The great Windows 8 debate

[Fredledingue]

People Do NOT like change.

So why forcing change on poeple? Isn't the goal of a public company to satisfy their clients? If the same is what they want, so give them.

Even though everyone knows it's inevitable

Why inevitable? Everybody is happy with W7 or similar. So why sudenly it must be inevitable that everything we are accustomed to for years must change?

Here's a revelation. If Microsoft users don't like change (for the sake of change) then maybe Microsoft shouldn't change. Are we going to add sparkles and sound effects to a hammer because it's not cool enough? An operating system is a tool, not a toy.

Windows 8 is like anything else that is radically different from the previous.

It's not even radicaly different. Exit Metro and you are in 7.2.

---

Metro is radicaly different. But it's a failure.

Or some have figured out how to make the Start Screen more effective and useful...

Starting Windows directly on the desktop would be a good start. Who needs to start on the Start Screen? If you need quick access to your favorite tiles, then go to the Start Screen and then it might be useful, cool, fun, positive experience. But starting everytime on the Start Screen while you don't need it is an irritating loss of time.

---

Other than this I don't see how you could beat the classic Windows UI in usability and efficiency. Microsoft is joustling against windmills here.

 

[BillWindows]

"But starting everytime on the Start Screen while you don't need it is an irritating loss of time"

What on earth are you talking about, you're worried about a few split seconds in your life, boy that shutdown button must be really killing you.
What about the boot up time in Windows 8 and the extra speed and file transfer speed, quicker to get to device manager and control panel, doesn't that make up for that split second in time.

 

[masterkongen]

By during transfering data and programming I rahter prefer Mac Ml or Ubuntu, The only reason I'm having Windows at all is gaming. But as matter of fact I won't start a war here, since we're currently speaking about Windows 8 and nothing else? I can agree by using windows 8 on a tablet computer. I think windows 8 is too designed for touch screen and not worth using on a desktop or laptop.

 

[walex]

Lets take "SIW2" view on this a step further, yes there is numerous 3rd party "start" buttons available and most are "paid"
start buttons. Now, how long do you think it's gonna take the "Bean counters" at microsoft to put a "paid MICROSOFT start"
button in the "Microsoft Store"..... I, myself, am using a "paid" STAR8 button, and I will probably pay for a Microsoft start
button......

just a thought,

walex


http://www.eightforums.com/member.php?u=1769

 

[edee]

I have installed Windows 8 and have mixed emotions about it.
First, the loss of the start menu once you get used to it is really no big deal, I don't like that MS removed it but after getting used to navigating around 8 it really is not a big deal, I just pinned my start menu folder to my start page to compensate for the loss.

Second, and I guess this will get better in time, the lack of good programs available for 8, there is not much, although most of the programs I used on 7 I am finding even though not advertised work on 8.
I like the live tile feature on the start page but do not like the fact that with a lot of the apps you have to have a Microsoft live account to access them.
I can live without the gaudy clock that appears on the lock page, especially since I do not or have not found a way to customise it.

Third, boot time. I can remember watching clips on "how much faster Windows 8 boots", let me say this, any OS straight out of the box with a fresh install is going to boot fast, start installing programs and that boot time will get progressively longer. When I first installed 8, to be honest the boot time was slightly faster than 7 but the boot time between the two was barely negligible. NOW after installing programs my boot time with 8 is pretty much the same as it was with all my programs installed with 7. So in my mind, Microsoft's claim of a faster boot time is false and they just used it as a marketing tactic.

Last, the lack of customization, again I am sure this will come with time as the true geeks start to get things figured out but I am a BIG Windows customization fanatic and the lack of custom themes and such for the boring look of Windows 8 is too much for me to take. Although it may take a little longer than 7 for the geeks to get worked out because it looks to me that not too many are off to the races to do too much with 8 right at the moment. I'm not talking about themepacks, anyone can throw some wallpaper together and recolor a taskbar and call it a theme, I am talking about true custom themes such as the infamous Mr. Grim did for Windows 7.

In closing, as I have said before and I knew this going in but Windows 8 kind of feels like a step down from 7 to me, without the aero effect when I am in Windows Explorer I feel as though I am using Windows 98, but hey, how much can one REALLY expect for forty bucks? I feel sorry though for those that buy into 8 after the forty dollar deal expires and goes to it's normal price, if it were me I would personally feel like I got raped.

If the start menu is gone for good then that is fine with me, but if I were Microsoft, I'd fire the one that redesigned the UI, they really did a sh!tty job of it.

 

[LovingWindows]

Third, boot time. I can remember watching clips on "how much faster Windows 8 boots", let me say this, any OS straight out of the box with a fresh install is going to boot fast, start installing programs and that boot time will get progressively longer. When I first installed 8, to be honest the boot time was slightly faster than 7 but the boot time between the two was barely negligible. NOW after installing programs my boot time with 8 is pretty much the same as it was with all my programs installed with 7. So in my mind, Microsoft's claim of a faster boot time is false and they just used it as a marketing tactic.

