with a different context) "We've seen this all before with Vista." :p
-
While there are some issues with the user interface, for instance the hot corners implementation on multiple screens, most of the backlash seems to be the old Microsoft bashing wank.
I'd be willing to bet if either Google or Apple were launching the exact same system, people would say it was "magical" or something...
i honestly believe that the hot corners system is downright retarded. all current implementations are just too much clutter and rather unuseable.
-
As I said above (with a different context) "We've seen this all before with Vista." :p
Yes, and once again we're seeing people get caught up in what others are saying instead of just using it for themselves to see what the fuss is about.
-
Yes, but a lot of the negative comments are coming from people who HAVE used it and still hate it.
-
indeed MS has a habit of failing on about every other PC OS release (ignoring organisation orientated OS such as NT).
DOS 6x + Win 3.1x - worked fairly well so long as you didn't multi task, but then everyone was used to one prog at a time from DOS anyway
Win 95 - (especially its initial release) was quite bad (lots of "new" features)
Win 98 - pretty good (basically 95 done right)
Win Millenium - some OEMs actually reverted to distributing 98 after a while (wasn't this the one where they tried to integrate NT into the 9X OS)
Win XP - again fairly solid
Win Vista - resource hog
Win 7 - fairly respectable OS
Win 8 - setting up for a panning
-
Interesting topic, I have been thinking the same. Microsoft has taken a huge risk with Windows 8, and given the reluctance of the corporate world, I'm not sure whether this will fly or not. More evidence on fail side is piling up from the entertainment industry side, Valve launching Steam for Linux is something of a hint.
I saw the beta version in the Spring. My first reaction was:
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/14070034.jpg)
From what I have heard, Microsoft has implemented some changes after that, and the possibility to revert it back from the Modern UI. Haven't checked it after that, but initial impression was "Vista all over again". Though, I'm curious to hear the corporate world comments after the launch - what do I know, it might even work. Vista was indeed hilarious (but not in a good way) on meetings when it completely ****** up the laptop of an executive... Try keeping up the facade with thoughts like: "Facial muscles, don't fail me now!" and at the same time "Dude, you just launched 20 calculators!"
-
You never had to "revert" from the "Modern UI" because it was never taken away in the first place. Sure the OS boots to it after you log in, but it's never been harder than clicking a single live tile (which is clearly labelled "Desktop" so even Neanderthals should be able to work it out) to get to something you should be able to get comfortable with.
I'm still struggling to wrap my head around the idea that, with MS providing free and open public betas for at least their last 3 major OS releases (including this one), people still think they can spout off about them despite never having actually used them and therefore having no clue wtf they're on about...
-
You do understand that it actually takes some commitment to download, install and test these "free and open public betas" right? You keep going on about them as if it's as simple as reading a page of text or something.
-
You do understand that it actually takes some commitment to download, install and test these "free and open public betas" right? You keep going on about them as if it's as simple as reading a page of text or something.
Isn't that what most people here are doing, reading pages of text and then forming an opinion without ever using the thing in question? Hell, it's how this very thread started off. My point here is that, if you're unable to make the commitment to give the thing a go, then why comment on it?
-
Also, the old saying comes to mind "Show me an idiot-proof system and I'll show you an idiot!"
Nope, did not notice that button there. I do recall massive tiles on one screen that were supposed to make things easier, and then scrolling on the horizontal direction and you got different screens for different purposes, whatever those purposes were. Seemed really complicated to me. Reminds me of a Nokia personnel who mentioned once that he isn't even sure if it is a smart idea to try to get the mobile phone UI to match desktop PC's.
By the way, have I mentioned that I have witnessed an open rebellion towards a software company that hinted of changing the old UI to Ribbon UI? After the flood of angry emails of "Do that and we'll jump ships!" they never mentioned this again. Basically it became a very pre-emptive strike by the users of that software. This is the corporate world reluctance towards change, which is very natural thing for human beings themselves. I'm supposed to be productive in the company, and most of that productivity comes from not learning new UI's all the time. Let's see how Windows 8 fares in the real world first, it will be interesting no matter what the outcome.
-
You do understand that it actually takes some commitment to download, install and test these "free and open public betas" right? You keep going on about them as if it's as simple as reading a page of text or something.
Isn't that what most people here are doing, reading pages of text and then forming an opinion without ever using the thing in question? Hell, it's how this very thread started off. My point here is that, if you're unable to make the commitment to give the thing a go, then why comment on it?
In order to install and test Windows 8, I' have to repartition my drive, register with Microsoft, install the new system and pray to high heaven it does nothing to damage the already installed OS. Considering the amount of information that would require restoring if it went wrong, coupled with the amount of time it would take to install in the first place, it's not something I would wish to do, so instead I read reports from people who are technically knowledgeable and have used it. When one person calls an OS 'bad' it can be taken with a pinch of salt, when large numbers say it, you have to pay attention.
This is why I never installed ME, because of bad reviews, I didn't need to use it, simply to hear the horror stories from those who had.
Personally, I see no need to upgrade from 7. It was slightly annoying when I first got it, but since then, I've found it to be a very reliable, stable and easy-to-use system most of the time.
From what I've seen and read, Windows 8 looks like what happens when you try to turn a high-spec PC into a mobile phone. Whilst I prefer Windows over Linux purely for the reason that I like the 'hand-holding' when it comes to new hardware (mostly because I'm lazy and like plug and play), I think putting too much cotton wool between the user and the system-layer of the PC itself can serve to have the opposite effect with regards to getting a machine to run at potential.
Yes, I like the fact my PC is a lot more powerful than a mobile phone, and this isn't a Special Sports Day, so I'm a bit scared with the whole 'here's an OS that means you are all equal!' mentality.
-
I don't know why Admiral LSD is raising his shield and sword for MS over Windows 8... but see here's the deal...
Winkey -> type first few letters of application I want to run -> Enter
Possibly the best and most often used function in my Win7 (non touch screen mind you) rig. I don't want any damned tiles with my Winkey. I want seamless search....
To name one of my issues with Win8.
Win8 = Win7 - everythingthatisgoodanduseful + bad ideas
-
In order to install and test Windows 8, I' have to repartition my drive, register with Microsoft, install the new system and pray to high heaven it does nothing to damage the already installed OS. Considering the amount of information that would require restoring if it went wrong, coupled with the amount of time it would take to install in the first place, it's not something I would wish to do, so instead I read reports from people who are technically knowledgeable and have used it. When one person calls an OS 'bad' it can be taken with a pinch of salt, when large numbers say it, you have to pay attention.
This is why I never installed ME, because of bad reviews, I didn't need to use it, simply to hear the horror stories from those who had.
Personally, I see no need to upgrade from 7. It was slightly annoying when I first got it, but since then, I've found it to be a very reliable, stable and easy-to-use system most of the time.
From what I've seen and read, Windows 8 looks like what happens when you try to turn a high-spec PC into a mobile phone. Whilst I prefer Windows over Linux purely for the reason that I like the 'hand-holding' when it comes to new hardware (mostly because I'm lazy and like plug and play), I think putting too much cotton wool between the user and the system-layer of the PC itself can serve to have the opposite effect with regards to getting a machine to run at potential.
Yes, I like the fact my PC is a lot more powerful than a mobile phone, and this isn't a Special Sports Day, so I'm a bit scared with the whole 'here's an OS that means you are all equal!' mentality.
See, this is just it. If you don't want to or can't test the thing, that's fine, but thinking you're somehow qualified to condemn it nonetheless is what's bothering me.
Nope, did not notice that button there. I do recall massive tiles on one screen that were supposed to make things easier, and then scrolling on the horizontal direction and you got different screens for different purposes, whatever those purposes were. Seemed really complicated to me. Reminds me of a Nokia personnel who mentioned once that he isn't even sure if it is a smart idea to try to get the mobile phone UI to match desktop PC's.
Bottom left hand corner:
(http://www.hexellent.com/files/26/Metro2.jpg) (http://www.hexellent.com/files/26/Metro2.jpg)
That isn't actually the spot it defaults to, it starts off a little closer to the top of that column of tiles, but somewhere along the line it shifted down a few spots and I'm not entirely sure why. It quite possibly happened when I was getting the video driver sorted out and the screen resolution was changing all over the place. Point is, it's there and it's not entirely hard to find or even figure out what it does.
I don't know why Admiral LSD is raising his shield and sword for MS over Windows 8... but see here's the deal...
...because, unlike most everyone else in this thread, I've actually used it (using it right now actually) for more than about 5 minutes and therefore know enough to say with some certainty it's not nearly as bad as people are making it out to be.
-
Actually, that screenshot pretty much tells the story. I can now see why I didn't see it, and it took me about 25 seconds to locate it now. I had to carefully look at every friggin' icon to find it. Others would be welcome to post their time to find the desktop button results from that too.
Besides what does Desktop have in common with Wikipedia, or XBox Live Games? And why isn't it a separate icon at one of the edges of the screen?
-
it's not nearly as bad as people are making it out to be.
Neither is Vista. That does not mean that, when compared to the preceding version, it suddenly becomes better. Is Win8 usable? Yes. It's fast, it's slim.
Is Win8 better than 7? No. The choices MS made when designing the Metro UI are too much, too soon. Hell, if Win8 on the desktop had been just a reskin of Win7 with a lot of under-the-hood changes, noone would have complained. But noooo, MS had to abandon the basic simplicity of the Windows Desktop UI because someone thought that full-screen menus are the **** now.
-
Actually, that screenshot pretty much tells the story. I can now see why I didn't see it, and it took me about 25 seconds to locate it now. I had to carefully look at every friggin' icon to find it. Others would be welcome to post their time to find the desktop button results from that too.
