Windows 8, one year later: 10 mistakes Microsoft made

As beta programs go, Windows 8 seemed like a smashing success. The engineers and designers putting the new operating system together hit their deadlines like a finely tuned machine, and hardware partners had three full months to get their new PCs ready for what some hoped would be a big holiday season.

It didn't quite work out that way. The Windows 8 launch in New York City went well enough, but it was followed within days by two damaging events: Hurricane Sandy and the abrupt departure of Windows chief Steven Sinofsky.

Miscalculation on desktop changes

You see that empty check box, highlighted in yellow? The option to bypass the Start screen and go straight to the desktop when signing in to Windows 8.1?
That option was in an early preview of Windows 8, but it was dropped for the final release.
It’s back in Windows 8.1, as Exhibit A in Microsoft’s “We’re listening to your feedback” campaign.
There was plenty of feedback during the beta process from people who wanted a desktop-centric version of Windows 8. Microsoft stubbornly (some would say arrogantly) ignored them.
And now, a year later, that option and a few other desktop-friendly changes are part of Windows 8.1. One can only wonder: what would the reaction to Windows 8 have been like if a traditional desktop configuration had been available, even as a well hidden option?

Windows 8, one year later: 10 mistakes Microsoft made (and how they plan to fix things) | ZDNet

 

[Superfly]

@Sonic98
Your post is rather extensive so excuse if I only address a portion of it...

The jist of the problem is not so much the 'lack of' but the lack of 'options'... in a corporate environment the start screen will definitely not be navigation friendly - and here I disagree with you regarding...

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

-the start screen is for the illiterate who read picture books as opposed to newspapers IMHO... they should at least drop it in Enterprise / Server - this one-size-fits-all mentality is where they are falling short..

 

[Mustang]

My personal view is that the companies which produce Screen cleaning products, are major and commanding shareholders in Microsoft - lol.

Good one Dave!

 

[Mustang]

Hi there
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".

Cheers
jimbo

A very balanced and factual post. Thanks Jimbo :thumb: