If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AZCentral)   Microsoft finds little demand for Windows 8 ... probably because consumers still haven't forgiven them for Vista   (azcentral.com) divider line 222
    More: Followup, Microsoft, Windows, Vista, Apple products, GfK, Kindle Fire, desktop computers, consumers  
•       •       •

3259 clicks; posted to Business » on 29 Oct 2012 at 10:39 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



222 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-29 08:55:46 AM
Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

pants on fire stupid stuff from Redmond, and no amount of attempted hipster branding is going to change it.
 
2012-10-29 09:45:51 AM
Hey, you insist on selling a desktop OS and force me to browse it like a tablet? Cool... Let me know how that works out.

It's also pretty neat to see Microsoft tell enterprises to f*ck off. I'm sure that's a sound strategy that would never cause businesses to ignore another OS release...
 
2012-10-29 10:06:38 AM
That, and 7 is in no way outdated yet.

If I could use XP for 8 years, no problem, I don't see any reason why I shouldn't get the same sort of life out of 7. Especially since big OS changes mean issues with a lot of the other programs I've purchased. Even if 8 didn't look totally idiotic (and it does), I would see zero reason to change. It ain't broke, after all...
 
2012-10-29 10:07:56 AM
I tried it out, if you have a touch screen PC it is pretty cool. It's pretty useless if you don't. The Levovo Yoga is really cool, I can see that being the road warrior go to device for the next 6 months or so. A nice tablet running a full version of Windows 8, with a cool flippy keyboard and trackpad: It's a tablet, it's a laptop , it's a tablet, it's a laptop...
 
2012-10-29 10:31:47 AM

Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?


NowhereMon: I tried it out, if you have a touch screen PC it is pretty cool. It's pretty useless if you don't.


whistleridge: 7 is in no way outdated yet.


Take aside the interface for a minute. Windows 8 is wicked fast - been running it since RTM, and I'm still getting sub-10 second boot times - it takes longer to go through BIOS than it does to boot the OS and get to a usable screen. Also enjoying the enhanced multi-monitor support, and full-blown Hyper-V. It's quite nice.

I personally prefer the new start menu. I hated it at first, but after I customized it, I have everything that I use on a daily basis in one pane, no scrolling around. And anything I use hourly is on the task bar anyway. The biggest thing I don't like is how some metro-enabled apps would sometimes launch in metro mode when you want them in desktop mode. It seemed to happen willy-nilly at first, but after some poking around and customizing, it doesn't happen anymore.

Just my experience. But if you think the only new thing about Windows is MEtro, you're sorely mistaken.
 
2012-10-29 10:32:29 AM

NowhereMon: : It's a tablet, it's a laptop , it's a tablet, it's a laptop...


i'm on a horse!
 
2012-10-29 10:35:38 AM
I thought everybody knew to use every other new OS from Microsoft...2000, XP, 7...I'll be waiting for whatever comes AFTER 8.
 
2012-10-29 10:41:44 AM
I have little demand for Windows 8, because I'm still happy with Windows 7.
 
2012-10-29 10:45:11 AM
I'm pretty happy with Windows 7 Ultimate thank you very much.
 
2012-10-29 10:46:27 AM
The tiles remind me of a cash register at McDonalds with pictures of the food instead of numbers.
 
2012-10-29 10:46:45 AM

whistleridge: That, and 7 is in no way outdated yet.


^This^. Even if Windows 8 is the best thing since sliced cheese, the biggest problem Microsoft has is that 7 is still awesome.

I have no intention of ever "upgrading" a perfectly fine Windows 7 computer to 8. But when I ever get around to buying a new computer, it'll probably be an 8 machine.
 
2012-10-29 10:47:27 AM

Krieghund: I have little demand for Windows 8, because I'm still happy with Windows 7.


They'll be releasing some updates soon in order to fix that problem
 
2012-10-29 10:51:04 AM
Demand will mostly come from the demand for new PC's which isn't terribly high but it's a constant inevitability that makes for a nice quarterly statement. Not a lot of people rush out and spend $150 for an OS upgrade to an existing computer excepting the 'enthusiasts' .

I can't see business moving anytime soon as most have barely got around to finishing Windows 7 and 8 is far too wacky to switch to right now.

Over the next 2 years it will have a substantial install based. People may end up hating it like Vista but they will have to deal with it.
 
2012-10-29 10:51:27 AM

Krieghund: I have little demand for Windows 8, because I'm still happy with Windows 7.


Meanwhile, the major corporation I now work for is still has us using XP because they're married to the customized version they force on us. Can believe how slow it runs on an i7.
 
2012-10-29 10:53:29 AM
After a decade of using Windows on home-brew machines, I gave up trying to get Vista to work reliably and bought a Mac. So yeah, pretty much (and I survived Windows ME).
 
2012-10-29 10:53:43 AM

Lost Thought 00: Krieghund: I have little demand for Windows 8, because I'm still happy with Windows 7.

They'll be releasing some updates soon in order to fix that problem


Not if they ever want another enterprise customer.

Hint: Microsoft didn't make their billions from home users.
 
2012-10-29 10:55:44 AM

Lumpmoose: After a decade of using Windows on home-brew machines, I gave up trying to get Vista to work reliably and bought a Mac. So yeah, pretty much (and I survived Windows ME).


you used vista and ME?

Well, at least you didn't follow that up with a third terrible waste of your moneyohmygodyou bought a mac too??

Do you pour sugar into your own gas tank?
 
2012-10-29 10:55:50 AM
I'll think about upgrading in about 8 years, when Win 7 support ends.
 
2012-10-29 11:02:30 AM
I feel the same way about this as I do about hurricane Sandy. I'm supposed to pay attention, but I just don't care.
 
2012-10-29 11:03:10 AM
Add me to the Windows 7 works great and when I need a new computer I will change camp. My desk top is 2 years old my Laptop 6 months old so I will upgrade in about 2 years.

Now that said if it really works the way they claim, and I can have one Operating System and the same software on my Computers, Tablet, and Phone. I can how it can really be useful. Hell Javascript on my phone would be great.
 
2012-10-29 11:04:19 AM
My employer is advising against Win 8, partially because of retraining that's necessary to use it. Now I've been in IT for about 20 years and have used every consumer version of Windows since 1.0. How much training is really necessary?
 
2012-10-29 11:06:20 AM
Everyone knows that every other Microsoft OS is utterly useless.
 
2012-10-29 11:06:20 AM
Just got a new laptop Friday. I figured it would show up with 7 and a coupon or some shiat but no, factory installed windows 8. I want to complain about it but seeing as how I was able to get it all configured and set up vpn/remote desktop and load all my google crap and office and accounting programs in just a couple hours after having never seen it before and not reading any tutorials... I figure everyone will get over it.

My two cents - I'm sort of determined to see how they want me to use it, just so I'll know. I support 20 pc's at work and it's coming so I figured someone should know how to work it. Frankly I thought it would be worse - here's the thing - if you are freaking out, there's a desktop button. Move that desktop button over to the left side of the metro. Push it. Ta da - now it looks just like every msft OS you've ever seen. If you are really freaked out just install one of those free start button widgets.

I'll say this - it's fast.
 
2012-10-29 11:08:01 AM

Cubansaltyballs: Hey, you insist on selling a desktop OS and force me to browse it like a tablet? Cool... Let me know how that works out.

It's also pretty neat to see Microsoft tell enterprises to f*ck off. I'm sure that's a sound strategy that would never cause businesses to ignore another OS release...


I installed it on my (ironically) iMac yesterday and spent the day using it. Its stable, fast, and Microsoft finally managed to create an installation and setup experience that doesn't suck. It also ran everything I owned including games (spent a few hours playing Old Republic although the new Visio preview wouldn't install) which was darn impressive after the disaster of upgrading from XP to Windows 7 a year ago. The positive vibes ended there.

But I found myself frequently switching between the legacy interface and the new metro interface. Updating of apps from the new app store was confusing and I really didn't know the status of an application installation (it took an hour just for RDP to appear after I kicked off the install from the store). The new metro interface and its supporting applications love doing everything in full screen mode which made doing anything outside of checking a twitter feed a royal pain. There is a reason I have a 27" screen and Win8 seems to want to take away all the advantages of it. Overall - I thought it was a confusing mess to use. But at least its a stable confusing mess to use. But I suspect that would improve as application support gets there.