You're free to move them around as you see fit. As I said, it's usually a lot higher than that, I have no idea how it wound up down there. Also notice how the background tracks whatever wallpaper you're using (see the desktop screenshot I posted on the first page) which helps you spot it too. Also, you can call up the desktop app using the standard search built into the screen. Even way back with the developer preview (which was a hell of a lot worse than either the consumer or release previews), it was no trouble at all finding the desktop tile. I will admit, however, that my particular wallpaper obscures the label just a tiny bit.
Besides what does Desktop have in common with Wikipedia, or XBox Live Games? And why isn't it a separate icon at one of the edges of the screen?
Most of the icons one has on their desktop typically don't have that much in common, yet we throw them together in the one place anyway, so I can't see how that's even a valid question...
Neither is Vista. That does not mean that, when compared to the preceding version, it suddenly becomes better. Is Win8 usable? Yes. It's fast, it's slim.
Is Win8 better than 7? No. The choices MS made when designing the Metro UI are too much, too soon. Hell, if Win8 on the desktop had been just a reskin of Win7 with a lot of under-the-hood changes, noone would have complained. But noooo, MS had to abandon the basic simplicity of the Windows Desktop UI because someone thought that full-screen menus are the **** now.
See, this would be a valid criticism if the desktop had been completely removed, but it hasn't. It's still there. Seriously, if you can just bring yourselves to get the **** over Metro it really does become "just a reskin of Win7 with a lot of under-the-hood changes", but that's something you simply can't get a handle on without actually using it.
-
I did use it. I found the removal of the start menu, and the enforced switch to a full-screen menu just for starting programs to be too much of a hassle. It's not something that is impossible to get used to, not by a long shot, but it's a change that screams "Hi, I'm a committee-designed WTF".
-
I did use it.
When instructed to "throw the mouse" were you at any point tempted to physically throw it out an actual window?
-
After years of XP usage there were several good reasons for me to switch over to 7 (one of the main reasons being the switch from 32 bit to 64 due to hardware and such). I quickly adapted to 7 and am now really enjoying using it. It's basically windows xp but just better on a lot of fronts. So I expect to be using it for many more years to come.
Everything I've read about 8 makes me wonder 'why'. Why would you try and force this ugly looking interface on desktop users? Why would you do this, why would you do that. etc etc.
But most of all I wonder: Why would I want to make the switch from 7 to 8? What kind of improvements would it offer? How would my pc life be enriched?
I still fail to see the benefits. 7 offers me everything I want.
-
Admiral LSD, you really need to stop assuming that everyone commenting on this thread hasn't used it. That's at least the second time you've complained that someone needs to use Windows 8 to understand the issue to someone who actually has used Windows 8.
There are quite a few people who have used it and simply disagree with you.
-
Admiral LSD, you really need to stop assuming that everyone commenting on this thread hasn't used it. That's at least the second time you've complained that someone needs to use Windows 8 to understand the issue to someone who actually has used Windows 8.
There are quite a few people who have used it and simply disagree with you.
Yeah, people who use it *just* long enough to confirm their initial preconceptions before nuking it. I know the type because I *was* the type before I got off my backside and made the effort to actually use the previews MS make available to anyone who wants them to make up my own mind. Three weeks in, and I'm still failing to see what all the fuss is about.
Moreover, once again the whole idea of certain things being 'forced' on users comes up again when, if you'd used it for any length of time, you'd know
-
Admiral LSD, you really need to stop assuming that everyone commenting on this thread hasn't used it. That's at least the second time you've complained that someone needs to use Windows 8 to understand the issue to someone who actually has used Windows 8.
There are quite a few people who have used it and simply disagree with you.
Yeah, people who use it *just* long enough to confirm their initial preconceptions before nuking it. I know the type because I *was* the type before I got off my backside and made the effort to actually use the previews MS make available to anyone who wants them to make up my own mind. Three weeks in, and I'm still failing to see what all the fuss is about.
Moreover, once again the whole idea of certain things being 'forced' on users comes up again when, if you'd used it for any length of time, you'd know
I havent used it but when the likes of The E say something is forced, it is either forced or the option to change the behaviour is deeply buried and or in such an illogical place that it id difficult to find.
-
I havent used it but when the likes of The E say something is forced, it is either forced or the option to change the behaviour is deeply buried and or in such an illogical place that it id difficult to find.
Yeah, because that "desktop" tile is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo hard to find...
-
Looks like I'm going to be somewhat of a middle-ground-sitter here. I'm currently running the Release Preview on 3 of my primary computers as the primary OS, my desktop, home theater and laptop.
I've yet to find a program, though admittedly I've not tried that hard, that won't just install and run just as it did in 7. And for that matter, in general, games and the like run more smoothly, likely due to the reduced overhead. There are several things that are, in effect, forced; like different locations for some things (most of which aren't that hard to find) and the fact that the Start Screen isn't optional.
I hardly ever see the Start Screen in general use, except when launching games that aren't pinned (that I place in the first section of the Start Screen) or when typing WinKey -> something I'm searching. Which still works, albeit ever so slightly differently.
Now don't get me wrong, it's not revolutionary by any means, and frankly if someone released a 3rd party tool to put back in the start menu I'd at least try it out. But for me, the performance improvements for desktop applications are completely worthwhile. Not to mention little tidbits like integrated ISO and VHD mounting.
-
That's basically what I did. After being berated myself for making the same kinds of judgements the people in this thread were making I threw together some old components and set about installing it as the primary OS. I did much the same thing with 7, only this time I wasn't quite as confident about upgrading/installing over my existing OS (the 7 beta/RCs came out while I was right in the middle of an upgrade cycle making it fairly easy to substitute it as I had already reformatted as part of the upgrade).
The most surprising thing I've learned from the experiment so far is just how little I actually use the start menu. I kind of knew I had mostly given up using it as an app launcher, but it didn't fully register until it was taken away. According to Microsoft (you can take this however you want, but based on my own personal experience I'm going to say it's closer to being true than not), only about 10-15% of users actually use the start menu anyway, it's role as an application launcher mostly being usurped by either the desktop or the new taskbar in 7 (which, while having its roots in the old quick launch bar introduced in IE4s shell upgrade, was updated to function more like the OS X dock) leaving 85% who probably aren't going to really miss it.
The thing with the start screen is the only time you're really forced to see it is right after you log in (from a full system start. If you recover from sleep, hibernate or screen saver, it remembers where you were and takes you back there whether it's the desktop or the start screen) and even then, only long enough to click the desktop tile and start partying like it's 2009 (which, btw, is the year 7 came out, not any reference to the desktop being outdated). Even if you don't like desktop icons, having your most used apps pinned to the taskbar is often quicker than hunting for them through either the start screen or even the old start menu, especially since, for the first 10 at least, you can call them up by using the Win+{1..0} shortcuts. This functionality was in 7 too, btw.
-
I havent used it but when the likes of The E say something is forced, it is either forced or the option to change the behaviour is deeply buried and or in such an illogical place that it id difficult to find.
Yeah, because that "desktop" tile is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo hard to find...
It is not the ****ing desktop tile that is the problem. Which you would know, if you had read what was said here.
If the Desktop tile would be something I had to click through once and then be able to stay on the desktop, that would be fine. But MS made the decision to make the desktop just another app (as opposed to a different usage mode), meaning that in order to start new, non-pinned programs, I have to either navigate to the executable, clutter up my desktop with links, or go through the start screen. None of these are things I particularly enjoy having to do; The fact that the start screen takes up a LOT of screen real estate (namely, all of it) in order to expose less functionality than the old start menu is pretty appalling to me.
Now, Win 8 would have been great if they had retained the start menu functionality. MS chose not to do that, so I guess it's up to the user community to come up with replacements. The thing is, the early beta versions had the ability to display a normal start menu. This was removed for the RTM version.
Now, as objections go, this is rather minor, granted. But, and this is the point where we apparently disagree, it's a decision that was made by MS despite a lot of feedback saying that the change would be unnecessarily stupid.
In the end, MS chose to antagonize a very vocal part of the Windows userbase. They chose to follow up one of their greatest successes with something that is needlessly rough-edged and feels unfinished and not fully thought through. You can try to defend these decisions, but I would guess it won't be fun to do so. I know, I used to defend Vista.
Oh, and all this talk about the UI is just a minor battle compared to MS' obsession with copying Apple badly, see App store.
The most surprising thing I've learned from the experiment so far is just how little I actually use the start menu.
See, that's where my way of using Windows is different. I have a slew of programs I use frequently, but not frequently enough to pin them to the taskbar. Pinning them to the Start menu, or using the Start menu search, is my preferred way of accessing these progs, since I absolutely hate desktop icons.
-
The most surprising thing I've learned from the experiment so far is just how little I actually use the start menu.
See, that's where my way of using Windows is different. I have a slew of programs I use frequently, but not frequently enough to pin them to the taskbar. Pinning them to the Start menu, or using the Start menu search, is my preferred way of accessing these progs, since I absolutely hate desktop icons.
this. a thousand times this.
if its as fast as the start menu and as useable as it, **** it, i'll deal with the ****. if it aint?
-
The most surprising thing I've learned from the experiment so far is just how little I actually use the start menu.
See, that's where my way of using Windows is different. I have a slew of programs I use frequently, but not frequently enough to pin them to the taskbar. Pinning them to the Start menu, or using the Start menu search, is my preferred way of accessing these progs, since I absolutely hate desktop icons.
Indeed. Hooray for no icons at all! A few super frequent programs are pinned to my taskbars, the rest are start menu accessible. I wuv my start menu.
-
Additionally, if I'm forced to learn a new UI, what's stopping me from switching to Linux, since the biggest hurdle has been - wait for it - the user interface? Now that Microsoft is generously giving me a "chance" to relearn the operating system, I might go over to Linux directly as some relearning is inevitable. And if I'm sufficiently pissed by Windows 8, I might do that at work as well. I do like Windows 7 after I got the old Start menu restored, so far it has been better than XP that I still use at work.
