How Microsoft can salvage Windows 8 before it's too late

This is a tough challenge, given that Windows 8 is only a few months away from release. There's not a lot that Microsoft can do in this time. However, given that the Redmond giant has already gone on the record to say that the UI that we see in the Windows 8 Release Preview is not what will be in the final release, it's safe to say that things are in a certain state of flux.

As I've said on numerous occasions, the biggest problem with Windows 8 is the way that the dumbed-down Metro UI has been unceremoniously bolted onto the mature and well-refined "Classic" user interface. While there's no doubt that the existing UI is flawed, bolting on a UI designed for touch devices is not the answer.

OK, you asked me to keep this concise, so here it is. Here's how I think Microsoft should tweak Windows 8 before it's released:

Read more at:
How Microsoft can salvage Windows 8 before it's too late | ZDNet

 

[Arpan]

Well Jeff I had used Windows XP, worse POS since Windows 98SE. I can't understand how people LIKED it, it was so INSECURE. and you could count on re-installing it atleast twice weekly. Do a web search on Windows XP gets infected again, you'll get in the hundred of thousands of hits with any search engine. I was for one happy to upgrade to Vista getting away from WinXP was a happy day for me.

I have used XP too. Windows XP isn't as bad as you are describing.

I agree, that compared to the newer operating systems, xp isn't as secure as the others. This is something inevitable, since support for a more than decade old os isn't gonna be the same as a three or six year old os. But performance wise, vista is no match for xp. Windows 7 remains the best os by microsoft till date, followed by xp. (Windows 8 is still not a stable release)
Remember, xp has, even after more than a decade, the second hight user share in the world even today. People haven't liked it just because its called 'xp'

 

[Mike Lonewolf]

I agree with you Arpan, but you can't deny ALL those complaints out on the web, plus on top of that the so-called firewall was only OUT BOUND. Meaning it was worthless to anyone looking for protection from it. ZoneAlarm seen the opportunity and gave us a GOOD software firewall. As I said, I typed it in myself, and got this as the VERY first hit:
Windows 7 Infection Rate Lower Than Windows XP
Still wondering WHY anyone liked XP to begin with.

***EDIT*** My opinion XP stands for eXterminate Processors. Because that what it did

 

[lehnerus2000]

The most successful desktop OS in history

Well Jeff I had used Windows XP, worse POS since Windows 98SE. I can't understand how people LIKED it, it was so INSECURE. and you could count on re-installing it atleast twice weekly.

Yeah I guess that's why it is the most successful desktop OS in history.
It's so bad that 40% -50% of users refuse to upgrade from it, to the newer operating systems.

I definitely got hit by malware more times using W98 (between2000 to 2004) than XP.
I only had to reinstall XP twice (between 2004 and 2006) due to malware.

Once I swapped from IE6 to Firefox (~2006) my malware problems basically stopped (i.e. I'd only see malware in my AVG Virus Vault).
After that, the only times I ever reinstalled XP was when I got new HDDs.

I started using W7 at build 7048 and by build 7100 I only booted XP to update it.

 

[Lionell]

Windows 8 (aka Vista 2.0): no way! Not even on a touch device. I will move to Apple before I will do that.

They will have to take Windows 7 and a functional desktop/laptop computer out of my cold dead hands.

well for me, they may do that.

Love Win8, Metro could be better, but I cannot understand anyone loving Win7.

It is like the XP users, cannot understand that either, but I never used XP, so hard to judge

Anyway, Coke is right, Win7 WAS Vista2 and an improvement, but Win8 is better, hands down

Jeff

I agree that you cannot understand. Perhaps this will help. Best is determined by ones needs, desires, and purpose. Windows 8 violates all three of those for me. It is unacceptable for me because METRO is constantly getting in the way I work and think. It is also unacceptable because it has invisible actions that you MUST use to use the desktop. THIS is a violation of sound human engineering practice. Correct use should result from correct design and not training or documentation. The path Microsoft is taking is a monumental error.

Positive changes are good. Negative changes are bad. I have found only negative changes in Windows 8 with promises of more bad things to come. In particular: the world of computers will only be touch and touch apps must be approved and sold by and through Microsoft. THAT too will fail ,at least for me. I want no part of it. Someone must develop the software and content that the zombie like consumers of content use. That cannot be done on touch only devices. There is far more to this world than tweets, sharing photos, and staying connected (whatever that means).