I don't see businesses adopting this anytime soon. Its too radical of a change, offers little benefit, and besides - most businesses just got off XP (or in the process of it). This is a transitional operating system and I would advise most people to skip it until the next version.
 
2012-10-29 11:10:28 AM

JohnBigBootay: I support 20 pc's at work and it's coming so I figured someone should know how to work it.


If you're reliant on group policy do yourself a huge favor and start working on it now. The new group policy options to manage Windows 8 are a terrible burden if you don't have the policy set EXACTLY as you want it from the first time you start deploying new 8 machines. In our lab we wound up with half the damn things covered in apps that were there and took up tile space (initially, anyway) but couldn't be launched while the other half didn't have those apps from the start. Very annoying.
 
2012-10-29 11:10:59 AM

enry: My employer is advising against Win 8, partially because of retraining that's necessary to use it. Now I've been in IT for about 20 years and have used every consumer version of Windows since 1.0. How much training is really necessary?


A lot. It fundamentally changes how you interact with applications and the OS. Your administrative assistants are going to freak out more about this than the Wordperfect to Microsoft Word switch you forced on them two decades ago.

/shudder at those memories
 
2012-10-29 11:14:10 AM
Looks like Windows 3.1 with slightly better graphics. I don't want that! I want the start button and a simple list of my stuff.
 
2012-10-29 11:16:07 AM

Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?


I know they've always tried to make using a pc simpler for the average person (My Documents) but they went a little too far this time. I just see this.

img688.imageshack.us
 
2012-10-29 11:16:27 AM

gingerjet: enry: My employer is advising against Win 8, partially because of retraining that's necessary to use it. Now I've been in IT for about 20 years and have used every consumer version of Windows since 1.0. How much training is really necessary?

A lot. It fundamentally changes how you interact with applications and the OS. Your administrative assistants are going to freak out more about this than the Wordperfect to Microsoft Word switch you forced on them two decades ago.

/shudder at those memories


WHAR START MENU WHARRRR

/really. it's farking awful. I love WP7. I don't want it on my PC.
 
2012-10-29 11:17:07 AM
Vista SP1 and later actually wasn't bad. Normally by SP1 or SP2 at the latest, the MS product tends to be fine. We've all just learned not to buy MS products at launch. Win7 is really the oddball in that it was great at launch.
 
2012-10-29 11:18:10 AM
I am not Linux_Yes by any stretch of the imagination. However, that being said, I use Mint almost exclusively save for the reboot in to Win7 for gaming.

Good shiat, but definitely not ready for the enterprise environment.

Cinnamon > Metro
 
2012-10-29 11:18:50 AM
As a touch screen OS Windows 8 looks awesome. For conventional displays, Windows 7 is just fine. On the latter front, Microsoft is a victim of its own success. Hard to sell a new razor when the old one is doing just fine...
 
2012-10-29 11:20:48 AM

Cubansaltyballs:
It's also pretty neat to see Microsoft tell enterprises to f*ck off.


Why would any enterprise WANT to switch to a touch screen oriented OS this early in the game? MS is just being realistic for a change. They know Windows 7 is their bread and butter in that segment.
 
2012-10-29 11:21:28 AM

MurphyMurphy: Lumpmoose: After a decade of using Windows on home-brew machines, I gave up trying to get Vista to work reliably and bought a Mac. So yeah, pretty much (and I survived Windows ME).

you used vista and ME?

Well, at least you didn't follow that up with a third terrible waste of your moneyohmygodyou bought a mac too??

Do you pour sugar into your own gas tank?


I think I got both OSes through academic give-aways or discounts.

I work in IT. That last thing I want to do at home is spending MORE time fixing computers, software or hardware. My Macbook Pro is still going strong after 4 years.
 
2012-10-29 11:21:44 AM

bhcompy: gingerjet: enry: My employer is advising against Win 8, partially because of retraining that's necessary to use it. Now I've been in IT for about 20 years and have used every consumer version of Windows since 1.0. How much training is really necessary?

A lot. It fundamentally changes how you interact with applications and the OS. Your administrative assistants are going to freak out more about this than the Wordperfect to Microsoft Word switch you forced on them two decades ago.

/shudder at those memories

WHAR START MENU WHARRRR

/really. it's farking awful. I love WP7. I don't want it on my PC.


It is a shame, because Vista/Win7 had hit the zenith of the start menu. It was smart in autopinning things (and you could say go to the pinned Word icon and then launch a specific recent document). If it wasn't autopinned, start typing its name and the search function found it quickly. It was the best of the Start Menu and Apple's quick search combined into one menu.

Now we just have change for the sake of change. I bet the tiles thing is awesome on the tablet or the phone where it is a touch screen. However I'm using a computer with a full sized farking keyboard. Make sure of the fact I have a keyboard you worthless farks who design UI.
 
2012-10-29 11:21:48 AM
Probably because as mentioned tens of thousands of times, Win 7 a) just came out and b) still works like a dream. Why the hell would I switch to a tablet type when I 3-D draft as part of my living?

I feel really bad for shooter-type gamers though. Tap *HEADSHOT* Tap *HEADSHOT*. No challenge anymore.
 
2012-10-29 11:22:10 AM
Doesn't Windows always sell slowly at the start? MS have never had the cult of personality that Apple has that makes customers want to queue outside the shop from the previous week. They'll get their sales from people having no alternative when they replace their existing PCs. Familiarity breeds customers I guess.

My laptop is 4.5 years old, runs Vista like a dream, though I must be the only person in the world to say that. I use W7 at work and I love it, and wouldn't mind sticking to it... that said, I'm not too bothered about getting W8. never really been resistant to change after having gone through the UIs of 3.1, 95-98-2000, XP (mostly run in Classic mode except at work where I had no choice), Vista and 7. Worst case, there's Start8.
 
2012-10-29 11:22:19 AM
What did they farking expect? You spend 17 years getting people accustomed to one way of doing things...the Start button. Then you eliminate it. It would have been one thing if it had been a gradual switch, giving users the option to go back to the Start Button/menu. But to make a radical change like that and expect consumers to adopt it? Someone at Microsoft must be stoned.

Additionally (and I've said this before), the Enterprise will not switch to Windows 8. Many companies are still on XP and are in the process of migrating to Windows 7. I can't see a situation where a company will embrace Windows 8 because of the amount of retraining it will require.

Furthermore, they've made the same UI changes to Server 2012. WTF Microsoft? I don't need the same farking interface that I'd have on a tablet on a server. Despite the fact that I'm more a VMware/Storage guy, I still have to do some support on the OSes. Thankfully, RedHat isn't stupid enough to make such radical changes.
 
2012-10-29 11:26:21 AM
Velvista wasn't bad after SP1; my desktop at home still runs it. People forgot how farking awful XP was pre-SP2.

As for my next one, I plan to build a Win8 machine. Just hasn't been terribly high priority. Getting a new MBP is more important, since my old Macbook is on its last legs.
 
2012-10-29 11:27:00 AM

Thats No Moose: My laptop is 4.5 years old, runs Vista like a dream, though I must be the only person in the world to say that. I use W7 at work and I love it, and wouldn't mind sticking to it... that said, I'm not too bothered about getting W8. never really been resistant to change after having gone through the UIs of 3.1, 95-98-2000, XP (mostly run in Classic mode except at work where I had no choice), Vista and 7. Worst case, there's Start8.


Nope, one of my MediaPCs is still running Vista, runs great and I've never gotten around to update it. As long as you did a clean install of Vista (ideally with a post SP1 disc) you pretty much can't tell it apart from Win7.

/that's likely the reason 7 was so awesome at launch, it was really just Vista SP 2.5 with some branding changes
 
2012-10-29 11:28:05 AM

NowhereMon: I tried it out, if you have a touch screen PC it is pretty cool. It's pretty useless if you don't.


Useless unless you like faster boot times, better performance, better security, and better battery life (The last two I can't confirm yet -- I've only seen them reported).

I upgraded a new Win 7 PC (no touch screen) to 8. Yeah, some of the interface that is geared specifically toward touch screens is annoying at first, but once you learn a few keyboard shortcuts you get around pretty well. It's not for people who hate change, that's for sure, but I like it so far.

The best way to explain using 8 on a non-touch screen device is that it's like watching a 3D movie on a standard TV; it doesn't really change the movie, but when a scene comes up that was obviously made to stick out of the screen you notice it and know you're missing the effect.
 
2012-10-29 11:33:45 AM
I upgraded the other day and have been pleasantly surprised. Sure, there's a bit of a learning curve but once you get it down, I think it's better than Windows 7 in almost every way. The substantially improved search is almost worth the price of admission alone.
 
2012-10-29 11:34:07 AM
The general consensus is that Windows 8 is great for mobile platforms with touchscreens, awful for desktop environments.

Microsoft shills can give it a rest... we know there are keyboard shortcuts and all that, and that you don't miss the start button. The reality is that 30 years of UI research has refined windowed UIs where Windows 7 is pretty much optimal. Nobody should be required to remember obscure keyboard shortcuts because Microsoft thought it would be a good idea to remove buttons and visual cues users have grown accustomed to in order to homogenize their desktop and mobile operating systems.

The sad reality is that Windows RT is NOT Windows 8, though they share the Metro compatibility. Windows RT looks fantastic for a touchscreen UI.... kudos to Microsoft for that. Windows 8 throws out too much and makes painful assumptions about productivity on the desktop. Metro could have been integrated better as a windowed interface, but it didn't suit marketing goals.... and what does that say about Windows 8? To me, placing marketing above 30 years of research tells me I should avoid it like the plague.

I used to like reading about "Windows secrets" - books and articles written to give you little tidbits of information that would make Windows even more powerful, offering up new features that were just cool, even if they didn't impact my usual productivity. With Windows 8, I feel like "Windows 8 Secrets" would be the manual for doing all the "normal" things I need to do to be productive... need to close an app? Look at secret tip #45. Wondering how to cut and paste between applications? Secret tip #198 using [Metro key]+[ALT]+C, curly swipe, double tap, cross-swipe, [Windows]+[Shift]+V to paste.

WTF?

It isn't evolutionary. It's design driven by marketing people who have no clue on what real people do on computers on a daily basis.
 
2012-10-29 11:35:06 AM
Windows 8 is ridiculously fast. Plus, you can customize the experience to appear mostly like Windows 7, which is why no one is going out of their way for this OS. I'm buying my first laptop hybrid in a month or so, so I will definitely enjoy Windows 8 on a touch screen computer. However, if you don't want the hassle/benefit of a touchscreen on your desktop, there is very little reason to upgrade.
 
2012-10-29 11:37:26 AM

Babwa Wawa: Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

NowhereMon: I tried it out, if you have a touch screen PC it is pretty cool. It's pretty useless if you don't.

whistleridge: 7 is in no way outdated yet.

Take aside the interface for a minute. Windows 8 is wicked fast - been running it since RTM, and I'm still getting sub-10 second boot times - it takes longer to go through BIOS than it does to boot the OS and get to a usable screen. Also enjoying the enhanced multi-monitor support, and full-blown Hyper-V. It's quite nice.

I personally prefer the new start menu. I hated it at first, but after I customized it, I have everything that I use on a daily basis in one pane, no scrolling around. And anything I use hourly is on the task bar anyway. The biggest thing I don't like is how some metro-enabled apps would sometimes launch in metro mode when you want them in desktop mode. It seemed to happen willy-nilly at first, but after some poking around and customizing, it doesn't happen anymore.

Just my experience. But if you think the only new thing about Windows is MEtro, you're sorely mistaken.


I think IT departments didn't ask for this crap, I think legacy apps won't support it, and I think Microsoft just carelessly pushed a shiat-ton of whizz-bang off on the business world who only wanted security patches and incremental improvements.

Can't wait to see how all these "faster better" dorked up security. Because thats usually the trade off.

For home users without tech savvy, perhaps this is better.

For the workplace I just don't see it.
 
2012-10-29 11:38:08 AM
us.acidcow.com
 
2012-10-29 11:38:55 AM

Babwa Wawa: Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

NowhereMon: I tried it out, if you have a touch screen PC it is pretty cool. It's pretty useless if you don't.

whistleridge: 7 is in no way outdated yet.

Take aside the interface for a minute. Windows 8 is wicked fast - been running it since RTM, and I'm still getting sub-10 second boot times - it takes longer to go through BIOS than it does to boot the OS and get to a usable screen. Also enjoying the enhanced multi-monitor support, and full-blown Hyper-V. It's quite nice.

I personally prefer the new start menu. I hated it at first, but after I customized it, I have everything that I use on a daily basis in one pane, no scrolling around. And anything I use hourly is on the task bar anyway. The biggest thing I don't like is how some metro-enabled apps would sometimes launch in metro mode when you want them in desktop mode. It seemed to happen willy-nilly at first, but after some poking around and customizing, it doesn't happen anymore.

Just my experience. But if you think the only new thing about Windows is MEtro, you're sorely mistaken.


And you demonstrate why Windows 8 is a loser. It may be fast, but if I have to customize the start menu, and figure out how to set the farking thing to desktop mode right out of the box then I don't want it. Win XP & 7 were pretty standard and most desktop users are comfortable with them right out of the box. If I have to either create a custom setup or a bunch of instructions for my users to set the operating system up to what they are used to, well then it is a loser and not worth my time.

Besides I'd rather be pushing Linux desktops instead of MS, if the changeover is too costly/large it may finally push corporate over to my point of view.
 
2012-10-29 11:40:04 AM
Actual headline is "Poll: Scant demand for Microsoft's Windows 8".

Now see the picture right below that headline. Gee, I farking wonder why?

If a single major business in the world (other than MS) upgrades to Windows 8, I will be completely floored. OTOH, I am betting sales of 7 will spike very soon, if they haven't already.
 
2012-10-29 11:40:57 AM

pkellmey: Windows 8 is ridiculously fast.


There is a caveat to this. Windows 8 is ridiculously fast IF you allow Microsoft to store all your information in their "cloud" and you keep your computer connect to the net at all times. Violate either of those, and it behaves just like every other version of windows and will get bogged down once you've installed a bunch of stuff on it (aka, after using it for a year)
 
2012-10-29 11:43:36 AM

whistleridge: That, and 7 is in no way outdated yet.

If I could use XP for 8 years, no problem, I don't see any reason why I shouldn't get the same sort of life out of 7. Especially since big OS changes mean issues with a lot of the other programs I've purchased. Even if 8 didn't look totally idiotic (and it does), I would see zero reason to change. It ain't broke, after all...


I've said this here on Fark before, but I'll lay it down one more time. I really think MS took a look at 7 and said "Oh shiat. We have another XP on our hands. We made this too good and 10 years from now people will still be using it. Quick, release garbage! Get 7 off the shelves pronto so we can guarantee a fresh revenue stream when we put out Windows 9 in two years!"
 
2012-10-29 11:44:51 AM
So will Windows 7 still be available for purchase or as a "downgrade" option? I'm probably 6 months away from buying a new computer.
 
2012-10-29 11:45:01 AM
I looke dinto it and if I had a touchscreen laptop I might consider it, but it doesn't seem very mouse friendly
 
2012-10-29 11:45:05 AM

Lost Thought 00: pkellmey: Windows 8 is ridiculously fast.

There is a caveat to this. Windows 8 is ridiculously fast IF you allow Microsoft to store all your information in their "cloud" and you keep your computer connect to the net at all times. Violate either of those, and it behaves just like every other version of windows and will get bogged down once you've installed a bunch of stuff on it (aka, after using it for a year)


Yes.

In the cloud.

Quite a few companies have policies forbidding it, or have requirements that they need to meet for various kinds of sensitive data.

Good luck explaining to your VP of finance why your credit card database is now sitting at microsoft's server cluster in Quincy, Washington
 
2012-10-29 11:46:48 AM

ColSanders: NowhereMon: I tried it out, if you have a touch screen PC it is pretty cool. It's pretty useless if you don't.

Useless unless you like faster boot times, better performance, better security, and better battery life (The last two I can't confirm yet -- I've only seen them reported).


That didn't require Microsoft removing the Start button, or making the default that UI Metro nonsense. All of the benefits of Windows 8 to desktop users could have been delivered with the same UI as Windows 7 - and been welcomed by users universally and corporate IT departments alike.

I upgraded a new Win 7 PC (no touch screen) to 8. Yeah, some of the interface that is geared specifically toward touch screens is annoying at first, but once you learn a few keyboard shortcuts you get around pretty well. It's not for people who hate change, that's for sure, but I like it so far.