I tend to pin the most important programs on the taskbar. Start menu is used to launch less frequently used stuff. People use operating systems differently, and Microsoft's current our way or no way doesn't sound very good. In the hindsight, my colleague used to laugh at me complaining about the changed UI in Office 2010, but after a while the argument went in to "you are just afraid of / too lazy" either relearning stuff or change. At that point I asked him whether he feels that he would be afraid of a change if it happened so that I broke his elbows and he would be forced to relearn using his hands... Sort of way of saying that not all changes are necessarily for the better.
-
Wouldn't it be a better business decision to just fork it and have two operating systems? One for PCs and Laptops that continues to march on with Win32 (Windows) and one for tablets and phones built around WinRT (Metro).
-
Wouldn't it be a better business decision to just fork it and have two operating systems? One for PCs and Laptops that continues to march on with Win32 (Windows) and one for tablets and phones built around WinRT (Metro).
From a business standpoint, having 2 OS's would mean double the amount of logistics and help support needed. 1 OS to bind them, 1 OS to rule them all is attractive to dark lords companies.
-
Wouldn't it be a better business decision to just fork it and have two operating systems? One for PCs and Laptops that continues to march on with Win32 (Windows) and one for tablets and phones built around WinRT (Metro).
From a business standpoint, having 2 OS's would mean double the amount of logistics and help support needed. 1 OS to bind them, 1 OS to rule them all is attractive to dark lords companies.
As well as double the code to write. A unified OS means one unified developer base, or at least one smaller one instead of 2.
-
Yep. That's why Windows XP acted as the "merger" between the "consumer Windows" class (95/98/ME) and the "corporate Windows" class (NT3/NT4/2000) by using the proven-to-be-more-efficient NT architecture while also retaining some degree of backwards compatibility with its consumer predecessors.
Microsoft wants money (as with any corporation, no matter how much you love them), and they're going to try their hardest to save it if they can.
-
Apple maintains two OS'
-
You do understand that it actually takes some commitment to download, install and test these "free and open public betas" right? You keep going on about them as if it's as simple as reading a page of text or something.
Isn't that what most people here are doing, reading pages of text and then forming an opinion without ever using the thing in question? Hell, it's how this very thread started off. My point here is that, if you're unable to make the commitment to give the thing a go, then why comment on it?
In order to install and test Windows 8, I' have to repartition my drive, register with Microsoft, install the new system and pray to high heaven it does nothing to damage the already installed OS.
You know that nowadays, virtualization allows you to test any OS as easy (if not easier) than any other application, right? Sure, you may not get accurate performance metrics, but that's not what is at stake here.
-
There's also the matter that Windows 7 works just fine for me, I have no desire to upgrade and I'm perfectly happy to wait out Windows 8 and see what happens.
As I said before, I have concerns, founded or not, from reading other people's experiences of it, but if there's one thing I've learned from any new software, especially an OS it's "wait till about a year after launch before even thinking of buying it". By that time, the more serious bugs/security holes are fixed, a more complete 'feel' for the system is among the users of it, and you can get a more realistic view of what it has to offer.
I'm in no real rush to upgrade, so downloading and testing an OS that I don't intend to use for several years would be pointless in the long run.
-
That screenshot of the Metro start screen is pretty much an abortion of UI design. It's like Baby's First Computer.
-
Metro start screen assumes every monitor is a touchscreen monitor.
Unfortunately, not every monitor is not a ****ing touchscreen monitor.
It's just clunky as hell to navigate by mouse because it just takes up way too much ****ing space, and looks ugly as sin.
HERP DERP COLORED BLOCKS I'M A FIVE YEAR OLD.
Sometimes I wonder if the people making this **** have taken a basic design class.
-
It's the next generation OS made by the next-generation of coders. ;7
-
I'm sure you all know this, but I feel it needs to be said (typed) out loud in this thread. As noted by Flipside a couple posts ago, Win7 still works fine. It's not going to magically break when 8 comes out. "It's not THAT bad, I'll get used to it" is a TERRIBLE reason to drop a lot of money on something you don't need. If there is something in 8 that you REALLY want/need, then sure, go ahead. But if you just want it because it's the newest, then you and your kind are pretty much the reason Microsoft CAN shaft us with terrible designs and unneeded "upgrades."
So, for a DESKTOP pc, what in Windows 8 is so great that it would warrant buying it with the knowledge that you really don't like the UI?
-
Desperate attempts to unify UI design across many distinct devices, and create a "write once, run everywhere" ecosystem is going to result in a product that is marginal at everything, but great at nothing.
Surprise!
-
It's the next generation OS made by the next-generation of coders. ;7
I weep for what shall be inflicted upon my computer.
-
I'm sure you all know this, but I feel it needs to be said (typed) out loud in this thread. As noted by Flipside a couple posts ago, Win7 still works fine. It's not going to magically break when 8 comes out. "It's not THAT bad, I'll get used to it" is a TERRIBLE reason to drop a lot of money on something you don't need. If there is something in 8 that you REALLY want/need, then sure, go ahead. But if you just want it because it's the newest, then you and your kind are pretty much the reason Microsoft CAN shaft us with terrible designs and unneeded "upgrades."
So, for a DESKTOP pc, what in Windows 8 is so great that it would warrant buying it with the knowledge that you really don't like the UI?
You have a good point there. I mean, my system could probably handle running 7, but cost aside, I've never felt the need to upgrade simply because I haven't run across anything that would require me to. If the corporate world is as reluctant to adopt 8 as it was Vista, then MS will probably have to keep updating 7 for a long time, just like they've done with XP.
-
If the corporate world is as reluctant to adopt 8 as it was Vista, then MS will probably have to keep updating 7 for a long time, just like they've done with XP.
XP life cycle was/is more of an anomaly than anything else. It is highly unlikely MS will let so many years pass until next OS release again. XP should have died many, many years ago if it wasn't for MS' blunder.
-
If the corporate world is as reluctant to adopt 8 as it was Vista, then MS will probably have to keep updating 7 for a long time, just like they've done with XP.
XP life cycle was/is more of an anomaly than anything else. It is highly unlikely MS will let so many years pass until next OS release again. XP should have died many, many years ago if it wasn't for MS' blunder.
I dont know about it being an anomaly, win 98 was viable and preferred by both business and private individuals until XP was released and patched up.
-
I'm sure you all know this, but I feel it needs to be said (typed) out loud in this thread. As noted by Flipside a couple posts ago, Win7 still works fine. It's not going to magically break when 8 comes out. "It's not THAT bad, I'll get used to it" is a TERRIBLE reason to drop a lot of money on something you don't need. If there is something in 8 that you REALLY want/need, then sure, go ahead. But if you just want it because it's the newest, then you and your kind are pretty much the reason Microsoft CAN shaft us with terrible designs and unneeded "upgrades."
So, for a DESKTOP pc, what in Windows 8 is so great that it would warrant buying it with the knowledge that you really don't like the UI?
Well one point you've missed is the one I hinted at. It will become increasingly hard to buy new PCs that don't have Win 8 on them as time goes on.
Another is that there are almost certainly other PCs you use beyond the one you have control over. Sooner or later you will have to use Win 8.
So while I agree with your point when it comes to your own computer, this is an issue that will affect you even if you decide not to install it on your current machine.
-
Well one point you've missed is the one I hinted at. It will become increasingly hard to buy new PCs that don't have Win 8 on them as time goes on.
Not necessarily. MS typically includes a downgrade clause in the license that would let OEMs at least continue to ship machines with 7 even though they're licensed for 8. Worst case, if even normal people reject Win8 en masse OEMs will simply use the downgrade clause to keep shipping machines with 7. This same thing happened with Vista, OEMs simply used the downgrade clause to keep shipping machines with XP. The really genius part about this though is that, in order to actually do this, the OEMS still have to first buy licences for 8 which means that, whatever happens, MS can claim 8 to be a success. This is why, despite the low public opinion, Vista wasn't technically a flop, MS were selling vista licence regardless of whether the machines actually shipped with it or not.
-
Well, I heard someone made it doable to install a KDE over Win8 so that you don't have to use Win8 UI at all.. This would eliminate the major disadvantage.
-
Well, I heard someone made it doable to install a KDE over Win8 so that you don't have to use Win8 UI at all.. This would eliminate the major disadvantage.
This is what I'm wondering, or waiting for. If 8 ever will come with a first-party (or easy and clean third-party) option for switching back to (and staying on) a more usable interface, that will remove the barrier to entry.
It's baffling that they haven't already built that in, but there's still time before the proper release, right?
-
Windows 8 RTM has been out since August 1st, and MSDN should have the RTM on the 15th. So unless they changed it significantly from the Release Preview (And from the leaks, no-ones commented saying they have) that option isn't going to be there.
-
I fail to understand how Microsoft failed to realize that inflicting a simplified tablet/phone UI onto PC users, and making it more difficult for advanced PC users to do the simple tasks they used to do with only a few keystrokes/clicks, wasn't going to go over well.
It's all well and good that there's a desktop button which allows you to access some semblance of the efficient Windows UI we've all become accustomed to (which is even more efficient now that Windows 7 added jumplists), but why someone would figure that a touchscreen interface would be a good design decision on a PC is beyond me. We use various devices in different ways. I'm all for unified architecture when it comes to application environment and cross-platform/device compatibility, but there is no conceivable reason why Microsoft could not simply offer a feature in Windows 8 called "Revert to classic desktop" allowing for a reversible change between UI environments. New users could still with the Metro UI; power users can stick with the desktop environment that is far more functional.