Don't bother saying I am afraid of change. I started with computers long before you were born (1965) and have experienced and caused more change in more fields than you can imagine. I have been burned in about every way one can be burned. Not all change is good. Some changes destroy. It is important to learn the difference between good and bad. I suspect that will take some time before you will understand the difference.

 

[mart4494]

I'm a FanBoy, but I've always agreed that there should be a choice of UI upon installation or upon boot. If at RTM this is left out, I think there will be such a backlash from Pros, PUs, and enterprise that they will be forced at SP1 to allow the choice.

There's not going to be a choice at install time as that would totally defeat what MS are determined to achieve. Paid for apps and monthly subscription cloud computing. The cloud always sounds a great idea provided you have a 100% fast connection all of the time which in my experience simply is not the real world. As I've said from day one, MS are living in a bubble over this and I'm sure everything works fine at Redmond. You can just imagine those MS folks patting each other on the back but Win8 is simply not going to cut it outside of the MS bubble.

Sure they will pick up a few tablet sales with Win8 and who knows, just maybe it will work out fine with the phone. But as has already been commented elsewhere, when you need to do some serious stuff, design, etc then a touch screen simply does not work out as the most effective. But for reading e-mails, browsing, playing games then it'll (Win8) no doubt be fine.

I'll buy a copy for $40 but it will stay in the drawer. It's worth the gamble to see if the Classic UI makes a return with SP1 some 12 months down the road. I'm not holding my breath over that though.

 

[crawfish]

I'm a FanBoy, but I've always agreed that there should be a choice of UI upon installation or upon boot. If at RTM this is left out, I think there will be such a backlash from Pros, PUs, and enterprise that they will be forced at SP1 to allow the choice.

There's not going to be a choice at install time as that would totally defeat what MS are determined to achieve. Paid for apps and monthly subscription cloud computing. The cloud always sounds a great idea provided you have a 100% fast connection all of the time which in my experience simply is not the real world. As I've said from day one, MS are living in a bubble over this and I'm sure everything works fine at Redmond. You can just imagine those MS folks patting each other on the back but Win8 is simply not going to cut it outside of the MS bubble.

Sure they will pick up a few tablet sales with Win8 and who knows, just maybe it will work out fine with the phone. But as has already been commented elsewhere, when you need to do some serious stuff, design, etc then a touch screen simply does not work out as the most effective. But for reading e-mails, browsing, playing games then it'll (Win8) no doubt be fine.

I'll buy a copy for $40 but it will stay in the drawer. It's worth the gamble to see if the Classic UI makes a return with SP1 some 12 months down the road. I'm not holding my breath over that though.

So you're going to spend $40 on something you don't believe in and think is terrible and won't use in hopes of it all getting better in the future and saving maybe a similar tiny amount. The only way to vote your disapproval that counts is NOT TO BUY THE THING, yet you're planning to give Microsoft your money anyway, which will only validate their direction and encourage them, making it less likely for your gamble to pay off. I don't get it.

 

[mart4494]

So you're going to spend $40 on something you don't believe in and think is terrible and won't use in hopes of it all getting better in the future and saving maybe a similar tiny amount. The only way to vote your disapproval that counts is NOT TO BUY THE THING, yet you're planning to give Microsoft your money anyway, which will only validate their direction and encourage them, making it less likely for your gamble to pay off. I don't get it.

I don't think my $40's is going to make any difference one way or the other. The future direction of Win8 will be determined by the feedback from the OEM's and the media once it hits the streets. But I do concede your point.

 

[Arpan]

I agree with you Arpan, but you can't deny ALL those complaints out on the web, plus on top of that the so-called firewall was only OUT BOUND. Meaning it was worthless to anyone looking for protection from it. ZoneAlarm seen the opportunity and gave us a GOOD software firewall. As I said, I typed it in myself, and got this as the VERY first hit:
Windows 7 Infection Rate Lower Than Windows XP
Still wondering WHY anyone liked XP to begin with.

***EDIT*** My opinion XP stands for eXterminate Processors. Because that what it did

Yeah, I completely agree that there are those complaints and windows xp isn't probably best choice of os you want to have in your pc, if you want to keep pace with the rapidly changing world of tech

 

[jeffrys]

Well I will answer to all in one reply here:

Those that liked/like XP, find it hard to change to another more modern OS.

that the METRO is getting in the way, explain please, because it does NOT get in my way.

true I do not use METRO much myself, but that is not the fault of MS, it is my fault.

If only METRO could be snapped, then most of the problems would be gone and METRO would be more accepted.