That's the point. You shouldn't have to learn a bunch of keyboard shortcuts to use a GRAPHICAL User Interface. Hovering around a spot on the screen to activate something is nonsense on a desktop with decent screen "real estate" - the pixel budget on a desktop isn't as tight as a phone or tablet, so why do they treat the screen like it is?

It's a huge step backwards. It's worse then a compromise, because it isn't any sort of compromise... it's a complete surrender to the phone/tablet UI mentality. It's also ridiculous that keyboard shortcuts are rationalized as "reasonable" in any sort of way for desktop users, because, hey, what else are they using those silly things for on a desktop?

The best way to explain using 8 on a non-touch screen device is that it's like watching a 3D movie on a standard TV; it doesn't really change the movie, but when a scene comes up that was obviously made to stick out of the screen you notice it and know you're missing the effect.

This makes no sense.

As somebody who has spent 25 years writing software (that users well liked, I might add) to improve productivity, Windows 8 is a painful step backwards in all ways.
 
2012-10-29 11:49:06 AM

LesserEvil: With Windows 8, I feel like "Windows 8 Secrets" would be the manual for doing all the "normal" things I need to do to be productive... need to close an app? Look at secret tip #45.


This I agree with, even though I like 8 overall. Microsoft actually made 8 very Apple-like in some ways. It took me a while to realize that, as with OS X, closing a program doesn't really close it. It's cute that you can swipe down to close an app, but would it have killed them to leave a red X in the corner, too?
 
2012-10-29 11:49:08 AM

Lost Thought 00: pkellmey: Windows 8 is ridiculously fast.

There is a caveat to this. Windows 8 is ridiculously fast IF you allow Microsoft to store all your information in their "cloud" and you keep your computer connect to the net at all times. Violate either of those, and it behaves just like every other version of windows and will get bogged down once you've installed a bunch of stuff on it (aka, after using it for a year)


I've used it off network on a newer laptop and it is still much quicker than Windows 7 (it was newer hardware so maybe more of an optimized driver load difference between OS). The apps launch quicker as well, but again it may just be optimized startup routines for Win 8 written apps. I've been evaluating it for enterprise since beta and RTM and I've had mostly positive experiences with it's performance off-network so far.
 
2012-10-29 11:49:18 AM

Babwa Wawa: Just my experience


Congratulations, you are not a literal pants-pissing baby.
 
2012-10-29 11:49:55 AM

StrikitRich: Krieghund: I have little demand for Windows 8, because I'm still happy with Windows 7.

Meanwhile, the major corporation I now work for is still has us using XP because they're married to the customized version they force on us. Can believe how slow it runs on an i7.


XP can not use multi-core processors properly. You are probably better off with an old single core processor then a modern multi-core...
 
2012-10-29 11:52:41 AM

extroverted_suicide: Actual headline is "Poll: Scant demand for Microsoft's Windows 8".

Now see the picture right below that headline. Gee, I farking wonder why?

If a single major business in the world (other than MS) upgrades to Windows 8, I will be completely floored. OTOH, I am betting sales of 7 will spike very soon, if they haven't already.


I work on the worlds largest intranet, and we have no plans to integrate a Windows 8 build for machines on that network. 400,000+ machines. The company I work for **IS** excited about Windows 8, though - but only on the hardware side. I suspect that has more to do with licensing and our relationship with Microsoft though. They were just as excited about Vista when it came out, for the same reasons (Our Intranet customers shunned Vista, too). Windows 7 will be the gold standard for corporate IT for 90~95% of the companies out there for some time. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been invested in desktop applications and nobody is interested in spending more money to redo all of that into Metro-compliant "apps", nor spend wads of cash on retraining millions of workers. Microsoft is insane for thinking they can push that, either.
 
2012-10-29 11:56:18 AM
Touch gestures = yes.
Mouse gestures = no way.
 
2012-10-29 11:57:26 AM

Generation_D: I think IT departments didn't ask for this crap, I think legacy apps won't support it, and I think Microsoft just carelessly pushed a shiat-ton of whizz-bang off on the business world who only wanted security patches and incremental improvements.

Can't wait to see how all these "faster better" dorked up security. Because thats usually the trade off.

For home users without tech savvy, perhaps this is better.

For the workplace I just don't see it


I agree with your assessment about businesses. But that's not what MS is targetting. It's very, very clear that this release was not targetted for businesses - hell, you can't even join RT to a domain.

The default build for business laptops is going to be Win7 for the next few years. That's no different than the slow migration of XP to 7. But I won't go back, because the speed improvements and ability to run a true hypervisor on my lappie makes this a no-brainer.

People will get over the lack of a start menu just as soon as I did. Can anyone claim that the Mac OS dock is better than Metro?
 
2012-10-29 11:57:36 AM

enry: My employer is advising against Win 8, partially because of retraining that's necessary to use it. Now I've been in IT for about 20 years and have used every consumer version of Windows since 1.0. How much training is really necessary?


For the average office drone, I'd say quite a lot. I consider myself quite computer savvy and have just upgraded to 8 from XP, their $40 deal was to good to pass up, and even the "traditional" desktop, not Metro, is way different to XP, Vista and 7. Seriously different. Lots of controls are hidden and you have to do non-intuitive things like put the mouse in a corner and wait for a menu to pop up. And no Start button, no My Computer etc.

With the Metro side optimised for tablets and touch control why the hell didn't they just leave the traditional desktop alone, just a facelift of 7? They have changed tons of things just for the hell of changing them, like Ford bringing out a car with the accelerator pedal on the left, the brake on the right and the clutch in the middle. There's no technical reason not to do that, and once you learn it you'll be fine. But it makes the transition a PITA.

And in Metro (I don't know what else to call it) things are seriously unintuitive as well, even worse than Desktop. The number of times I am in an App and don't know how to exit it or how to change things is just stupid, and they don't talk. Metro Chrome and Desktop Chrome don't share bookmarks for example.. I suspect I will just never see/use Metro at all.

Once I downloaded Classic Shell (Start8 is another one) it made it much easier.
And it is fast, the backup tools look good, I like the pining programs to the task bar and the dual monitor functions will be good (as soon as my new video card arrives. Old one wasn't W8 compatible.)
 
2012-10-29 12:00:22 PM

macdaddy357: Looks like Windows 3.1 with slightly better graphics. I don't want that! I want the start button and a simple list of my stuff.


I downloaded Classic Shell and it works a treat. Start 8 looks good as well.
 
2012-10-29 12:01:07 PM

Babwa Wawa: Can anyone claim that the Mac OS dock is better than Metro?


No but I can claim that it lets me achieve what TIFKAM does (launch programs) without taking up THE ENTIRE FARKING SCREEN
 
2012-10-29 12:02:58 PM

LesserEvil: Microsoft is insane for thinking they can push that, either.


Ms should have just pushed out Metro for tablets and fancy touch screen laptops, while keeping Windows 7 as the desktop OS. More focus on the back end type things, letting tablets run full Windows apps, making WinRT suck less, lots of flawless integration via associating a device to a Windows Live account, etc. Then in a couple years some VP or Present will want the same interface on his work laptop that the tablet he watches porn on at home has. So he'll come knocking on IT's door and demand a network wide upgrade. That's MS's cue to step in and offer Windows 8 for the with Metro to enterprise folk (and with a classic boot option to avoid pissing off the backend folk).

As it stands they just make the whole Win8 ecosystem unattractive since it has such a high up front knowledge cost. It's better to follow the iPhone model. For awhile a lot of execs carried both a Blackberry and an iPhone or iPhone 3G. They finally got sick of dual phones and demanded iPhones be allowed on the corporate network and low and behold now iOS devices are common in corporate environments. Right now there is no emotional investment in the OS so all the execs hear is "We'll loose X billion in productive hours as people learn the new UI." You need them thinking "I want my shiny new toy on the company network" to get something new in the door.

/our intranet still has Win2k boxes on it
//a lot of them
 
2012-10-29 12:08:48 PM
Installed 8 on Friday, and like it so far. Yes, it's fast.

The apps store is mostly meh right now. That will pick up though.

Go to the edge to bring up your old desktop if that's what you want.
 
2012-10-29 12:09:13 PM

Lost Thought 00: pkellmey: Windows 8 is ridiculously fast.