No they didn't. On Windows 7 a fresh install would boot to active desktop in ~20 seconds. 3 years later I still had my Windows 7 booting under 20 seconds to active desktop. Windows 8 came along and my boot time (from logo to active) was 2.1 seconds. It's been a few months since retail release and I've beaten the living daylights out of my system on a daily basis and my boot time is still ~2 seconds.

 

[edee]

Third, boot time. I can remember watching clips on "how much faster Windows 8 boots", let me say this, any OS straight out of the box with a fresh install is going to boot fast, start installing programs and that boot time will get progressively longer. When I first installed 8, to be honest the boot time was slightly faster than 7 but the boot time between the two was barely negligible. NOW after installing programs my boot time with 8 is pretty much the same as it was with all my programs installed with 7. So in my mind, Microsoft's claim of a faster boot time is false and they just used it as a marketing tactic.

No they didn't. On Windows 7 a fresh install would boot to active desktop in ~20 seconds. 3 years later I still had my Windows 7 booting under 20 seconds to active desktop. Windows 8 came along and my boot time (from logo to active) was 2.1 seconds. It's been a few months since retail release and I've beaten the living daylights out of my system on a daily basis and my boot time is still ~2 seconds.

I don't know what type of machine you are using but I had my windows 7 system booting in less than 8 seconds, now unless you are installing your programs in the virtual folder in Windows 8 I cannot believe that a fully loaded windows 8 OS is still booting in 2 seconds. Mine did too with a fresh install, since adding programs my boot time is up to around 7 seconds now. I also do not use Defender and have opted to use a REAL antivirus program, this could also lead to an increase in the boot time.

 

[BillWindows]

Yeah there's no way Windows 7 is anywhere near the boot time of Windows 8. I've got one HDD dual booting 7 and 8 with identical programmes, 7 takes about 40 seconds, 8 is almost instant.

 

[walex]

Yes win 8, overall, is an improvement over win7 and I will continue using it. But I still feel, and again "feel" that there is
something missing. I don't know how to explain it, but, I felt more in control of my operating system with win 7.
Does anyone have the same experience?????

walex

 

[Night Hawk]

win 8 would be doing even worse without them.

Blah blah blah, all I see is FUD here. I'd like to see some sources of proof for your claims.

For one most people who run desktops on a regular basis are not looking for a mobile gui to start with! The 3rd party options are part of what has made 8 bearable for a good number of Win 8 users. Without those options a majority of them would simply say: "Sorry MS! Maybe the next time!" while others who replaced 7 with 8 are looking to get 7 back on again abandoning 8 entirely!

With each new version there are always those that will frown. People who tried 7 went back to Vista or XP when not finding 7 to their liking. With 8 however MS went out on a limb slapping the RT gui "Designed for Tablet" onto what they call a new desktop version? Simply listen to the reactions of many who say: "I don't want any mobile OS! No thanks! I'll keep 7 on!"

Now go from the not so novice rejection to the general market place when that old time XP user has to buy a new machine for replacing that worn out old museum piece and finds RT on the new Win 8 machines being sold and has never used any tablet or smart phone. "Hey sales clerk how do you run this thing?!"

Next you look at the XP fan who always cranks things up for an old gaming machine and then finds half of those games won't even run on 8. No DX 9 elements can be used on 8 while you could still add DX 9c to the 64bit 7 which comes with DX 11. The lack of 9 elements means many old titles run into OpenGL and other ooos simply because 8 is newer and no longer compatible with a good number of things. Likewise things that wouldn't run on the 32bit Vista but would on the 32bit 7 written for XP are out on 8 most likely to add to the flavor.

Progress? Just because hand helds are jumping off retail shelves doesn't necessary mean the productive desktop worker still doesn't need a suitable "desktop" gui to work with and why the "not ready to run out of the box" problem is an immediate concern with 8. Businesses as well as those who work at home are more or less shying away from 8.

Now making pcs that see full functionality over large steel cases has board manufacturers working on micro atx boards with more options to almost be a full atx model in what some of these newer small boards offer. They still need a desktop OS however despite the shrinking down of the physical size of running a micro minitower to do the same work.

The reality check for MS in learning things the hard way is that most still want to see a desktop OS not simply someone tossing a "Metro-mare" on something called a desktop version. The first thing most want to see right away is a "Metro Killer"! What does say about 8 being "progressive"? In the wrong direction is more like it!

MS got lazy with 8 and was too focused on Google's Android and IPxx items by the fruit company and got severely sidetracked when it came time to see a new desktop version come out. Again the "lazy fast solution" was what? "Oh fortunately we still have the RT gui we can borrow for 8!"

 

[BillWindows]

"Now go from the not so novice rejection to the general market place when that old time XP user has to buy a new machine for replacing that worn out old museum piece and finds RT on the new Win 8 machines being sold and has never used any tablet or smart phone. "Hey sales clerk how do you run this thing?!"

