apart from the biggest mistake in ANY business -- that of an "Over Inflated Ego than can never admit to a mistake" I really can't understand how any sensible minded developer would even THINK of touch screens for a desktop in a traditional working environment -- and with people using MORE and LARGER monitors the whole idea of Touch gets even more ludicrous - and it will get worse.
If I can afford a Huge almost Cinema screen size 4K TV / Monitor in the future anybody who even THINKS of touching it will get a good solid dose of Baseball Bat on their Bonce.
The GUI also as has been shown - while it can be organised for desktop work it's messy and requires a bit of Post installation work unlike Windows 7. People just don't want to bother with setting up - they want it to work conveniently STRAIGHT OUT OF THE BOX. On these Forums we prefer to do things differently but we aren't the great majority of users.
A traditional menu also is not always the best idea either once you have a LOT of applications with loads of sub choices -- so GUI on W8 ranks as a fail although the time of the traditional menu itself has probably also passed its sell by date. What the ideal GUI would be for a modern desktop I've no idea really -- I don't like ENDLESS scrolling -- and I know common applications can be put in a custom toolbar / on the desktop (like W7 / XP etc) or the quick launch taskbar -- or on a combination of all 3.
There's a lot to be said for USER CUSTOM menus -- make the custom toolbar a lot more flexible and this would provide a decent menu system. The standard W7 menu also is UGLY on a large screen -- the small custom toolbar menu looks far better (rather like the small setting in XP's menu display).
There's actually plenty of indications that the Desktop (or laptop) is beginning to make a comeback as people see the limitations of tablets and smart phones. Of course the halcyon days of the PC are essentially over -- formerly there was NO choice for computing and communication devices -- but now there is and for some purposes a tablet might be fine -- on a vacation for instance some people don't want to take a laptop -- especially with baggage restrictions on aircraft getting tighter almost by the hour and exhorbitant charges for "Non Carry on Luggage".
Reactions to events oscillate wildly -- people initially over react -- then over react the other way until it settles down and equilibrium is reached.
The PC has to realize that it's not KING any more but it's NOT going away and an OS fit for purpose needs to be designed for it.
Nothing wrong in having a mobile OS either -- I can't see what the problem would have been in allowing the interface to have SEVERAL GUI's -- Linux has had that choice for YEARS -- you'd start up what used to be called the X-Server and then launch one of several GUI's according to your choice -- for example GNOME and KDE are probably the most well known Linux current GUI's.
If multiple GUI's can be supported as OPEN SOURCE software on the Linux platform I really can't see why Ms with its huge army of developers and large budgets couldn't have come out with something a bit more "Fit for purpose".
My personal view is that the companies which produce Screen cleaning products, are major and commanding shareholders in Microsoft - lol.
Like I've seen in the UK some of those ridiculous "Traffic Calming measures" which consist of bumps in the road which even a Horse at an "Over the jumps" Horse race would have trouble with.
I almost felt like painting a sign at the entrance to the Street saying "This street is Sponsored by KWIKFIT" (a shock absorber / tyres / brakes etc fast repair service for cars franchise).
Probably would have been deported for Vandalism so though better of it in the end.
Great fun though in driving an off road type 4WD vehicle over them at speeds far over the speed limit -- probably not what was intended though !!! -- I'm still a Schoolboy at heart. !!
these are the mistakes which have caused the Win 8 to get the victim of most of the dislikes form its users .. no matter these were the part of the delivering a changed functionality out of the OS or making efforts to take it to the next level which is most probably the reason of it being so .. all is seeming failed now ..
Jimbo45: you are so right. i have two 24"at work, but ideally i get two 32" screens. no way i use touch. My wife is an accountant and has four 24" monitors. Not sure who would want to pay for or use touch screens... (unless you are the guy in the movie "Minority Report")
Besides the focus on touch devices, W* fails this simple OS test:
- does a user from the previous OS have problems performing simple and common tasks without having to read a tutorial or googling a week long?
- do reasonably intelligent users after a week of use think it its an improvement and makes use easier?
