Windows 8 and 8.1 Forums


Five reasons why the Windows desktop isn't going away

  1. #1


    Germany/Florida
    Posts : 4,514
    Vista and Win7

    Five reasons why the Windows desktop isn't going away


    At least Ed Bott is optimistic for the desktop, Ed Bott is a well respected journalist and he seems to be optimistic that the desktop is not going to disappear. That, at least, is comforting.


    The speculation on the next version of Windows (code-named Blue) is getting out of hand. Based on a few screenshots and one offhand remark from a prominent Windows blogger, one of my colleagues is convinced that the Windows desktop is an endangered species. Nope. Not gonna happen.

    Read more at source:
    Five reasons why the Windows desktop isn't going away | ZDNet
    Last edited by Brink; 27 Mar 2013 at 10:52. Reason: Fixed format to meet "News" posting guidelines

      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  2. #2


    Posts : 5,360
    7/8/ubuntu/Linux Deepin


    I don't think it it is going to be removed imminently.

    It does look like MS are trying to keep the average consumer in metro as much as possible.

    It means the advertising billboard and exhortations to the MS services will be as prominent as possible.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  3. #3


    Thanks for posting the link.

    I think the Desktop will disappear when most of the "four million desktop apps" used (seems like a high figure to me) are written in the Modern interface. I'm guestimating five years. It will remain a portal to the Modern UI until then.

    An organization, just like a living organism, needs to grow in order to survive. This is MS's dilemma -> Growth into the modern changing markets. Where one's target market (in MS's case the desktop PC) has flat lined, one must look for other markets to grow. It seems to me that touch-centric mobile devices are where it's at. It's all too bloody obvious.

    This was the genius of Steve Jobs. It's not that he was so much a great salesman that so many report, but he was greater at market insight and innovation supplying needed mobile devices, such as the iPhone and iPad along with an app store. He knew his Mac and lappy market flat lined, so he diversified with other demanding and growing markets. He also knew he wasn't going to encroach into MS's turf of enterprise desktop PCs. (Keep in mind Google also) But, MS can certainly infringe onto their turf to diversify for growth and survival.

    In being rather risky, MS is performing a high wire balancing act to fulfill everyone's needs in this crucial transitional period. We have enterprise with it's demands on one side for creation, whom, after all, made MS the successful corporation that it is. These are the ones that need the desktop the most, for as Bott states, "The four million desktop apps need to run somewhere".

    On the other side we have Mr. and Mrs. Joe Consumer who are the ones buying up most of these mobile devices for consumption. They could care less if their app or program opens up on desktop or not, just as long as it opens and functions with what they are attempting to seek. Emails, social apps/sites, and news for the most part. They could care less if it was an app or an internet site. They could care less if it was Win32, RT, or full Modern/Metro, nor most likely would they know. All they want is their information and to post/share information in a timely matter.

    Here's where the genius of MS's innovation comes in with 8, 8RT, the Surfaces, and Windows phone 8. An OS that runs on and across multiple devices to run the same apps no matter what type of device. When we think about it will be simplified for all, no matter who we are, no matter how much knowledge we have of computing devices, and/or whether we're using the device for creation or consumption. Kind of like a "unification". MS needed to create a store to sell apps, not only to bring about this "unification", but also to diversify for revenue. After all, it is a money maker for Apple, Google, and others.

    Not sure, but I think Google's Play Store apps run across all their platforms, but I see there are two Apple app stores. One for apps to run on OSX and one for apps to run on iOS. I'm assuming they are not the same apps? If so, does that mean I have to buy an app twice if I want it on my other devices? Any which way, I know when I download a Microsoft Store app, whether free or bought, I can download it on all my devices. Simple.

    Another crucial piece. Let's say one owns a desktop PC with Windows on it, an Apple laptop with OSX, and an Android OS phone. One then needs to learn and remember three different systems and ways of navigation. Let's say they update the Android or I need to get a new Android phone with the latest OS on it. I have to learn that system's changes. Then let's say they update Windows with an SP1. I have to learn that even if the changes are slight. Worse scenario is that all three update at the same time. I think you get the jest of where I'm heading. It may be fun for us techies/enthusiasts, but for Mr. and Mrs. Joe Consumer I would imagine it's no fun.

    Would it not be more convenient if one OS ran across multiple devices with the same apps? Familiar no matter what device we pick up to use. Simple IMO.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  4. #4


    Posts : 5,360
    7/8/ubuntu/Linux Deepin


    They are not running much of a risk.

    This is aimed at the consumer.

    MS can subsidise the oems and wait till the consumers have to buy something - unless they can afford a Mac - that something has 8 on it.