Windows 7 was such a leap forward from XP/Vista that this is very disappointing.
-
I think the bottom line here is not even Microsoft gives a **** about the desktop PC market anymore. They don't care too much if they piss off the comparatively tiny PC power user market when they have all the idiots who buy new smart phones and tablets every year to check their email and facebook with. Why bother with quality when you can just market and sell a trend? I don't see businesses as having much impact either, because from what I've seen, they tend to not upgrade for the hell of it anyway. Any competent business isn't going to drop a ton of money for new licenses for all their computers if they don't need it. At my office, even the damn government that LOVES to waste money still runs XP on nearly all the computers.
-
Guys seriously, this is all just part of the pattern. Every other Windows sucks. All of this has happened before and all of this will happen again. Win 9 will probably be slick.
-
the difference this time is that instead of instability and shoddy coding, it's willful design decisions, and in my eyes microsoft pretty clearly signaling they intend to go a direction we don't want them to.
-
i really dont care what windows 8 will or will not be. windows 7 has plenty of life left. and when that life is sapped and raped by the evil empire and nothing remains, i will have long since jumped ship. i will be using reactos assuming it has gone beta before that happens. and if not, linux has no doubt gotten better since last i attempted to use it (especially with steam jumping on board). ive always hated phones and tablets. their interfaces lacked control, speed, and grace. a full size keyboard with full size keys, a mouse, and a good joystick, a big ass screen and a box to plug it all into, with a cpu installed by my own hand, and a gpu the likes of which god has never seen. destroy that expirience, and i will nuke your city and put your heads on spikes.
-
If the corporate world is as reluctant to adopt 8 as it was Vista, then MS will probably have to keep updating 7 for a long time, just like they've done with XP.
XP life cycle was/is more of an anomaly than anything else. It is highly unlikely MS will let so many years pass until next OS release again. XP should have died many, many years ago if it wasn't for MS' blunder.
Another contributing factor is that a lot of legacy software won't run properly on Vista or 7. The company I work for is stuck on XP due to several business critical applications whose vender's have yet to push out a proper fix. That is what happens when you get locked into propriety software contracts and the developer goes off in a different direction with their core product and tries to dump the heavily customized product they sold you years ago.
-
At my office, even the damn government that LOVES to waste money still runs XP on nearly all the computers.
Yeah we are just now trying to migrate over to 7 with a tech refresh. I agree, it's time.
Oh, and for Windows 8... can someone please try installing Launchy (http://www.launchy.net/) and see if it works on 8? If it does, that should alleviate some of the issues with the Start menu search being gone. (key-combo+appname (or partial appname) launch FTW).
I tried the first Windows 8 developer preview and HATED it. So, should I try RTM? Like, how much has been fixed? Can it launch apps quickly via the keyboard or some replacement for Taskbar pinning?
EDIT: Checked; several download sites say Launchy is compatible with 8. So there's that.
-
At my office, even the damn government that LOVES to waste money still runs XP on nearly all the computers.
Yeah we are just now trying to migrate over to 7 with a tech refresh. I agree, it's time.
Oh, and for Windows 8... can someone please try installing Launchy (http://www.launchy.net/) and see if it works on 8? If it does, that should alleviate some of the issues with the Start menu search being gone. (key-combo+appname (or partial appname) launch FTW).
I tried the first Windows 8 developer preview and HATED it. So, should I try RTM? Like, how much has been fixed? Can it launch apps quickly via the keyboard or some replacement for Taskbar pinning?
EDIT: Checked; several download sites say Launchy is compatible with 8. So there's that.
It still leaves the question why we should upgrade to a new product that requires third party programs to make up for the lack of functionality that the old product, that we all already use, has out of the box:)
-
Well, I like hacking things. I don't like iPhone's lack of openness with third-party apps. I got one, love the interface, and hacked the restrictions. I think I get some sort of high every time I make something do something that it's not supposed to do because some jerk decided they were going to control the end-user's experience, even if the end-user wished to change that experience.
-
Well, I like hacking things. I don't like iPhone's lack of openness with third-party apps. I got one, love the interface, and hacked the restrictions. I think I get some sort of high every time I make something do something that it's not supposed to do because some jerk decided they were going to control the end-user's experience, even if the end-user wished to change that experience.
You gave Apple money to further produce new devices that will be even more locked down instead of supporting manufacturers that encourage/accept unlocking and tinkering.
Excellent work.
-
It was either that or pay for an almost-certainly Vendor Locked™ Android phone. Or HP/Palm's sorry excuse for a smartphone, which isn't really turning a nice profit given its small share of the market. Better hardware is almost always worth it, since it can't be as easily manipulated as the software.
-
Or I could always have gotten a Windoze phone, however Mobile 6.5 on a Samsung Omnia II (SCH-i920, not the i8000 or w/e the other Omnia II was - great hardware, loved that part) soured me on that. No friggin updates, oh wait, here's an update... and all they did was update their stupid apps. Great, but can I get a stability / performance patch for your crappy OS?? Oh no.. we've moved on to bigger and better phones. You should get one of those. :rage:
-
i thought everyone here would have realized that the design goal of smart phones is to make you buy a new one every 1-2 years.
-
Well, it's actually like that with most stuff out there. I've heard a tale of a kitchenware company which almost went out of business, because they made their stuff too durable and saturated the market somewhat. If you make things that will last a lifetime, your customers won't come back, because why? If you want to sell new stuff to your old customers, the old one must go either out of order or out of fashion. Preferably both, so they won't try tinkering and fixing their broken product or declaring themselves "retro" and keep using old stuff (there are people, like me, who'd gladly do both to avoid spending money, but outside of Krakow and Scotland they're a small minority).
-
Well, if, instead of wasting resources on manufacturing and purchasing the same crap every two years, we had durable stuff, perhaps then we would have more resources to buy other interesting stuff. Sure, there wouldn't be 13 million silverware companies, only a few because of low demand, however, that would make room for other novelties and useful stuff.
Instead of buying a car every 10-15 years max, maybe increase the value of my home, buy a boat, heck, with enough savings due to not replacing disposable crap, buy a plane?
Hey, I can dream, right?
-
But by doing that, you pretty much take away the uncertainty of a market economy, and you've pretty much formed an oligopoly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly), meaning almost every new startup business will have to have a totally unique product or service 100% unlike its competitors in order to make ends meet.
Anyways, if Microsoft takes this approach with Windows (which it appears they are about to do), then we're going to have some serious ****ware on our hands. I still have a Windows 98 computer that I use for old games because virtual machines and compatibility mode is a ***** to work with, but I either have to use an old license key from a machine that used to work, or pull one off of the 'nets (not so legal, hence why I did the former since the aforementioned machine is dead forever). Soon, I won't be able to do that with XP because Microsoft won't let me activate new XP licenses after 2014. The same thing will eventually happen to 7. If the aforementioned "****ware" trend continues with Microsoft, we're going to have to find other OSes to rely on.
-
If the corporate world is as reluctant to adopt 8 as it was Vista, then MS will probably have to keep updating 7 for a long time, just like they've done with XP.
XP life cycle was/is more of an anomaly than anything else. It is highly unlikely MS will let so many years pass until next OS release again. XP should have died many, many years ago if it wasn't for MS' blunder.
Another contributing factor is that a lot of legacy software won't run properly on Vista or 7. The company I work for is stuck on XP due to several business critical applications whose vender's have yet to push out a proper fix. That is what happens when you get locked into propriety software contracts and the developer goes off in a different direction with their core product and tries to dump the heavily customized product they sold you years ago.
This is the exact situation for which MS made XP mode a feature of Windows 7 Professional.
-
I still have a Windows 98 computer that I use for old games because virtual machines and compatibility mode is a ***** to work with, but I either have to use an old license key from a machine that used to work, or pull one off of the 'nets (not so legal, hence why I did the former since the aforementioned machine is dead forever).
Where did you get that key? Did it come with the computer? If so, you are in violation already, as MS even considers swapping the motherboard to be making an OEM license invalid. (It's not the HP you bought, so the license supplied by MS to you through HP is no longer valid). Ta-da, M$ win$ again. The only way what you are doing could be legal is if it is either a) a full-blown license or b) an upgrade license, and you have a valid license for a previous, qualifying version of Windows.
As far as XP goes, Google volume license and setupp.ini {the only difference between MS XP Home, Pro, and VLK (Volume License Key) Pro is the contents of this file} to make it VLK (Volume License Key). As for M$'s activation, you can always just block it in the hosts file.
As for Vista/7: Google activate windows 7 without ms
Or go browsing around MDL (MyDigitalLife) forums, you can get help there.
As always, DRM does nothing to stop those with the sources or the know, which of course includes pirates, and the only ones caught in the crossfire are legitimate users.
-
I still have a Windows 98 computer that I use for old games because virtual machines and compatibility mode is a ***** to work with, but I either have to use an old license key from a machine that used to work, or pull one off of the 'nets (not so legal, hence why I did the former since the aforementioned machine is dead forever).
Where did you get that key? Did it come with the computer? If so, you are in violation already, as MS even considers swapping the motherboard to be making an OEM license invalid. (It's not the HP you bought, so the license supplied by MS to you through HP is no longer valid). Ta-da, M$ win$ again. The only way what you are doing could be legal is if it is either a) a full-blown license or b) an upgrade license, and you have a valid license for a previous, qualifying version of Windows.
As far as XP goes, acquire a volume license version, or search the nets for how to change the setupp.ini file in the ISO {the only difference between MS XP Home, Pro, and VLK Pro is the contents of this file} to make it VLK (Volume License Key). The first like three Google hits should get you that info. Then, get a VLK keygen, and set your hosts file to block M$'s activation server (also Google). Now you will always have XP.