Well it's like this, have you got 15 seconds and ill show you.

Who cares about XP games, if they run they run, if they don't they don't, time to let go, I've let hundreds of games go over the years, maybe you think Microsoft is responsible to run your old DOS games as well.

Nothing personal Night Hawk, but I'm getting this picture of you riding down a dirt road on an old horse and buggy.

 

[Ray8]

While those who are voicing legitimate concerns, the local Nero's play 'La La, I can't hear you':

Microsoft Loses Mobile Market Share to Google and Apple | Maximum PC

Hopefully not a sign of larger issues.

 

[LovingWindows]

While those who are voicing legitimate concerns, the local Nero's play 'La La, I can't hear you':

Microsoft Loses Mobile Market Share to Google and Apple | Maximum PC

Hopefully not a sign of larger issues.

Doesn't really mean anything.

Windows dominates desktops, laptops, notebooks and netbooks.
Linux dominates the server market.
Google/Android owns the mobile market.

 

[Ray8]

Doesn't really mean anything.

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, maybe it doesn't just yet. But Microsoft is really, really, wanting to get a slice of the mobile phone pie, ergo, why we have the user interface that's so contentious.

 

[BillWindows]

Gee look at that figures for the end of November, Wp8 had only barely come out, what a surprise.

 

[BillWindows]

In related news, BGR.com reports that sales of Windows Phone products are making a bigger impact in parts of southern Europe. In Spain, the market share of Windows Phone devices has gone up to three percent compared to just 0.4 percent a year ago, while the market share for the iPhone in that country has gone down to 4.4 percent. In Italy, the market share for Windows Phone is up to 11.4 percent.

 

[Ray8]

And people were queuing up for the iPhone days before release. Almost the same for Samsung phones. Windows Phone 8 has been known about for ages, yet generated pretty low interest. The same applies to Windows 8 tablets.

 

[Night Hawk]

It's called software investments! The first and always oldest rule of upgrading versions is the delay in upgrading often seen due to the old stuff as you would call it not able to run on the newer OS. MS made a "smart move" bringing in the XP Mode for 7! That is what you would call a brainstorm in smart thinking to motivate XP users into migrating to the latest! Good move for MS since 7 became an instant success!

Now take one fast comparison to how MS is bringing in the next version with the stripping down of the OS, tossing a mobile touch swipe gui on top of what should be an actual updated desktop gui seeing an improved touchscreen support not a borrowed tablet gui for the desktop platform to begin with. Just listen to an expert in this field from SUN Microsystems for one great example. Windows 8 UI 'strategic mistake,' argues design guru - Mobile/Wireless, norman, Networking, nielsen, Sun Microsystems, Windows, wireless, software, mobile, operating systems, Nielsen Norman Group, Microsoft - Computerworld

The analogy there is quite accurate from someone who knows what makes a desktop gui work. Are you going to say he rides a horse with buggy as well? Or doees he know something from "practical hands on experience" as to why 8 is suffering?! In his occupation he has to work out the details for what will be the next progressive improvements seen with SUN's own OS platform.

So it isn't just the personal opinion of one person only taking a look at how 8 was developed! While realizing back in 2009 the next version to come would be a slow seller when finding 7 to be a "working OS" for a change having come up from the dos, 3.1 days and even befote dos the most I figured I would end up doing is seeing a 7/? dual boot until giving 8 a look.

It wasn't just the want to "Nuke Metro, Metro Hater Fan Club" but other things found that would curtail 8's use despite certain security improvements and a very few actual innovative ideas put to work that would stifle 8 as being considered as any possible replacement for 7! Not in this life!

And then how do you recommend a new version that looks more like a new blonder instead? When trying to get people to look at 7 where they were XP Fan Boys and not even interested in anything else from lack of interest in following the OS ball game one was finally upgraded to Vista and still won't look at 7 let alone 8 while another now uses a 7 laptop regularly.

What that show is people will adapt when they have to do in order to upgrade. But when the upgrade isn't that but something else entirely it soon becomes a fast turnoff! Just because something is new doesn't automatically make it better then what is already seen. MS instead decided to bring in something most people don't want and are lacking interest in. And meantime those 3rd party app sellers will be making a bundle off of 8!

 

[BillWindows]

Hey Night Hawk, come on tell us your real name, is it Tim Cook? Like I said before a 3 year old child seems to be able to manage it with ease yet some people can't. In my opinion it's easier than Windows 7.

Keep looking for those articles Night Hawk, there's plenty of MS haters

 

[edee]

Doesn't really matter now does it? all with Windows 8 sales MUCH lower than Vista was at this point in time now and surface sales are pretty much taking it in the a$$. Microsoft is receiving a real big message right now and that is, don't put lipstick on a pig and tell me it's beautiful. People are not stupid and know what they want.