    There is a slim chance of competition appearing, not very likely as the barriers are too great.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  5. #5


    Posts : 5,707
    Windows 8.1 Pro


    The Desktop I do see being phased over this decade. Why? That's where the vast majority of Windows' issues lie in, winrot, system file corruptions, programs that get deeply embedded into the system and ends up screwing with everything else (chrome), and such. WinRT doesn't allow that.

    But from how I see it, I bet the Desktop will remain a feature for Windows vVerFarNext Pro or Enterprise as well. For the general public, the modern UI will be and should be fine, that is if a lot of Desktop apps get built into a WinRT model. Once Office gets into a WinRT app, that should be the spark for third parties to make the shift to that. Also, once the WinRT apps in Windows become MUCH more useful, like a proper Desktop app in a modern package, that will also be part of the change over from legacy to modern. Of course, the WinRT app model needs to be tweaked to properly support better app snap, possibly a tiled window interface.

    Right now, VLC Player is being ported over to WinRT, the beta should be released to the sponsors of the development project and should be released sometime April or May. What's special about that is they're developing the WinRT app to have EVERY bit of features that the Desktop counterpart has. They will also be bringing it to Windows Phone as the development is pretty simple from WinRT.

    I would hate to see Microsoft taking the modern UI and the Desktop UI into simple and advanced modes. I don't want that to happen, I'd rather see simple AND advanced in a nice modern package versus two separate UIs. I still need to use the Desktop to change metadata on music files so they show up as I want in a metro app.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  6. #6


    Germany/Florida
    Posts : 4,514
    Vista and Win7


    This is MS's dilemma -> Growth into the modern changing markets. Where one's target market (in MS's case the desktop PC) has flat lined, one must look for other markets to grow. It seems to me that touch-centric mobile devices are where it's at. It's all too bloody obvious.
    This is understood. But this was no reason to kill the desktop. The installer could very well generate a modern UI when it senses a touchscreen and a traditional UI when there is no touchscreen. That would have been a piece of cake to implement and over a billion PC users would have been happy.

    They are able to make a differentiation when they sense a disk with zero rotation (SSD), so why not for screens with or without touch.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  7. #7


    Posts : 5,360
    7/8/ubuntu/Linux Deepin


    They are able to make a differentiation when they sense a disk with zero rotation (SSD), so why not for screens with or without touch.
    Because MS think it is to their advantage to do it this way.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  8. #8


    Quote Originally Posted by HippsieGypsie View Post
    Would it not be more convenient if one OS ran across multiple devices with the same apps? Familiar no matter what device we pick up to use. Simple IMO.
    Sure but, a desktop PC is not a tablet which is not a mobile phone. You interface with them differently. What MS did with Windows 8 is not working and they will totally mess things up with their plan for Metro tiles and advertising. That's going to be the stone around their necks that really hurts Windows 8 adoption.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  9. #9


    The desktop is not going to disapear, it's going to be rewritten into WinRT code. You can already see this in the W9 qkq Blue leaked snapshots. But it will take a while because they didn't start from the desktop patern but with a cellphone UI that they need to improve until it eventualy become a normal desktop.
    Quote Originally Posted by Coke
    Of course, the WinRT app model needs to be tweaked to properly support better app snap, possibly a tiled window interface.
    Well, I hope that when it happens, we will find again all the features, ease of use and efficiency as on the old desktop.
    That would be cool for exemple to have a condensate of all the app tiles resized and displaying on a column on the bottom left of the screen. You know what I mean.
    The time when Metro will replace Desktop will be when it will allow to open, move and resize an infinite number of windows and a taskbar where you can get a glance at the open apps.
    And of course with compatibility with ancient w32 software because not eerything will be ported to WinRT that fast.
    Quote Originally Posted by HG
    They could care less if it was Win32, RT, or full Modern/Metro,
    Nor would I. Port the W7 desktop and all the softwares I currently use into Metro and I'll be happy.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  10. #10


    South Coast NSW, Australia
    Posts : 615
    Windows 8.1 'Ultimate' RTM 64 bit (Pro/WMC).


    Nor would I. Port the W7 desktop and all the softwares I currently use into Metro and I'll be happy.

    Port the desktop and kernal improvements from Win 8 into Win 7 and I'd be a darn sight happier... :-)

    Wenda.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Five reasons why the Windows desktop isn't going away
Related Threads
Five reasons Windows 8.1 is a winner | Computerworld Blogs
see full report
More a list of killer features that are a big improvement over windows 7. I loved windows 7 and hats the idea of win8 and struggled with it to begin with but it's better in many ways.. 1. Super fast boot. My PC starts up in about 12 seconds and the sleep mode is instant to resume. Very handy! ...
Five reasons why Windows 8 has failed | ZDNet
7 Reasons Windows 8 RT was DOA
Source A Guy
Eight Forums Android App Eight Forums IOS App Follow us on Facebook