As for Vista/7: Google activate windows 7 without ms
Or go browsing around MDL (MyDigitalLife) forums, you can get help there.
As always, DRM does nothing to stop those with the sources or the know,which of course includes pirates, and the only ones caught in the crossfire are legitimate users.
Always. All it takes to crack Windows 7 is RemoveWAT. You even get a working Windows Update.
A bit more OT, I guess: I played with the Windows 8 developer preview for a few months. If all I do is make tweaks to make it work more like Windows 7, that's a pretty clear indication that there's no reason to stop using Windows 7 in the first place. I could see it being decent for a tablet computer, though. Technically, since I have a Wacom Bamboo Create (shut up, it was cheap), I already have the option of using finger gestures to navigate through Win7, although using touch input for a desktop OS is a pointless novelty. I feel bad for the "what is this I not good with computer" types who will buy a new machine with Windows 8 and have to deal with the default UI elements.
As a few posters have already pointed out, trying to make a cross-platform OS means that it's just not going to be very good on any of the platforms.
-
Just for future reference, let's pull back on the "lol pirate Windows keys" line of discussion.
-
Even if Microsoft's bull**** policies with handling license keys are indeed bull****, when it comes to OSes for primary use, I still think it'd be better to relocate to something more... legal. (And potentially, more reliable.)
Really, all of this is going to be hearsay until Windows 8 has been out for a month. We'll see just how bad of a ****storm it is after that.
-
Officially, I have to say that I am not comfortable with the level of discussion RE: keys and work around methods to circumvent, even by abstraction.
And while I don't wish to convey a censorship of "free speech", it is still verging pretty close to the Board policies to the extent that I'd personally be a lot happier if some posts (and quotes of them) would be edited as I'd rather not have to do it myself. Especially as conversation regarding circumvention of protections of previous OSes does not in and of itself contribute to an actual discussion of Windows 8.
Thank you.
-
Getting things back onto topic:
"Buy a new HP laptop for college, get a free pair of Beats headphones. Plus, if you buy a laptop now, we'll refund your Windows 8 upgrade at no additional charge." - an actual commercial from HP
See? Even HP hates it. :ick:
-
Getting things back onto topic:
"Buy a new HP laptop for college, get a free pair of Beats headphones. Plus, if you buy a laptop now, we'll refund your Windows 8 upgrade at no additional charge." - an actual commercial from HP
See? Even HP hates it. :ick:
Means HP will pay for the upgrade to Windows 8, when it becomes available, if you buy a Windows 7 laptop now? How does that translate to hating it.
-
You misunderstood the commercial. HP is saying they'll pay for a free upgrade to Windows 8 when 8 comes out. I suppose MS offering current purchasers of OEM Windows 7 (7 with a new computer) their Windows 8 upgrade for $15 means HP figures "Hey, I'll bite that..." as it's a selling feature. Plus, with all of the Windows 8 haters and late adopters (don't get a new OS till SP1 crowd), HP probably won't even have to pay the $15.
-
I interpreted it as "Since Windows 8 RTM is out, we'll refund you for having to upgrade to Windows 8."
I could've been wrong :rolleyes:
-
So, I got Windows 8 through MSDNAA.
Pros:
I like the window decorations.
The whole OS seems a lot more responsive (I don't think this has anything to do with it being a new install; I did do an upgrade install over Win 7)
The ribbonized explorer is actually great
Cons:
The start menu. After going through it, unpinning everything that was pinned there by default and then pinning the stuff I actually use it is somewhat usable, but it's still unnecessarily obtuse. For example, start menu search hasn't been removed, but there is no hint in the acual UI that this is the case. I also installed Stardocks' "Start8", just to get a normal-sized target to click on on the taskbar, and to get a quickly reachable shortcut to shut the thing down.
Inconsistency. The whole user experience feels inconsistent. On one hand, you have beautifully redesigned tools like the task manager, on the other, stuff like the device manager or the various settings dialogues haven't been updated forever.
Then there's the divide between "Apps" and normal programs; much like the Widgets from the Vista era, apps exist completely separate from the desktop programs. Unlike them, there is no good way to make the two interact; using apps always means going through the start menu into a fullscreen application, which in cases like the mail app or the twitter app I use is just a waste of screen real estate. Beautiful waste, though.
In conclusion, my verdict for now is "skip it, unless you get it for free and don't mind the initial setup period". It is certainly not a mandatory upgrade.
PS: During setup, I had a weird failure when installing the GPU drivers. For some reason, ATI's installer refused to recognize my card, and thus didn't give me the option of installing the proper driver; I had to go through the device manager and install the damn thing manually to get it to work.
-
Quite, I agree that Win8 is an inconsistent mess when it comes to PCs. It's great that a lot under the hood has been upraded and it is more responsive than Win7, but consistency of applications and user interface is a horrid mess.
Perhaps Win9 will make things right once again. Assuming PC business even exists then anymore.
-
I forced myself to use it for a month, and feel pretty much the same. It's not /horrible/ or anything. Start-up times are faster, or, at least, they were on my crappy old laptop. I just felt like there was an incredibly unnecessary amount of tweaking involved to get it to do what I wanted it to do. I like to customize things, by nature, so that's saying a lot. I installed a simple script that was set to run at start-up that would boot it straight to the desktop instead of the obviously-touchscreen-optimized "charm" window. I made my own crappy hack of a start menu from a jumplist. I started utilizing Windows key shortcuts a lot more often.
If Windows 7 disappeared from the face of the planet tomorrow and I had to use 8, I don't think I'd complain all that much. It's not a big deal one way or another. I just don't really see a reason to "upgrade" from 7 at the moment.
-
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/08/samsung-start-menu-app-shows-why-microsoft-is-going-its-own-way-with-surface/
(http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/s-launch.jpg)
OEMs have started shipping Start Menu emulators with their copies of Windows 8. :lol:
-
wow. that article read like it was written by a microsoft marketing director.
"WE know what's best for you! Customizing things the way you want and defeating our sales-driven design is IMPEDING your enjoyment!!!!"
what. teh. ****. do they really think we're stupid enough to be fooled by that?
(don't answer that)
-
they think that apple became worth the better part of a trillion dollars by doing that, so they will too.
-
they think that apple became worth the better part of a trillion dollars by doing that, so they will too.
Well Apple kinda did... and now they are kinda hogging the ignorant sheeple masses that Microsoft would need to repeat Apple's success. :P
-
The problem is that Apple probably has a patent on "computer-like devices with Apps", so this is bound to go to court.
-
Apple has a cross patent license deal with Microsoft from when Microsoft bailed Apple.
-
that would explain why more and more of microsoft's stuff is emulating apple's stuff.
-
(http://shinnok.com/rants/wp-content/uploads/dude_they_buy_os.jpg) (http://shinnok.com/rants/2009/02/05/dude-they-buy-oslooosers/)
(http://apcmag.com/system/files/images/Apple_Microsoft_desktop1.article-width.jpg) (http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=I+hate+Microsoft&word2=I+hate+Apple)
-
So, more disconcerting than the user-interface issue is the fact that new machine shipping with Windows 8 will automatically be placed in secure boot mode, and if locked there by OEM who use a firmware key, you will be unable to dual-boot or run any other OS without virtualization.
WTF?
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/linus-torvalds-on-windows-8-uefi-and-fedora/11187
-
That's Windows RT (ARM), Windows 8 (x86/x64) does not have that. And on ARM you'll be able to install other OSs provided they have a key. Canonical and Red Hat seem to have been able to do so for their OSs.
-
Windows 8 x86/64 supports it as well, but I'm fairly certqin that there's a condition in the agreement for windows 8 x86/64 certification that says that oems must allow secure boot to be shut off.
-
I think you could always boot Linux or another OS from the Windows boot menu. You can do that now, try putting EasyBCD (http://neosmart.net/EasyBCD) (personal use is free, have to look for the link, e-mail is not required, contrary to appearances) on your Windows machine, and edit the startup menu from there.
EDIT: If the NeoSmart site isn't letting you download, get it from Softpedia (http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/OS-Enhancements/EasyBCD.shtml). I think it just my connection, though (landlord's HughesNet <ick!> Satellite connection via repeater at almost max range).
-
I spoke to a friend of mine who works at an Intel-run CPU/BIOS interfacing lab in Columbia, SC, and everyone he works with absolutely abhors the UEFI paradigm. They all insist that UEFI is going the way of the Vista at some point--and Secure Boot with it--though I wonder just how much of that prediction is optimism. :nono:
-
I think you could always boot Linux or another OS from the Windows boot menu. You can do that now, try putting EasyBCD (http://neosmart.net/EasyBCD) (personal use is free, have to look for the link, e-mail is not required, contrary to appearances) on your Windows machine, and edit the startup menu from there.
With EFI secure boot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_8#Secure_boot) enabled, if the OS isn't signed with the right key then it won't boot. As mentioned earlier though, not only have MS have mandated the ability to turn it off (on x86 at least) as part of the certification agreement, but several popular distros (SuSE, Fedora and notably, Ubuntu) have announced plans to support the feature.
I spoke to a friend of mine who works at an Intel-run CPU/BIOS interfacing lab in Columbia, SC, and everyone he works with absolutely abhors the UEFI paradigm. They all insist that UEFI is going the way of the Vista at some point--and Secure Boot with it--though I wonder just how much of that prediction is optimism. :nono:
It's taken 16 years for everyone to start moving away from the archaic PC BIOS, it'll probably take another 16 before any alternative to UEFI becomes viable...
-
Right, hmm, I haven't looked into how EFI booting works, but if it is similar enough to regular booting, then, after NTLDR (or its EFI equivalent) is loaded, then you just have to chainload another OS from the boot selection menu. Let me go see if this is plausible; then I'll post back.