There is a caveat to this. Windows 8 is ridiculously fast IF you allow Microsoft to store all your information in their "cloud" and you keep your computer connect to the net at all times. Violate either of those, and it behaves just like every other version of windows and will get bogged down once you've installed a bunch of stuff on it (aka, after using it for a year)


First thing I did was to install Thunderbird so I could keep all my old emails from Outlook on my own hard drive.

/Have every email I have sent and received since 2001.
//You have to install Thunderbird before installing W8, convert all the files, then install Thunderbird again in W8.
///It's still nice and quick.
 
2012-10-29 12:10:28 PM

mjohnson71: So will Windows 7 still be available for purchase or as a "downgrade" option? I'm probably 6 months away from buying a new computer.


AFAIK it is if you buy a PC with W8. If you go with the W8 Pro for $40 offer like I did then you can't.
 
2012-10-29 12:12:20 PM

Slaves2Darkness: And you demonstrate why Windows 8 is a loser. It may be fast, but if I have to customize the start menu,


You never customized the start menu? Let's face it, the start menu itself was fairly useless by the time W7 rolled around. I would pin things to the taskbar or first level of the start menu anyway from the get go. Once set up, I would rarely navigate to the "All Programs" submenu. With Windows 8, I right click and remove stuff I don't want, go to all apps and pin stuff that I want. It really is a very similar operation, and it's not something that's going to confuse most users.

Slaves2Darkness: If I have to either create a custom setup or a bunch of instructions for my users to set the operating system up to what they are used to, well then it is a loser and not worth my time.


Yeah, I agree that some people are going to need some hand-holding, but I think it's going to be less than most IT folks think. As I've posted earlier, this is not a release targeted toward the enterprise - it's v1.0 of a UI model that MS is thinking people will acclimate themselves with it using consumer-targeted devices like phones, tabs, etc.
 
2012-10-29 12:15:51 PM

ha-ha-guy: Thats No Moose: My laptop is 4.5 years old, runs Vista like a dream, though I must be the only person in the world to say that. I use W7 at work and I love it, and wouldn't mind sticking to it... that said, I'm not too bothered about getting W8. never really been resistant to change after having gone through the UIs of 3.1, 95-98-2000, XP (mostly run in Classic mode except at work where I had no choice), Vista and 7. Worst case, there's Start8.

Nope, one of my MediaPCs is still running Vista, runs great and I've never gotten around to update it. As long as you did a clean install of Vista (ideally with a post SP1 disc) you pretty much can't tell it apart from Win7.

/that's likely the reason 7 was so awesome at launch, it was really just Vista SP 2.5 with some branding changes


And working drivers. And realistic advertised system requirements.
 
2012-10-29 12:19:31 PM

moel: No but I can claim that it lets me achieve what TIFKAM does (launch programs) without taking up THE ENTIRE FARKING SCREEN


I observe people with their Mac dock, scrolling back and forth trying to find the app they want to launch. 5-10 seconds or longer is not uncommon. Entire screen or no, Metro's a good way to get what you want quickly.
 
2012-10-29 12:29:52 PM
Complainers in 2009 = Ugggh! When will Microsoft get with the program and release an OS that is designed for a touchscreen!?!

Complainers in 2012 = Ugggh! My start menu is now designed to work with both a touchscreen and a mouse. The world's going to end!!!
 
2012-10-29 12:31:28 PM

LesserEvil:
I work on the worlds largest intranet.


DoD?
 
2012-10-29 12:31:43 PM
Thats your defence?
"I've seen people take up to 10 seconds finding something on their dock?"
That's it?

I'm sorry, but thats a user having too many things on his dock. Also Apple helpfully dump your Apps folder on there, which is spring loaded and in alphabetical order. (Which is a damnsight easier to navigate than the haphazard mess TIFKAM became after i installed Office Pro Plus on there)

Other helpful differences include OS X only containing ONE update facility (not two that both require running independently)
A working mail app amongst others..
 
2012-10-29 12:32:22 PM
It's not because I haven't forgiven them for Vista; it's because I haven't forgiven them for ruining Office. I'm afraid Windows 8 will do to Windows what Office 2010 did to Office 2003.
 
2012-10-29 12:33:29 PM
As a system administrator for a department in a state university, I wish to express how enthusiastically I have been looking forward to not upgrading our Windows 7 systems to Windows 8.

/It almost rivals my enthusiasm for not seeing Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 2.
//Almost.
 
2012-10-29 12:35:39 PM
 
2012-10-29 12:36:57 PM

ha-ha-guy: Ms should have just pushed out Metro for tablets and fancy touch screen laptops, while keeping Windows 7 as the desktop OS


It's a shame then, that Microsoft is forcing all enterprises to upgrade from Windows 7 to 8 within the next six months.

More seriously - what you outline is exactly what I believe Microsoft's strategy to be. MS knows damned well enterprises wouldn't upgrade even if Windows 8 shat rainbows - most have too much invested in Win7 over the last two years for another desktop upgrade. So they might was well make Windows 8 about the consumer and early adopter.
 
2012-10-29 12:39:08 PM

SuperT: LesserEvil:
I work on the worlds largest intranet.

DoD?


It would have to be just the NMCI network.
 
2012-10-29 12:42:18 PM
Here's my take on Win8. I tried to Consumer Preview on a VM and didn't much care for it. Things looked and acted different and I just didn't feel like spending the time to learn it. On Friday I bought a new SSD (128GB Samsung 830 for $69.99!) so I figured I'd try Win8 again. First impressions is that it's lightning fast. I'm sure a lot has to do with the SSD but I have a WIn7 test box at work with an SSD and it's no where near as fast.. As others have said, POST takes longer than the the Win8 load time. As far as the new UI..first, Metro doesn't need to be used if you don't like it. It's one simple click to get into Desktop when the PC first boots (and I believe there's a way to configure it to auto load into Desktop). Once you're in desktop mode, it's mostly like Win7 or any other OS. The Start Menu is obviously missing...which annoys me, just leave the friggen icon on the task bar! But it's easy to get to...just move the mouse slightly further to the left of where the Start Menu used to be and click. I have no idea why MS did that and it makes absolutely no sense but whatever. Once you're in the Start Screen, all you Metro apps and your traditional Desktop programs are right there. If you want you can sub divide the programs you can do so but unless you've got an unwieldy amount, it's unnecessary. If there's something you can't find on the Start Screen, just start typing and it auto searches as you type. So far I've found it to be very accurate at finding what I'm looking for. For example, if you want to get into the Services.msc just hit the Windows key (or open the Start Menu with the mouse) and type "services". It will show up on the list of results before you finish typing word. It works exactly the same way as it did in Win7 except it's full screen instead of the traditional Start Menu. Other than that, it pretty much works like a Win7 machine, only significantly faster.

As far as Metro...well you don't have to use it if you don't want to. Everything you did on Win7 can be done on Win8 in the Desktop mode. If you choose to use it, it is pretty clunky with a keyboard and mouse, IMO. It's not very intuitive and the gestures and hard to do. That said, I imagine if you used it as it was meant to be used, on a touch screen, it'd make a lot more sense and be easier to use.

Keep in mind, the entire purpose of this dual purpose OS is to get you used to using Windows RT (you couldn't have come up with a sexier name, MS?) and then be able to use the same apps and interface on your desktop if you choose. They want to build an ecosystem that incorporates the desktop and the tablet/phone into one UI. How successful that will be remains to be seen but so far my initial impressions is that it can work very well.
 
2012-10-29 12:45:49 PM
I decided to go to a store and try it. And it was as bad as I thought it would be. Now obviously that means that I went into it with some bias, but here was what I didn't like..

1) The Control Panel is now "Settings" but has about as many options as Android, instead of the myriad advanced settings I have in Windows 7
2) Instead of hitting the Windows key and starting to type to search for something (the MS version of Spotlight) now you need to go over to the far right, hover until a bar comes up, click Search, and then start typing. It needs to be an easily accessible button.
3) Metro and all the new "apps" are designed for full screen, including this fancy version of a Start Menu. And I don't like anything being full screen on my combined 3200x1050 dual monitor setup.
4) Mail, Calendar, and People are all Hotmail/Live based. Obviously they want us using their products. But I use Google like a lot of people so this just turns me off.