That 40-50% of PC users will skip Win8.......is hard to believe for me. If one still wants to use XP (MY GOD), Vista or Win7 well do so, but not me.

Win7 is old news for me. I do not consider a PC+OS as a type machine, please look forward, do not look back.

Jeff

 

[FSeal]

Well I will answer to all in one reply here:

Those that liked/like XP, find it hard to change to another more modern OS.

that the METRO is getting in the way, explain please, because it does NOT get in my way.

true I do not use METRO much myself, but that is not the fault of MS, it is my fault.

If only METRO could be snapped, then most of the problems would be gone and METRO would be more accepted.

That 40-50% of PC users will skip Win8.......is hard to believe for me. If one still wants to use XP (MY GOD), Vista or Win7 well do so, but not me.

Win7 is old news for me. I do not consider a PC+OS as a type machine, please look forward, do not look back.

Jeff

When looking forward, one sees a world full of 24 inch monitors running one app at a time and a constant blitz of advertisement at every turn. One is right to cringe at the sight.

You're right, if Microsoft had handled Metro differently on desktops it would have been actually pallatable. Metro apps movable and sizable on the desktop, Start screen movable and resizable as well...

But the way they have neutered the desktop and bolted metro on like it was an entire second OS is just horrendous. A real slap in the face to anyone that is a "producer" as they call us. The new desktop is going to be stark and ugly with the new graphics as well. Is that the new future? Interface designs that look like they were done by and for first graders and run on machines that only have 16 color graphics cards?

I WANT a new forward looking Windows. But Metro is NOT it.

 

[Arpan]

that the METRO is getting in the way, explain please, because it does NOT get in my way.

Its the same case as me. Metro doesn't get in the way at all :thumbup:

Win7 is old news for me. I do not consider a PC+OS as a type machine, please look forward, do not look back.

I have exactly the same opinion as you :thumbup:

Those who don't like windows 8, microsoft is NOT forcing you to buy it. You buy Windows 8 if you like Windows 8, as simple as that.

And that is the reason why all these windows 8 preview 'os'es have been released.
Test it, don't like it, don't buy it
Like Windows 8? Wait for October 26

 

[HippsieGypsie]

I don't think my $40's is going to make any difference one way or the other. The future direction of Win8 will be determined by the feedback from the OEM's and the media once it hits the streets. But I do concede your point.

I'm glad to see you change your mind and concede the point. We often feel that our single, personal vote may not accomplish much, but, (I'll just throw out a number here) if 20 million customers do, that adds up quickly. That would be $800 mil USD at their introductory price. Anyone's guess what it would be thereafter if the price increases.

 

[tseven]

It needs more work. I don't think this will be the next vista as it doesn't feel laggy and this computer I'm using at the moment used to run vista and was super slow. But I also don't see the benefits aside from being super light when it's fully done. User interface is similar to windows 7 which should have happened a long time ago if they didn't wait so long to release vista which in itself was a disaster and didn't offer much of anything special compared to windows xp the biggest selling point of windows 7 was the new superbar(taskbar). I guess the only selling point for windows 8 is something that should have been in windows all along, faster operation. I don't even think they have time to make all the changes in order to make the system better.

 

[chev65]

I especially like this part.

However, given that the Redmond giant has already gone on the record to say that the UI that we see in the Windows 8 Release Preview is not what will be in the final release, it's safe to say that things are in a certain state of flux.

 

[jeffrys]

Fseal,

but my METRO only has in it what I want, no apps from MS, so when I open anything it is always as if snapping is working.

So no advertising either.

I include again my METRO screen and no mather what I click of the 43 possibilities, it opens just as I want.

that is why I like METRO. For me snapping is not necessary anymore. I have a shortcut for allsnap64 but that does not work.

I leave it just there.

So no mather what I click it opens just as if I was on the desktop.

Jeff

 

[HippsieGypsie]

As quoted from the article:

•Reinstate the Start Menu.
Scrolling through the Metro UI Start Screen is no better than scrolling through the Start menu, so why add change for the sake of change? While I'm sure some people will take to the Start Screen, for those that don't want it -- perhaps because they don't have a touch system, or just want to keep their old workflow -- then bring back the Start Menu.

While I appreciate his opinion, I personally find the Start Screen a big improvement over the Start menu. The Start menu is basically a hierarchical list of folders and programs shortcuts that one cannot rearrange, although one could add or subtract to it. The Start Screen however is a list of apps, programs, and IE favorites shortcuts that has live, informational tiles that are shortcuts that one can add or subtract to and rearrange to one's needs and liking. The Start menu didn't conveniently give me the at-a-glance information that I appreciate the tiles do or the flexibility of rearranging for organizing.