EDIT:
EFI / UEFI seems to be a really good concept, and have been around for a long time, even without user knowledge, as some UEFI manufacturers have BIOS emulators built in. The idea behind UEFI is that the BIOS can perform diagnostic and other functions on its own, as well as UI (GUI or otherwise), and can load an OS, and provide low-level drivers for the OS to use until the OS's own specialized drivers take over (e.g., graphics while booting until the regular drivers can take over. Normally, the OS loads the basic graphics driver first, and then the specialized one later). UEFI (in its previous EFI form) has been supported since early 2000 era with no big fuss. However, your concern stems from M$ trying this nice little power grab: (-gasp! who would've thought??)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface
Microsoft will demand that computers with the "Designed for Windows 8" logo use UEFI with secure boot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_boot) (which will only allow signed software to run on the device) enabled by default.[39 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-Windows8UEFISecureBoot-38)][40 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-Windows8UEFIClarifies-39)] Red Hat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat) developer Matthew Garrett raised concerns over the requirement for secure booting to be enabled by default and Microsoft responded by saying that there was no mandate from Microsoft that prevents secure booting from being disabled in firmware or that keys could not be updated and managed.[39 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-Windows8UEFISecureBoot-38)][40 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-Windows8UEFIClarifies-39)] Microsoft later reversed this position, mandating that disabling SecureBoot on ARM-based systems "MUST NOT be possible."[41 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-Win8_Req-40)]
EDIT2: Hmm, there was more further down... IDK why the criticism is about UEFI, though, the problem seems to just be M$'s demands about Winblows 8....
Numerous digital rights activitists have protested against UEFI. Ronald G. Minnich, a co-author of coreboot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coreboot), and Cory Doctorow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Doctorow), a digital rights activist, have criticized EFI as an attempt to remove the ability of the user to truly control his computer.[46 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-FosdemInterviewRonaldGMinnich-45)][47 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-46)] It does not solve any of the BIOS's long standing problems of requiring two different drivers—one for the firmware and one for the operating system—for most hardware.[48 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-YouTubeCorebootFirmware-47)]
TianoCore,[49 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-48)] an open-source project which provides the UEFI interfaces, lacks the specialized drivers that initialize chipset functions, which are instead provided by coreboot, of which TianoCore is one of many payload options. The development of Coreboot requires chipset manufactures to cooperate by providing specifications needed to develop initialization drivers.
UEFI reimplements a full networking stack, unlike many BIOSes, and therefore is a target for remote security exploits.[50 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-49)]
Secure Boot
See also: Windows 8#Secure boot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_8#Secure_boot) and Hardware restrictions#Windows 8 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_restrictions#Windows_8)
In his article "UEFI secure booting", Red Hat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat) developer Matthew Garrett raised a concern that UEFI's "secure boot" feature may impact Linux: Any machine with the Windows 8 logo and with secure boot enabled and that ships with only OEM and Microsoft keys will not boot a generic copy of Linux.[51 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-50)][52 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-51)] In response, Microsoft stated that customers may be able to disable the secure boot feature in the UEFI interface.[2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-ElReg1-1)][53 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-52)] Concern remained that some OEMs might omit that capability in their computers, and later it was reported that Microsoft apparently prohibited the implementation of such a feature on ARM systems.[54 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-softwarefreedom1-53)][55 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-54)]
Joshua Gay of the Free Software Foundation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundation) (FSF) also raised concerns about "secure boot"; the FSF declared a public statement open for anyone to sign:
We, the undersigned, urge all computer makers implementing UEFI's so-called "Secure Boot" to do it in a way that allows free software operating systems to be installed. To respect user freedom and truly protect user security, manufacturers must either allow computer owners to disable the boot restrictions, or provide a sure-fire way for them to install and run a free software operating system of their choice. We commit that we will neither purchase nor recommend computers that strip users of this critical freedom, and we will actively urge people in our communities to avoid such jailed systems.[56 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-55)][57 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-56)]
In December 2011, Microsoft released a document about hardware certification of OEM products: Windows Hardware Certification Requirements, [41 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-Win8_Req-40)] confirming significantly different requirements regarding secure boot for the x86/x86-64 architecture and the ARM architecture. It has been revised several times since being issued. As of July 30 2012, the document requires that x86 and x86-64 devices have "secure boot" enabled by default. However, it requires that the firmware include an option to disable secure boot, and also a custom secure boot mode that provides the ability to add cryptographic signatures from vendors other than Microsoft. ARM devices are required to have secure boot enabled by default, and are required not to provide either an option to disable it, nor a custom mode that allows the user to add alternate signatures.[54 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#cite_note-softwarefreedom1-53)]
EDIT3: So, I guess the TL;DR version is M$ is trying to say "**** off, we own ARM" ?? And possibly x86 and x86-64 if they can get that too... :doubt:
EDIT4: Easiest way around this: create some "company" that sells a universal UEFI chainloader for other OSes (there is one mentioned somewhere in the wiki article I think, openboot or somesuch) anyways, have the OEMs sign their UEFI for that, then use the software bootloader to have the signature keys from M$ to load their bloatware if desired, along with nice OSes likee Linux and MacOS.
-
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/08/samsung-start-menu-app-shows-why-microsoft-is-going-its-own-way-with-surface/
-snip-
OEMs have started shipping Start Menu emulators with their copies of Windows 8. :lol:
This is the one thing that might make Windows 8 on PC bearable.
-
:bump:
Official launch event in NY live right now (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/oct/25/microsoft-windows-8-launch-live), devices should be available tomorrow. I'm really curious how the public will react...
-
The public adores the iPhone. I predict the majority will love it. What of it? :lol:
-
the public will "love it" simply because it's heavily promoted and comes with their new computer.
-
Yupp. Same as iPhone.
-
You got a new iPhone with your Computer?
-
What do you guys think about Windows 8 and its apparent bull****?
I believe Windows 8 will improve the use of Tablet PCs in production and logistics. So it might be boost Microsoft sales in the professional market.
Nowadays PCs are mostly used in an office environment, and Tablet PCs (like the I Pad) are only used for personal entertainment.
A Windows Tablet PC what is easy to integrate in a company's networks and runs applications like Word, Excel & Access may be helpful for workers in storehouses, laboratory and production plants.
I-Pads and Android Tablets are IMHO at the moment not alternative.
And as for us PC Gamers,... well I don't think we are really important for Microsoft.
-
What do you guys think about Windows 8 and its apparent bull****?
I believe Windows 8 will improve the use of Tablet PCs in production and logistics. So it might be boost Microsoft sales in the professional market.
Nowadays PCs are mostly used in an office environment, and Tablet PCs (like the I Pad) are only used for personal entertainment.
A Windows Tablet PC what is easy to integrate in a company's networks and runs applications like Word, Excel & Access may be helpful for workers in storehouses, laboratory and production plants.
I-Pads and Android Tablets are IMHO at the moment not alternative.
And as for us PC Gamers,... well I don't think we are really important for Microsoft.
One caveeat... for professional applications... we have had awesome Tablet Computers with both touch and also the rather incredible WACOM Pen technology for years now already.
(And several companies that require either devices that offer precise drawing/handwriting capabilities or the ability to effectively use them while standing/walking have been using them extensively.)
I've been using first a Thinkpad X220 convertible, and now a Motion J3500 Slate over a span of about 4 years already and lemme tell you, for education, architecture, medical applications and artists those Tablet PCs are still without peer. A Wacom "Penabled" Tablet with a professional drawing program (for artists) or OneNote (for teaching, note taking or marking up documents) has no viable competitor - none.
With Windows 8 we may now finally see devices that are as capable as those larger Tablet Computers (which are usually 12" devices), but in a much smaller form factor and with much less weight and... for much less money (Professional 12" Tablets have traditionally been very very expensive.).
That's nice... but for someone who has been using Tablet Computers professionally for about 4 years now.... not really anything new. ;)
So... my suspicion is, commercial success... is not really that much about capabilities.... but rather much more about marketing and the devices "sexyness".
The Surface (Pro) is sexy.... and it is lightyears ahead of an IPad in usefulness... but it can't do anything that professional Tablet PCs haven't been offering for years.
(It may even be worse if the Microsoft Pen is not up to Wacom Standards... which it likely isn't.)
Now why is this a (potential) caveeat? Well... it will be one if it turns out that the market at large doesn't give a sh** about the advantages of fully featured "computers" in Tablet format and continues to simply choose the device that is perceived as the "sexiest" (i.e. Apple) as long as it can do some web browsing, Facebook and some casual/mobile games.
So now that everyone is crazy about Tablets (thanks to Apple)... Microsofts success really hinges on the question wether the majority of users can appreciate the capabilities of a fully featured computer... interesting times heh. ;)
Or in other words: Just how low is the lowest common denominator... we're about to find out!
-
You got a new iPhone with your Computer?
It's wildly promoted as must-have, 'hip', yada yada. Having tried it: yes, it's slick. However, too OCD-controlling, preventing customization for fear of ruining my "experience"... lol wut? That's what restore is for if I break something.
-
the point being there's a pretty significant difference between the iphone being a pop culture fad and windows being all but forced upon PC buyers.
-
iOS is rather forced upon iPhone/iPad users.
especially seeing how it is now actually illegal to jailbreak iPads.
-
Yeah. There is a project to get Android running on the iPhone, but IIRC it only (sort of) works on the 3G (not 3GS and up) iPhones. And Apple actively opposes jailbreaking via the iOS and hardware design of iDevices. Each new update to the software removes the previously found exploit allowing jailbreaking. M$ seems to be trying to follow suit with UEFI on non-x86/x64 platforms.
EDIT: I should add, at least with the x86/x64 platform, you can always just decline the MS EULA. I think they will refund you your money IIRC. Then you can install Linux. Or MacOS if you have the drivers and software to pull it off.