Microsoft should get the point, and leave the entire Windows 7 line available, and market Win8 for the portable computing environment it was clearly designed for. I haven't used Mac OS X in a while, but last I checked they don't use iOS for their Macbooks. And that's what this feels like.
 
2012-10-29 12:49:00 PM

MrSteve007: Complainers in 2009 = Ugggh! When will Microsoft get with the program and release an OS that is designed for a touchscreen!?!

Complainers in 2012 = Ugggh! My start menu is now designed to work with both a touchscreen and a mouse. The world's going to end!!!


Why was it necessary to remove the Start button, My Computer etc from the traditional desktop to make it touch compatible?

Desktop PCs and tablets are like cars and bikes. Should some car/bike manufacturer like Honda bring out a unified set of controls for both their cars and bikes? Should car controls be changed drastically to make them "more bike like"? Take away that accelerator pedal, put a twist throttle on the steering wheel! You'll get used to it!

No one is complaining that they added touch screen functions. They're complaining because they took away mouse functions that millions of people were used to that could have been kept without compromising the touch functions in any way.
 
2012-10-29 12:49:00 PM
Win8 is about ten times better when you actually use it right. Having a 10 minute preview in a store doesn't give you the full feel for it. After spending ten minutes customizing it (which was incredibly easy to do), I'm already far happier than I was with Win7, which says a lot.
 
2012-10-29 12:50:33 PM

Flint Ironstag: MrSteve007: Complainers in 2009 = Ugggh! When will Microsoft get with the program and release an OS that is designed for a touchscreen!?!

Complainers in 2012 = Ugggh! My start menu is now designed to work with both a touchscreen and a mouse. The world's going to end!!!

Why was it necessary to remove the Start button, My Computer etc from the traditional desktop to make it touch compatible?

Desktop PCs and tablets are like cars and bikes. Should some car/bike manufacturer like Honda bring out a unified set of controls for both their cars and bikes? Should car controls be changed drastically to make them "more bike like"? Take away that accelerator pedal, put a twist throttle on the steering wheel! You'll get used to it!

No one is complaining that they added touch screen functions. They're complaining because they took away mouse functions that millions of people were used to that could have been kept without compromising the touch functions in any way.


Because Metro replaces the Start Button and "My Computer" was only a shortcut. You can still do the exact same thing (actually, more) in 8 than 7 in Computer.
 
2012-10-29 12:51:54 PM

Gig103: 2) Instead of hitting the Windows key and starting to type to search for something (the MS version of Spotlight) now you need to go over to the far right, hover until a bar comes up, click Search, and then start typing. It needs to be an easily accessible button.
3) Metro and all the new "apps" are designed for full screen, including this fancy version of a Start Menu. And I don't like anything being full screen on my combined 3200x1050 dual monitor setup.


2. Search also works just like before. You can still just hit the Windows key and start typing - your search comes up full screen.

3. They're designed for full screen, and being "pinned" to the side of the screen. I enjoy pinning the music app to the side while using the regular desktop. Then using the windows key + to split my open applications to either half of the remaining screen. With a dual 27" monitor setup, it's stupid simple to get 5 side-by-side applications running at the same time.
 
2012-10-29 12:52:00 PM
Tried it when I went to Best Buy yesterday for something else. I think Ballmer is so desperate to make a new fad he's betting the whole company on this (stupid) idea.
 
2012-10-29 12:54:42 PM
Once again, still using Vista, still works great. Haters can suck it and suck it hard.
 
2012-10-29 12:57:00 PM

ShadowLAnCeR: Once again, still using Vista, still works great. Haters can suck it and suck it hard.



just keep that antivirus program up to date and be careful what you click on. (;
 
2012-10-29 12:57:25 PM

Gig103:
2) Instead of hitting the Windows key and starting to type to search for something (the MS version of Spotlight) now you need to go over to the far right, hover until a bar comes up, click Search, and then start typing. It needs to be an easily accessible button.


You can still hit the windows key and start typing to search.
 
2012-10-29 12:58:37 PM

lilbjorn: Everyone knows that every other Microsoft OS is utterly useless.




Repaired
 
2012-10-29 12:59:30 PM

Sargun: Flint Ironstag: MrSteve007: Complainers in 2009 = Ugggh! When will Microsoft get with the program and release an OS that is designed for a touchscreen!?!

Complainers in 2012 = Ugggh! My start menu is now designed to work with both a touchscreen and a mouse. The world's going to end!!!

Why was it necessary to remove the Start button, My Computer etc from the traditional desktop to make it touch compatible?

Desktop PCs and tablets are like cars and bikes. Should some car/bike manufacturer like Honda bring out a unified set of controls for both their cars and bikes? Should car controls be changed drastically to make them "more bike like"? Take away that accelerator pedal, put a twist throttle on the steering wheel! You'll get used to it!

No one is complaining that they added touch screen functions. They're complaining because they took away mouse functions that millions of people were used to that could have been kept without compromising the touch functions in any way.

Because Metro replaces the Start Button and "My Computer" was only a shortcut. You can still do the exact same thing (actually, more) in 8 than 7 in Computer.


So instead of clicking Start then the program I want, or ALL Programs, then what I want) I now have to find the three pixels in the corner, wait for a pop up to appear, click Metro, then scroll sideways to find what I want? That's a pain.

And Metro programs and Desktop programs don't talk. On Desktop I have all my bookmarks bar in Chrome. In Metro Chrome has none of my bookmarks. Open Chrome in Metro and it is full screen only. What if I want a small Chrome window and something else, that is already open in Desktop, open? I can only do that in Desktop, which means I can't use the Metro as a Start button to open it.
 
2012-10-29 12:59:50 PM
7 works great for me.

I was one of the poor idiots who got suckered in to using Windows ME.

Not going to fall for it again. If 8 is in use and stable for a couple years I'll think about it. But I seriously doubt that's gonna happen.
 
2012-10-29 01:00:09 PM

Lumpmoose: After a decade of using Windows on home-brew machines, I gave up trying to get Vista to work reliably and bought a Mac. So yeah, pretty much (and I survived Windows ME).



Mac is good. Unix under the hood. you made the right move but i don't have to tell you that.

be sure and keep that antivirus up to date. snicker.
 
2012-10-29 01:00:46 PM
FWIW I feel nowhere near the level of excitement I had when DOS 6.0 was released.
 
2012-10-29 01:01:57 PM

StrikitRich: Krieghund: I have little demand for Windows 8, because I'm still happy with Windows 7.

Meanwhile, the major corporation I now work for is still has us using XP because they're married to the customized version they force on us. Can believe how slow it runs on an i7.



nothing quite as satisfying as Vendor Lock-in.

smart companies are going to Linux. except the big ones. they have their tongue's up Ballmer's ass and they do what he tells them to do.
 
2012-10-29 01:02:09 PM

Flint Ironstag: Why was it necessary to remove the Start button, My Computer etc from the traditional desktop to make it touch compatible?


Sausage fingers. No other touch device has navigable submenus.
 
2012-10-29 01:02:35 PM
The funny thing is, if Windows 8 were more like Windows 7, they probably would have sold more copies. IT departments on XP right now and contemplating a switch would be more likely to move to 8 instead of 7 if 8 wasn't such a Frankenbeast.
 
2012-10-29 01:02:48 PM

macdaddy357: Looks like Windows 3.1 with slightly better graphics. I don't want that! I want the start button and a simple list of my stuff.



its called eye candy. it looks so neat!
 
2012-10-29 01:03:58 PM

clkeagle: Lost Thought 00: Krieghund: I have little demand for Windows 8, because I'm still happy with Windows 7.

They'll be releasing some updates soon in order to fix that problem

Not if they ever want another enterprise customer.

Hint: Microsoft didn't make their billions from home users.



no they didn't. but they sure f*ked 'em good anyways. here's your PC , Sir. and no, you have to run windows. because we said so.

its called Freedom, sir.
 
2012-10-29 01:07:08 PM

Flint Ironstag: Desktop PCs and tablets are like cars and bikes. Should some car/bike manufacturer like Honda bring out a unified set of controls for both their cars and bikes? Should car controls be changed drastically to make them "more bike like"? Take away that accelerator pedal, put a twist throttle on the steering wheel! You'll get used to it!


Nice example. Actually, Honda did exactly that in the 1970's with their motorcycles, and the rest of the industry followed suit in the following years (Honda unified the brakes on the right side of the bike and shifting on the left. Before that, both American and British bikes had the foot brake and shifters on opposing sides).