W8 failed on both accounts. It is like when I switch cars, even if some buttons are at different locations, i still know how to drive and adjust the mirror and seat without using the manual. If it takes explanation how to do that, the car won't sell. fortunately you can buy a different car even if you already own the same brand, because you don't have legacy software in a car. With an OS we unfortunately can't change the OS.
Hey JImbo. Who needs an off roader. Recently visited an old lady friend down in Twickenham. (now in her eighties). They have those half humps there, hitting alternative sides of the car as your drive. She took me out for a Chinese - didn't give a damn. I got a free kidney massage out of it though!
I'm not sure I can agree with most of this list. Most of these are mistakes, but not major mistakes in my opinion. Personally, I think there were only two major mistakes. One was the lack of hardware mentioned in the article. The other was the learning curve. These being said you also have to take into account the fact that people really like the previous versions of the OS. The fact that XP hasn't died off should be evidence of that.
I think Microsoft made the mistake of thinking that because now everyone has or uses a PC, unlike with OS prior to Windows 7, that they're much more computer savvy than they are. People don't like to have to figure out things. People don't like change. A lot of 98 people didn't like XP initially, and a lot of XP people didn't like 7 (neither of these make even the slightest amount of sense to me other than stylistic issues), but at least it was easy to see in XP or 7 how to do you did the same thing in a prior OS. People who aren't tech people hate even the slightest change. Even something as simple as moving an icon from the desktop to the taskbar will make some people just give up. Some people only know what way to do things or only want to do things the way they already know how, even if you can show them a more easy and efficient way to do something. They'll go down 6 levels of start menu folders to open an application rather than just create a desktop icon if that's what they're used to. I work in IT, and even I could not just sit down with Windows 8 and instantly figure out how to do certain things. For example it's not obvious how you shut down the computer or log off. Even with Windows 7, I had a lot of clients who swore off Windows 7 simply because the log off/shutdown options buttons look and worked slightly different than XP. The first time I open a PDF document, I had no idea how to get it off the screen. I initially didn't know how to get to All applications. Luckily for me someone remind me about ALT+Tab. Also, there is an old thinking in sales that if you give customers too many options, they get confused. There is just too many tiles and too much going on in Metro for the novice user. All these lead back to my original point. You have a hard time figuring out how to do the same things in 8 you did in 7.
No, Windows 8 would not be flying off the shelves, but some small things could have gone a long way to to more sale than Windows 8 has now.
1. Tile lets and layouts. Just like in Windows 7 and XP you can go into Control Panel and choose Classic view, there should have a second, simpler layout option for Metro. It could have had less tiles and those tiles only representing the top the X number (say 10-15) clicks from the Windows 7 start menu, desktop, and taskbar ie Music, Documents, IE, music player
2. Some functions that didn't have tiles initially should have had tiles: Shutdown/logoff, All Programs/All Applications(not necessary with 8.1), Settings/Control Panel. This along with #1 would have made it easy for people to sit down and see how they do some of the same things they did in Windows 7.
3. There should be a back button at the top of all apps like you have on a phone or a minimize button. I know a lot of people were like me the first time I opened up a PDF document.
This is a bonus one, only because it relates to 8.1 and no 8, but I think Microsoft could make groups collapsible.
All this being said, I think that at some point MS will see significant growth in Windows 8.x. The misinterpreted the market and forgot that people hold them to a completely different standard. Look at the all the criticism of Windows based tablets. They're the only company that people are saying that the main problem with their tablets is they're not PCs. They can still fix some of these issues and whatever others arise, and over time people will get more used to Windows 8.x. And overall I disagree with the majority of people on this site and other sites, why even make Windows 8 with 7 selling so well, if you're going to make Windows 8 basically a new versions of Windows 7. I just don't buy that the lack of the start menu is something that could not have been overcome by better implementation of Windows 8. There are a portion of users that absolutely need the start menu and use it heavily, but I don't think it's anywhere near the majority of people. I still think the main problem is how they managed Windows not how different it is from 7.
Last edited by Sonic98; 01 Aug 2013 at 12:49.