EDIT2: On second thought, that doesn't make sense (MS refunding your money). I may be mistaking my memory of reading about that. I'll have to look it up. :rolleyes:
-
especially seeing how it is now actually illegal to jailbreak iPads.
Say what now?
-
He's bluffing. Court's actually decided the opposite, that it is quite legal to jailbreak your iOS devices.
-
He's bluffing. Court's actually decided the opposite, that it is quite legal to jailbreak your iOS devices.
I imagine that depends where you live, which is why I was asking.
-
Today I had the opportunity to try out the official release version of W8 - on a touchscreen. Test subject was a Sony VAIO all-in-one. As W8 is hardly designed for mouse and keyboard, I felt I should give the touch interface a chance.
DISCLAIMER
What follows is the highly subjective opinion of a first-time, mildly prejudiced W8-touchscreen user. I'm focusing mainly on the 'Modern' interface (for that's what it's called now, from what I've heard), because apparently that's the future Microsoft has prepared for us; if they get away with it in W8, I expect much more of it in W9.
The good
Yeah, okay, the Start screen makes sense for a touch interface - probably more so than the old menu. And some bits of Modern are looking quite the part - for some reason I liked the computer settings app, once I'd figured out how it works. Furthermore it's generally responsive, like any halfway decent OS should on a system like that.
The bad
Aside from the start screen, I was rather disappointed by W8's touch controls. You know how with a mouse, the start button pops up if you move to the bottom-left corner? No such thing on touch. I tried tapping, dragging, swiping, to no avail. So much for an easy way back to the Start screen. The next most convenient option to go back would be via the ridiculously-named 'Charms bar', which you're supposed to swipe in from the right. There's a knack to that, too: you really have to swipe in from outside the screen border to bring it up, just dragging near the right edge isn't good enough. But alright, once I got that figured it went pretty smoothly.
Next up, multitasking. It's practically impossible. You've probably heard that all 'apps' (as in, stuff you get from the Windows Store) run in fullscreen, but that they can also be used side-by-side. Well, that's only true on a widescreen; if you want to multi-app on a 1280x1024, you're out of luck. And then still! Using apps side-by-side only works with one big and one small app. The width distribution is fixed around 80/20 (or 20/80). Even on a big screen like the VAIO's, this means the smaller app is barely wide enough for following a chat. There is no way to choose the width of the apps yourself, you can't even just make them equally wide (like you can on the desktop).
And app switching? If you drag in from the left, you'll get the previous app you were in. But what if you have more than two apps open? I found this out purely by chance: drag in from the left, as if to get the previous app, then drag it back off the screen and you'll get an overview of the apps you have open. How that's supposed to be intuitive I have no idea.
Last but not least, closing apps. You may or may not know that to close an app, you have to grab its top and drag it down to the bottom of the screen. And you have to do it slowly, or your movement won't be recognized. On a big screen like the VAIO's, that takes two seconds. Two full seconds, for something that used to take naught but a click on a red button! I'm enough of a power user that that seriously bothers me. And it's not just that: the fanciness is overdone everywhere. In W7 it was already bothersome, but bearable: now it just gets in my way. Goddamn Minesweeper took thirty seconds to start up, taking me past loading screens, login screens, level selects, and a whole bunch of fancy animations in between. Thirty seconds!? I could have finished the game in that time! Twice! (On 'beginner', obviously). If they do this to (what used to be) a simple time-killing accessory like Minesweeper, I shudder at the thought of what else they still have in store.
The ugly
The design of the start screen I found utterly impersonal and downright annoying. Half the backgrounds are downright dull, the other half plain ugly, an all of them are terribly generic. Nope, you can't set a custom picture as background. There's about 20 predefined colour schemes to choose from; nope, can't define your own. And then the tiles. Every time you go to the start screen, BAM! COLOURFUL CHAOS! I should probably mention that I'm used to Rainmeter, which makes your desktop look like this (http://i.imgur.com/sAvRc.jpg); it's highly customizable and generally subdued. Next to that, the Start screen looks like a kindergarten: colourful, messy, and all the kids are begging for your attention. Oh yes, they are: the much-hailed live-updating tiles get downright annoying after a while. And often, in their efforts to grab your attention, the third-party apps get quite unrecognizable: while the tile displays a slideshow of sometimes barely relevant pictures, the actual logo of the app - your only hook to find the correct app in the mess of tiles - gets reduced to a tiny box in a corner. While that's technically not Microsoft's fault, it still adds to the issues that make the start screen - IMO - very annoying.
tl;dr
Touchscreen interface doesn't work quite as good as people would have you believe; except in the start screen, the mouse remains the most convenient input device. Multitasking is nigh impossible, fanciness gets in the way of productivity, the start screen is impersonal and chaotic. 2/5, recommend against.
-
FSF, try one of these?
Windows 8: Four approaches to Start Menu / Desktop restoration (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=82708.0)
-
I've been using Windows 8 since the Release Preview came out. At first I used a mouse and keyboard, but then I bought a touchscreen to make sure I got the full experience. Since the Release Preview didn't have a walkthrough (like the full version does), I had to rely on web reviews and youtube videos to find out about things like which side to swipe in from for what. I researched these before downloading the release preview, as any intelligent buyer should do before committing to a new product. What ended up happening was that I switched back to the mouse and keyboard for most situations. This actually eliminated most of the problems talked about by FreeSpaceFreak.
Aside from the start screen, I was rather disappointed by W8's touch controls. You know how with a mouse, the start button pops up if you move to the bottom-left corner? No such thing on touch. I tried tapping, dragging, swiping, to no avail. So much for an easy way back to the Start screen. The next most convenient option to go back would be via the ridiculously-named 'Charms bar', which you're supposed to swipe in from the right. There's a knack to that, too: you really have to swipe in from outside the screen border to bring it up, just dragging near the right edge isn't good enough. But alright, once I got that figured it went pretty smoothly
This was one of the things that I defaulted to mouse for. While swiping in from the right makes sense on a tablet using a two-handed grip, on a normal PC with mouse and keyboard, it's much faster to move into the "Start Corner" and click. Also, I'm pretty sure all Windows 8-branded tablets have a built-in Start button much like Apple's square and Android's Home.
Next up, multitasking. It's practically impossible. You've probably heard that all 'apps' (as in, stuff you get from the Windows Store) run in fullscreen, but that they can also be used side-by-side. Well, that's only true on a widescreen; if you want to multi-app on a 1280x1024, you're out of luck. And then still! Using apps side-by-side only works with one big and one small app. The width distribution is fixed around 80/20 (or 20/80). Even on a big screen like the VAIO's, this means the smaller app is barely wide enough for following a chat. There is no way to choose the width of the apps yourself, you can't even just make them equally wide (like you can on the desktop).
I don't piddle around too much with side-by-side multi-tasking; it's usually only when I want to have one of the Win8 "Metro" apps on the side of my desktop. Like Music, Skype, or Video. I find old-fashioned Alt-tabbing to be much easier. Also, Alt-tabbing eliminates the frustration of the swipe-in-from-the-left-then-back issue. Again, it might make better sense on a tablet, though without the tutorial, it'd be very hard to figure that out.
Last but not least, closing apps. You may or may not know that to close an app, you have to grab its top and drag it down to the bottom of the screen. And you have to do it slowly, or your movement won't be recognized. On a big screen like the VAIO's, that takes two seconds. Two full seconds, for something that used to take naught but a click on a red button! I'm enough of a power user that that seriously bothers me.
I, too, had frustration with this, but for a different reason. On the big screen, it is annoying to try to use touch. Again, probably easier on a tablet. However, with a mouse, it's much more intuitive to drag from top to bottom than to swing to the corner to close the app with the "red button" which may or may not be there, depending on which program you're using. Even if it is there, certain ones have a "dead zone" in the very corner to prevent accidental closes. This results in (what do you know) a go-to-the-upper-right-corner-and-back issue. Which is avoided by a simple click-and-drag from anywhere on the top.
My main problem with it was that it did not extend to so-called desktop (non-Metro) apps. There have been a couple of times where, out of habit, I've clicked-and-dragged from the top, only to realize that instead of closing, I've only minimized my program to the taskbar. :banghead: I've also found myself trying to drag the start screen closed in order to get to the desktop, but since the desktop itself is considered an app, and the start screen is the new "main screen," this doesn't work.
The design of the start screen I found utterly impersonal and downright annoying. Half the backgrounds are downright dull, the other half plain ugly, an all of them are terribly generic. Nope, you can't set a custom picture as background. There's about 20 predefined colour schemes to choose from; nope, can't define your own. And then the tiles. Every time you go to the start screen, BAM! COLOURFUL CHAOS! I should probably mention that I'm used to Rainmeter, which makes your desktop look like this; it's highly customizable and generally subdued. Next to that, the Start screen looks like a kindergarten: colourful, messy, and all the kids are begging for your attention. Oh yes, they are: the much-hailed live-updating tiles get downright annoying after a while. And often, in their efforts to grab your attention, the third-party apps get quite unrecognizable: while the tile displays a slideshow of sometimes barely relevant pictures, the actual logo of the app - your only hook to find the correct app in the mess of tiles - gets reduced to a tiny box in a corner. While that's technically not Microsoft's fault, it still adds to the issues that make the start screen - IMO - very annoying.
This I wholeheartedly agree with. Personally, I picked a color scheme very close to the hardlight forum's. But I've also noticed the issues with live tiles (especially news apps) becoming hard to differentiate from other random-picture apps. I'm sure with time you can remember where you have it (the system of naming groups of tiles can help with this), but if you want an easy-to-find logo, you'll have to disable the live feature.