Flint Ironstag: Why was it necessary to remove the Start button, My Computer etc from the traditional desktop to make it touch compatible?


Pretty much, yes, unless you want a big ass icon that eats up screen space vs. a swipe gesture for touch / corner icon for mouse. After using a Surface RT over the weekend, and Win 8 on my laptop/docked workstation, it makes a lot of sense. I was frustrated for the first couple hours, but once I learned the UI, I like it quite a bit. It's very flexible across multiple devices and uses.
 
2012-10-29 01:07:40 PM

Flint Ironstag: Sargun: Flint Ironstag: MrSteve007: Complainers in 2009 = Ugggh! When will Microsoft get with the program and release an OS that is designed for a touchscreen!?!

Complainers in 2012 = Ugggh! My start menu is now designed to work with both a touchscreen and a mouse. The world's going to end!!!

Why was it necessary to remove the Start button, My Computer etc from the traditional desktop to make it touch compatible?

Desktop PCs and tablets are like cars and bikes. Should some car/bike manufacturer like Honda bring out a unified set of controls for both their cars and bikes? Should car controls be changed drastically to make them "more bike like"? Take away that accelerator pedal, put a twist throttle on the steering wheel! You'll get used to it!

No one is complaining that they added touch screen functions. They're complaining because they took away mouse functions that millions of people were used to that could have been kept without compromising the touch functions in any way.

Because Metro replaces the Start Button and "My Computer" was only a shortcut. You can still do the exact same thing (actually, more) in 8 than 7 in Computer.

So instead of clicking Start then the program I want, or ALL Programs, then what I want) I now have to find the three pixels in the corner, wait for a pop up to appear, click Metro, then scroll sideways to find what I want? That's a pain.

And Metro programs and Desktop programs don't talk. On Desktop I have all my bookmarks bar in Chrome. In Metro Chrome has none of my bookmarks. Open Chrome in Metro and it is full screen only. What if I want a small Chrome window and something else, that is already open in Desktop, open? I can only do that in Desktop, which means I can't use the Metro as a Start button to open it.


To be fair it's more than just a few pixels in the corner...it's the corner itself. Arguably it requires much less precision than having to point at an actual button...just slide it into the corner. Or you can hit the Windows key. I don't understand why they did away with the icon but of all the changes they made, this is the least significant. Also, since the Start Menu is now full screen, there's plenty of room for you applications, there's not really much need to scroll. If you find that you do, you can rearrange the icons to put the most commonly used in the front.

As far as Metro Chrome not talking to Desktop Chrome, complain to Google. They wrote it that way. Until the fix it, stop using both and stick to one copy. Why would you use both versions anyway?
 
2012-10-29 01:08:07 PM

MrSteve007: 2. Search also works just like before. You can still just hit the Windows key and start typing - your search comes up full screen.

3. They're designed for full screen, and being "pinned" to the side of the screen. I enjoy pinning the music app to the side while using the regular desktop. Then using the windows key + to split my open applications to either half of the remaining screen. With a dual 27" monitor setup, it's stupid simple to get 5 side-by-side applications running at the same time.


I appreciate the clarification on the search thing. The full-screen is still something I can't get past right now with high resolution multiple displays but at least it does search when typing. If you disable metro (can you?) what happens when you press the Windows key?
 
2012-10-29 01:12:15 PM
My desktop is finally reaching it's Windows 7 entropy limit and Desktop Exploder keeps crashing.

So I am thinking of doing the old wipe and reinstall on it.

Granted under XP this was required once a year, and on 7 it seems to be required once in three years...

But anyway, since 8 does have a desktop mode, and presumably a bunch of improvements in speed, I am considering loading 8 on to it.

Does Windows 8 bring anything to a roughly 3 year old $700 (that is, basic hardware, nothing special) HP desktop?
 
2012-10-29 01:14:12 PM

RoyBatty: Does Windows 8 bring anything to a roughly 3 year old $700 (that is, basic hardware, nothing special) HP desktop?


$40 to Microsoft's coffers?


/I keed because I don't actually know the answer
 
2012-10-29 01:15:57 PM

MrSteve007: Flint Ironstag: Desktop PCs and tablets are like cars and bikes. Should some car/bike manufacturer like Honda bring out a unified set of controls for both their cars and bikes? Should car controls be changed drastically to make them "more bike like"? Take away that accelerator pedal, put a twist throttle on the steering wheel! You'll get used to it!

Nice example. Actually, Honda did exactly that in the 1970's with their motorcycles, and the rest of the industry followed suit in the following years (Honda unified the brakes on the right side of the bike and shifting on the left. Before that, both American and British bikes had the foot brake and shifters on opposing sides).

Flint Ironstag: Why was it necessary to remove the Start button, My Computer etc from the traditional desktop to make it touch compatible?

Pretty much, yes, unless you want a big ass icon that eats up screen space vs. a swipe gesture for touch / corner icon for mouse. After using a Surface RT over the weekend, and Win 8 on my laptop/docked workstation, it makes a lot of sense. I was frustrated for the first couple hours, but once I learned the UI, I like it quite a bit. It's very flexible across multiple devices and uses.


Honda didn't try to unify cars and bikes.

And having no Start button makes sense for Metro. But on Desktop there is still a taskbar. What screen real estate would the Start Button be taking up?

Metro for touch screen tablets, Desktop for traditional PCs. Why screw up the 'traditional'desktop interface by taking away features millions of users got used to to add touch options when they could have been kept alongside the touch options?

Hell, why aim the traditional desktop at touch anyway? Apart from very specific uses, like menu screens in McDonalds etc, home PCs will remain mouse/keyboard. Can you imagine having to use your arm at full reach for hours while sitting at a desk? Rather than the mouse (or in my case trackerball) where your arm is resting on the desk? That would be an ergonomic nightmare.
Let alone trying to keep your PC screen clean with all the fingerprints....
 
2012-10-29 01:18:24 PM

Gig103: If you disable metro (can you?) what happens when you press the Windows key?


I don't believe so, unless you install a 3rd party program like start8 - but I haven't installed or played with it.
 
2012-10-29 01:21:43 PM

RoyBatty: My desktop is finally reaching it's Windows 7 entropy limit and Desktop Exploder keeps crashing.

So I am thinking of doing the old wipe and reinstall on it.

Granted under XP this was required once a year, and on 7 it seems to be required once in three years...

But anyway, since 8 does have a desktop mode, and presumably a bunch of improvements in speed, I am considering loading 8 on to it.

Does Windows 8 bring anything to a roughly 3 year old $700 (that is, basic hardware, nothing special) HP desktop?


It has a nifty restore option that has more options on how to reload and not to lose everything than many of the previous versions.
 
2012-10-29 01:24:58 PM

Flint Ironstag: MrSteve007: Flint Ironstag: Desktop PCs and tablets are like cars and bikes. Should some car/bike manufacturer like Honda bring out a unified set of controls for both their cars and bikes? Should car controls be changed drastically to make them "more bike like"? Take away that accelerator pedal, put a twist throttle on the steering wheel! You'll get used to it!

Nice example. Actually, Honda did exactly that in the 1970's with their motorcycles, and the rest of the industry followed suit in the following years (Honda unified the brakes on the right side of the bike and shifting on the left. Before that, both American and British bikes had the foot brake and shifters on opposing sides).

Flint Ironstag: Why was it necessary to remove the Start button, My Computer etc from the traditional desktop to make it touch compatible?

Pretty much, yes, unless you want a big ass icon that eats up screen space vs. a swipe gesture for touch / corner icon for mouse. After using a Surface RT over the weekend, and Win 8 on my laptop/docked workstation, it makes a lot of sense. I was frustrated for the first couple hours, but once I learned the UI, I like it quite a bit. It's very flexible across multiple devices and uses.

Honda didn't try to unify cars and bikes.

And having no Start button makes sense for Metro. But on Desktop there is still a taskbar. What screen real estate would the Start Button be taking up?

Metro for touch screen tablets, Desktop for traditional PCs. Why screw up the 'traditional'desktop interface by taking away features millions of users got used to to add touch options when they could have been kept alongside the touch options?