•Desktop-centric Windows.
Make it so it's possible to make the desktop the central focus of the operating system. Booting into the Windows Desktop is infinitely more useful for those on a traditional PC than booting to the Metro UI Start Screen. Unless you're driving Windows 8 via a touchscreened device, that Metro UI Start Screen is about as useful as a fire alarm that plays a lullaby.

Again, his opinion, although I'll agree on the choice of UI. Check all my posts on the subject and you'll find that I've always stated this.

I don't agree that:

Booting into the Windows Desktop is infinitely more useful for those on a traditional PC than booting to the Metro UI Start Screen. Unless you're driving Windows 8 via a touchscreened device, that Metro UI Start Screen is about as useful as a fire alarm that plays a lullaby.

BS! Now it's like he's putting blanks in his gun trying to ward off the "attacker M$". I don't find it difficult at all to navigate my way around 8 using a keyboard and mouse any less than prior OSs. In fact, I'll state that it's easier.

•Bring back the Start orb.
There's enough mystery meat navigation elements in Windows 8 already without adding more. I can understand why Microsoft pulled the Start orb -- because none of the other on-screen cursor hotspots that Microsoft has added have a visual element attached -- but the Start orb is so iconic that removing it is likely to cause no end of confusion.

"Mystery meat" my butt! Take the time to learn it! When upon final release, they most likely will add the "Getting Started" as in prior OSs and/or the help files. Just read them as we have in past new OSs to learn how to navigate and/or learn about functionality.

Confusion? Get a life! Windows key was the shortcut key to the orb and the Start menu in prior OSs. It continues to be the shortcut to the Start Screen in 8. WinKey....PQQF....Start Screen appears! WinKey again....PQQF....It's gone and one is back to prior screen. How Fn simple is that?!!

•Rename Windows RT
Windows RT is a wishy-washy name for a platform that doesn't give the consumer a clue as to what to expect. Even adding the word 'Tablet" somewhere would help. Come on Microsoft, give people a clue here somewhere.

I'm beginning to feel this guy is an iButt lover. Let's see...Uhmmm...Most of the world is literate and I'm quite sure when one doesn't understand a subject, such as the acronym RTM, one has the intelligence to search and read up on it. He assumes his readers just aren't that smart.

•Integration between the two versions of Internet Explorer
Windows 8 has two different versions of Internet Explorer. A "Classic" version and a "Metro" version. This introduced all the problems associated with running two browsers. While both versions share a common history file, that's about it.
Let me give you an example of what's wrong. If I'm working with both a "Classic" application and a "Metro" app, and I need the browser open in both screens -- sounds complicated, but this comes in handy when you're researching something -- there's no way to have both Internet Explorers synced so they show the same content.

Let me give YOU an example of what's wrong....YOU! Your complicated! I can see it must have been the "integration" of your parents that went wrong.

I don't have dual screens and not quite sure if he means that or split-screen (Snap), but I'll assume split screen here. I just opened both versions of IE on the same web page as seen below.

Metro

View attachment 7384

Traditional

View attachment 7385

Snapped side by side

View attachment 7386

Variations of snapping with Notepad

View attachment 7387


View attachment 7388

I'll admit they have a ways to go so far as snapping. Some get minimalized zoom wise or minimized in left field, etc. I can sympathize with Pros and PUs on this issue, but let's remember this is BETA.

•Use Windows 8 SP1 as an opportunity to refine both UIs
We know that it will take about a year from when Windows 8 is released before we see Service Pack 1. That gives Microsoft a chance to listen to user feedback -- and by users here I mean regular users, not people who've bothered to download and install the previews -- and configure the two UIs into what users want rather than what Microsoft thinks they want.

A half-way sensible statement. He stated in the opening his article:

There's not a lot that Microsoft can do in this time. However, given that the Redmond giant has already gone on the record to say that the UI that we see in the Windows 8 Release Preview is not what will be in the final release, it's safe to say that things are in a certain state of flux.

Flux meaning a state of ongoing change. So why would he assume that the RP is the way it will be at final release and then make his statement concerning SP1? Hollywood-talk-out-of-both-sides-of-mouth-BS! Why don't we just wait for the final release to see first before assuming?!!

 

[Mike Lonewolf]

HippsieGypsie said:

I personally find the Start Screen a big improvement over the Start menu. The Start menu is basically a hierarchical list of folders and programs shortcuts that one cannot rearrange, although one could add or subtract to it.