On a positive note for power users, if you right-click the "Start Corner" you get a convenient listing of 15 commonly used features like the Control Panel, Disk Manager, Programs and Features, etc. I only wish they let the control panel display as a menu instead of just a shortcut.
All told, I think Windows 8 works great with a mouse and keyboard, better than with touch on a large screen. If you have a tablet, the touch will work well once you learn the system. It does have a steep learning curve for people that are used to older versions of Windows, but come 25 years from now, nobody but us old folks will have any clue what a Start menu is.
Also, I'd like to recommend this in-depth Windows 8 review/walkthrough. It's the best one I've come across so far: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-8-review,3334.html
-
FSF, try one of these?
Windows 8: Four approaches to Start Menu / Desktop restoration (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=82708.0)
Hey, I'm not actually using W8, just tried it out in a virtual box and at an electronics store. I'll take Linux any time - more stable, more safe, more user-friendly, better-looking (some distros, anyway) and free. Can't beat that in price/quality. And it comes with DVD playback right out of the box, idk why that's suddenly so hard for Windows.
*snip*
Ah, good, someone to counter my rather negative experience :) I too found the mouse+keyboard a better choice than touchscreen, despite the extra mouse distance required. The drag-down-to-close is surprisingly intuitive indeed, I just wish it would make do with a quick pull, instead of actually having to drag it all the way down. Good in-depth and objective review, too, thanks for sharing.
-
Even reading the more positive reviews, I can't see how this could possibly be a good thing for 'power users'.
-
FSF, perhaps increase mouse sensitivity? I like mine so I can get diagonally across the screen just using my thumb and fingers, keeping my hand stationary. Takes getting used to but well worth it.
-
Also, I'd like to recommend this in-depth Windows 8 review/walkthrough. It's the best one I've come across so far: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-8-review,3334.html
Hmm.
I'm quite skeptical on using Win8 if even someone who generally likes it still suggests I read a 20 page article on how to use my 6th iteration of Windows. I really shouldn't have to study how to use Windows at this point.
-
Also, I'd like to recommend this in-depth Windows 8 review/walkthrough. It's the best one I've come across so far: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-8-review,3334.html
Hmm.
I'm quite skeptical on using Win8 if even someone who generally likes it still suggests I read a 20 page article on how to use my 6th iteration of Windows. I really shouldn't have to study how to use Windows at this point.
The thing is, the only thing that is really different is that there's a whole new "METRO UI", which is basically like getting used to the UI of any new program/Phonething/Linux distro --- Which is completely optional. You can just use the start menu and the desktop, the only difference is that the start menu is now a fullscreen thing, and is MUCH, MUCH easier to navigate IMO (it basically is like the desktop).
In fact, untill you use programs that actively use the metro UI (which is rather neat by the way, as it is basically like having the "F11 fullscreen" mode you ahve in some browsers and readers, but then on all the time and having a universal way of browsing trough them) - Windows 8 is a very marginal difference over Windows 7. Over that, it's not even worth upgrading. Basically: What "The E" said.
As for learning to navigate the Metro UI - it's not that hard. Just move your mouse to the top corners of the screen, and watch how stuff appears.
-
Hypothetically, if this UI catches on, and more and more laptops/desktop are gonna feature touchscreens - I wonder what Apple would do? If it turns out that the customer likes this newfangled touch thing, would Apple follow suit, or would they stick to the good old desktop?
FSF, perhaps increase mouse sensitivity? I like mine so I can get diagonally across the screen just using my thumb and fingers, keeping my hand stationary. Takes getting used to but well worth it.
Let me reiterate: NOT. USING. IT. :P I'm perfectly happy with my Ubuntus, and I still have a W7 install that does everything I really need Windows for.
-
Even reading the more positive reviews, I can't see how this could possibly be a good thing for 'power users'.
It wouldn't be a "good thing" or a "bad thing," really... just an adjustment. There's a few niceties like extra detail in the Task Manager and such, but I don't think there's any huge gains or losses in functionality. Unless you're talking about Windows RT. Not quite sure what MS was thinking with that one. If anything, maybe they should have released the full version first, let the app base grow, then release RT later so that they had more than a threadbare app selection.
I'm quite skeptical on using Win8 if even someone who generally likes it still suggests I read a 20 page article on how to use my 6th iteration of Windows. I really shouldn't have to study how to use Windows at this point.
I'm not suggesting that you'll have to read all 20 pages in order to use Windows 8. That would be truly awful. It's just a very thorough review that should be able to answer a lot of FAQs.
-
The more I use Windows 8, the less I dislike the random changes. It's certainly almost worth it for the under-the-hood improvements alone. My testbed laptop, running on a truly pitiful dual core 2.0 GHz CPU, 3 gigs of RAM, a typical 5400RPM HDD, and integrated graphics, goes from power-on to desktop in 15-16 seconds, including the couple of seconds spent on the BIOS screen. I was pretty damned impressed by that little detail.
One thing I'll say about it: learn your keyboard shortcuts and you'll be absolutely fine.
-
Gimme an example of a keyboard shortcut.
(Apart from the classic ones that is, alt-d, alt-e, alt-tab and so on).
-
Heh...here I am all the way back on XP, I still haven't managed to upgrade the family machine from Vista to 7, and now apparently 8 is an utter cluster****. Fun fun. :D
7 is good. My sister and I found it very usable (we skipped Vista because we don't upgrade often and I recommended 7 because I had a bad feeling about 8). Stick to 7 if you want something that has the feel of Windows XP.
They've gone nuts with the advertising here in Singapore. A (terrible) Windows 8 Television commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ2cftjyHys) and Windows 8 stickers on the upper windshield of double-decker buses may not seem like a lot, but it's the most visible mass advertising for any desktop OS ever seen here.
-
They've gone nuts with the advertising here in Singapore. A (terrible) Windows 8 Television commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ2cftjyHys) and Windows 8 stickers on the upper windshield of double-decker buses may not seem like a lot, but it's the most visible mass advertising for any desktop OS ever seen here.
Hey, I saw that commercial in the cinema the other day (Germany). Funny how they advertise screw-multitasking W8 with the slogan "Everything at once" :blah: The entire city has been plastered with W8 posters, too.
-
Gimme an example of a keyboard shortcut.
(Apart from the classic ones that is, alt-d, alt-e, alt-tab and so on).
Mostly, I mean the Windows key shortcuts, like Win+E for explorer, etc.
-
Gimme an example of a keyboard shortcut.
(Apart from the classic ones that is, alt-d, alt-e, alt-tab and so on).
Mostly, I mean the Windows key shortcuts, like Win+E for explorer, etc.
I hate it because it's unfamiliar! :)
-
^ Yeah that was what I meant. Win+E, Win+D, Win+tab (LOL), Win+U, Win+M and so on.
-
Even reading the more positive reviews, I can't see how this could possibly be a good thing for 'power users'.
It wouldn't be a "good thing" or a "bad thing," really... just an adjustment. There's a few niceties like extra detail in the Task Manager and such, but I don't think there's any huge gains or losses in functionality.
Didn't someone a page ago mention that you can't use more than two windows / scale them anymore? That's a pretty serious design change that will hurt productivity in A LOT of fields.
-
Even reading the more positive reviews, I can't see how this could possibly be a good thing for 'power users'.
It wouldn't be a "good thing" or a "bad thing," really... just an adjustment. There's a few niceties like extra detail in the Task Manager and such, but I don't think there's any huge gains or losses in functionality.
Didn't someone a page ago mention that you can't use more than two windows / scale them anymore? That's a pretty serious design change that will hurt productivity in A LOT of fields.
Only in the Metro/Modern interface. On the desktop you still have the same Windows 7 style management abilities.
-
It's just soooo confusing....
-
It's really not that confusing once you get a bit more of the workflow figured out. I have no real issue jumping back and forth between Windows 7 and 8, as my desktop and laptop are both 8 machines and my HTPC, the girlfriends computer, and my spare test/dev/cart-to-parent's-place tower are all running 7. Most of the critical settings and such are in the same places once you get past the slightly different abstraction layer to get to them, and the quick menu when right clicking on the bottom left is mighty handy. As is the improved task manager, integrated AV and integrated ISO and VHD mounting. Just nice little add-ons that I find myself missing a bit on fresh installs of Win 7.
Nothing I've thrown at it has been difficult to make functional, with the exception of a remarkable amount of difficulty getting the Android ADB and SDKs working. At worst, I've had to do a compatibility mode install of the drivers for my Radeon 4870 that got bumped into the home theatre, as the Windows 7 drivers and CCC work fine, but won't install in Win 8 without the compatibility mode set.
In short, not as huge of an immediate usability jump as from, say a fresh install of XP to a fresh install of 7; but still a nice upgrade if you aren't paying full price for it.
(Notice I'm comparing fresh installs here. I reinstall often as a reason excuse to organize and consolidate files every 6 months or so, and I notice the difference in setup time getting to the same level of usability)
-
In interesting news, Steven Sinofsky has left Microsoft (http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/Press/2012/Nov12/11-12AnnouncementPR.aspx). Why is this important, you ask? Simple. Windows 8 and The-UI-formally-known-as-Metro were Sinofsky's babies. He was also considered one of the most accomplished project leads MS had; It was his direction that salvaged 7 from the disaster that was Vista. Going to be interesting to see what'll happen next.
-
He was "fired" because he was a jerk. And apparently he was deemed as the "next CEO". Come on MS, really? Even in this issue you *had* to run your photocopiers? :D
Anyway, the problem apparently was that he was a jerk to other teams, and wasn't paying attention to "cross-platforms", which is ridiculous in this day and age of windows phone 8 and XBox. There's a huge potential being completely forgotten there. There's aledgedly lots of (quiet) hurrahs in Redmont now.