That is NOT true, you can indeed rearrange your programs, just right click on your Windows 95 - 7 Start button, Open all users, and then go from there and you can rename folders, change around everything so that it is the way you want it.

 

[vrosa]

Windows 8 (aka Vista 2.0): no way! Not even on a touch device. I will move to Apple before I will do that.

They will have to take Windows 7 and a functional desktop/laptop computer out of my cold dead hands.

well for me, they may do that.

Love Win8, Metro could be better, but I cannot understand anyone loving Win7.

It is like the XP users, cannot understand that either, but I never used XP, so hard to judge

Anyway, Coke is right, Win7 WAS Vista2 and an improvement, but Win8 is better, hands down

Jeff

I consider Windows 7 a great OS and personaly love it... It's what Vista should have been plus something. The case of Windows XP is different. It had its golden days, but now it's an outdated platform. I wouldnt say that Windows 8 is better or worse than Windows 7. It follows a new concept and I like it, except for the absence of the start menu and the inability to boot directly to desktop mode. When I saw Metro for the first time in Developer Preview I disliked it, but now understanding the concept, I feel better with it. The world is not ready to live without the classic UI yet, and that's why desktop is still there. If Microsoft undestood that right, Windows 8 RTM will be a very good OS.

 

[Arpan]

@lionell
Windows xp is not the most used os at present. Its Windows 7. Researches show that windows xp's popularity is continually declining. Many modern softwares don't run in xp. People are switching to windows 7.

Windows 2000 was never the most used os in the last 7 years or so. Ever since the release of xp, xp has ruled the market until came windows 7. Same goes with NT 3.5, after the release of xp, the usage share of other 'os'es have been significantly declining.

I don't think there are a lot of people complaining about end of support for windows 2000 and NT 3.5 at present. Microsoft is officially giving you support for W7 till 2020 and by that time only God knows what will happen. People might not be complaining about end of support for windows 7 then.

If windows 7 remains the most used os till then and other operating systems following windows 7 turn out to be craps and still microsoft ends it support, I for one will stop using microsoft products.

 

[HippsieGypsie]

#1: I'm not here to argue. I try my utmost to respect everyone's opinion. To me opinions are like butt holes in that everybody's got one, including me. I realize that everyone is an individual and likes things their way, or for in enterprise, the boss's way.

@ Mike Lonewolf

That is NOT true, you can indeed rearrange your programs, just right click on your Windows 95 - 7 Start button, Open all users, and then go from there and you can rename folders, change around everything so that it is the way you want it.

You are correct. My apology. I'm old. It's been about 25 or so years. I never did that, for I liked it in alphabetical order and used the "most frequent" program/doc arrangement. I didn't frequent the Start menu much. I used the Task Bar and pinned shortcuts to the desktop. BTW: I was wrong in stating it is in hierarchical order when in fact it's in alphabetical order. In WE it is the combination of the two.

@ Lionell

Hippsie: "As explained in my reply just above this one, one can make METRO to work for him. If it bothers you that when you restart, metro is popping up, then you have a problem."

Also:

An extra step costs focus and lost focus means lost productivity and THAT means costs added to the development of product without adding value. All because Microsoft is late to the party and is trying to force the world into a "new" way of working. Worse, Microsoft expects to be paid for the software that causes the increased cost without value added. Why would I not have a problem with this?

You say the impact of the extra step is trivial. I say it is not. It is especially not trivial if hundreds of millions of people are exposed to the extra step every time they log into their system and every time they switch to a new application. Don't give me the crap that you can pin the application to the task bar. To do that, you must jump back and fourth between Metro and Desktop for EACH app you pin. Multiply that by hundreds of millions and it is a huge cost of lost productivity by people who are working for a living rather than living in their parent's house and not having to pay for what it costs to live there. Why would it not have a problem with this? Especially since I make my living DELIVERING value to customers at a cost of time, effort, and money they are willing to pay for the value it represents.

Lionell, did I not state?

Again, his opinion, although I'll agree on the choice of UI. Check all my posts on the subject and you'll find that I've always stated this.

I'll admit they have a ways to go so far as snapping. Some get minimalized zoom wise or minimized in left field, etc. I can sympathize with Pros and PUs on this issue, but let's remember this is BETA.

In fact, which UI should be a choice upon installation. I fully understand the impact on production at the enterprise and pro level. Although I'm not a pro (but use the PC for my small business) your not writing to some beginner here. I've been around the block more than once.