Hell, why aim the traditional desktop at touch anyway? Apart from very specific uses, like menu screens in McDonalds etc, home PCs will remain mouse/keyboard. Can you imagine having to use your arm at full reach for hours while sitting at a desk? Rather than the mouse (or in my case trackerball) where your arm is resting on the de ...


Well you've got to remember, MS would like people to run Win8 Pro, not just RT, on touch enabled devices. For example, the Surface Pro will run Win8 Pro. One of the selling features is you'll have full desktop capability without the need for a mouse or keyboard. I'm not saying it was the smartest thing for them to do...a simple toggle switch to put a Start button on the taskbar would have gone a long way....but not having the button there is trivial. A new user to Win8 might be confused the first time they sit down but it's not hard to invoke once you know where it is. Also, after you install Win8 for the first time it gives you a ever so brief tutorial on how to bring up the Start Screen and the Charms Bar on the right hand side....
 
2012-10-29 01:25:42 PM

RoyBatty: My desktop is finally reaching it's Windows 7 entropy limit and Desktop Exploder keeps crashing.

So I am thinking of doing the old wipe and reinstall on it.

Granted under XP this was required once a year, and on 7 it seems to be required once in three years...


So in other words, you visit a lot of porn sites and/or steal a lot of software.
 
2012-10-29 01:25:49 PM

ForgotMyTowel:
To be fair it's more than just a few pixels in the corner...it's the corner itself. Arguably it requires much less precision than having to point at an actual button...just slide it into the corner. Or you can hit the Windows key. I don't understand why they did away with the icon but of all the changes they made, this is the least significant. Also, since the Start Menu is now full screen, there's plenty of room for you applications, there's not really much need to scroll. If you find that you do, you can rearrange the icons to put the most commonly used in the front.

As far as Metro Chrome not talking to Desktop Chrome, complain to Google. They wrote it that way. Until the fix it, stop using both and stick to one copy. Why would you use both versions anyway?.


Thinking about it the corner thing is probably due to my dual monitor setup. Because my video card doesn't play with W8 and I've had to order a new one (due tomorrow! Yay!) I am only using one monitor at the moment, the left one. So I don't just move the mouse into the corner because I am used to it then moving over to the next screen. Trying it your way, the single monitor way, it is easy.

But it is still more involved and more work to open the Metro screen than slicking Start.

But not for me, thanks to Classic Shell.

So far, with Classic Shell (or Start 8 which looks like it does much the same) I am very happy and glad I upgraded. At least I will be when I get my second screen back.

But had Classic Shell or Start 8 not existed I would not be nearly as happy. It is a lot of change for no reason. They didn't need to take away mouse functions to add touch functions.
 
2012-10-29 01:29:42 PM

Flint Ironstag: ForgotMyTowel:
To be fair it's more than just a few pixels in the corner...it's the corner itself. Arguably it requires much less precision than having to point at an actual button...just slide it into the corner. Or you can hit the Windows key. I don't understand why they did away with the icon but of all the changes they made, this is the least significant. Also, since the Start Menu is now full screen, there's plenty of room for you applications, there's not really much need to scroll. If you find that you do, you can rearrange the icons to put the most commonly used in the front.

As far as Metro Chrome not talking to Desktop Chrome, complain to Google. They wrote it that way. Until the fix it, stop using both and stick to one copy. Why would you use both versions anyway?.

Thinking about it the corner thing is probably due to my dual monitor setup. Because my video card doesn't play with W8 and I've had to order a new one (due tomorrow! Yay!) I am only using one monitor at the moment, the left one. So I don't just move the mouse into the corner because I am used to it then moving over to the next screen. Trying it your way, the single monitor way, it is easy.

But it is still more involved and more work to open the Metro screen than slicking Start.

But not for me, thanks to Classic Shell.

So far, with Classic Shell (or Start 8 which looks like it does much the same) I am very happy and glad I upgraded. At least I will be when I get my second screen back.

But had Classic Shell or Start 8 not existed I would not be nearly as happy. It is a lot of change for no reason. They didn't need to take away mouse functions to add touch functions.


I hear you. Just one more option also would be to put the mouse in any right hand corner and click the Start button from the Charms Bar. Not nearly as easy but a work around until you get the monitors squared away. I've been tempted to run something like Classic Shell or the like but I'd rather learn the UI (being in IT) just in case my company every decides to go that route. Also, for those admin types listening, Win Key + X is a life saver for me...
 
2012-10-29 01:29:53 PM

RoyBatty: My desktop is finally reaching it's Windows 7 entropy limit and Desktop Exploder keeps crashing.

So I am thinking of doing the old wipe and reinstall on it.

Granted under XP this was required once a year, and on 7 it seems to be required once in three years...

But anyway, since 8 does have a desktop mode, and presumably a bunch of improvements in speed, I am considering loading 8 on to it.

Does Windows 8 bring anything to a roughly 3 year old $700 (that is, basic hardware, nothing special) HP desktop?


I have a HD DC7900 desktop with Core 2Duo E8400 at 3Ghz. Admittedly I was running XP, far older than the mobo and chip, but W8 is far faster.

Try it and see, the upgrade deal is very good, and I can certainly recommend Classic Shell if you find you really miss the Start button and other W7 features.
 
2012-10-29 01:32:06 PM

RoyBatty: My desktop is finally reaching it's Windows 7 entropy limit and Desktop Exploder keeps crashing.

So I am thinking of doing the old wipe and reinstall on it.

Granted under XP this was required once a year, and on 7 it seems to be required once in three years...

But anyway, since 8 does have a desktop mode, and presumably a bunch of improvements in speed, I am considering loading 8 on to it.

Does Windows 8 bring anything to a roughly 3 year old $700 (that is, basic hardware, nothing special) HP desktop?


Having used the Beta at home, on my older desktops, I would say "no".
It works fine once you figure it out and configure it the way you like it (took me about twenty minutes), and it is a little faster - especially on boot-up and opening apps. But I wouldn't spend the money - the new capabilities it has don't apply to an older desktop with no touchscreen.
I would buy a new device that had W8 on it without hesitation, but I see no reason to upgrade a standard desktop or laptop to it.
 
2012-10-29 01:32:28 PM

MrSteve007: Gig103: If you disable metro (can you?) what happens when you press the Windows key?

I don't believe so, unless you install a 3rd party program like start8 - but I haven't installed or played with it.


Classic Shell doesn't disable Metro in any way, just gives you the start button. Pressing the Windows Key just brings up the traditional Start menu.

This is my point, if Classic Shell can give you the W7 look and feel without in any way compromising the touchscreen functions then why the hell couldn't MS have done that in the first place?
 
2012-10-29 01:33:55 PM

ForgotMyTowel: Also, after you install Win8 for the first time it gives you a ever so brief tutorial on how to bring up the Start Screen and the Charms Bar on the right hand side....


I never got a tutorial!
 
2012-10-29 01:34:31 PM

Lando Lincoln: RoyBatty: My desktop is finally reaching it's Windows 7 entropy limit and Desktop Exploder keeps crashing.

So I am thinking of doing the old wipe and reinstall on it.

Granted under XP this was required once a year, and on 7 it seems to be required once in three years...

So in other words, you visit a lot of porn sites and/or steal a lot of software.


There are people who don't?
 
2012-10-29 01:35:15 PM

Gig103: RoyBatty: Does Windows 8 bring anything to a roughly 3 year old $700 (that is, basic hardware, nothing special) HP desktop?

$40 to Microsoft's coffers?


/I keed because I don't actually know the answer


Oh, I can get a free license. So the true cost is more like the waste of time if I end up tweaking it for a day or so and then end up having to reinstall 7 a week later.
 
2012-10-29 01:38:06 PM

Lando Lincoln: RoyBatty: My desktop is finally reaching it's Windows 7 entropy limit and Desktop Exploder keeps crashing.

So I am thinking of doing the old wipe and reinstall on it.

Granted under XP this was required once a year, and on 7 it seems to be required once in three years...

So in other words, you visit a lot of porn sites and/or steal a lot of software.


Yeah, sure.

It's not that 3 years of loading crappy programs with crappy installers can't eventually bork windows 7.

(I think it's Google Drive that's causing the issue, it seems to go away when Google Drive is not running.)
 
2012-10-29 01:38:42 PM

Flint Ironstag: This is my point, if Classic Shell can give you the W7 look and feel without in any way compromising the touchscreen functions then why the hell couldn't MS have done that in the first place?


I take it you never used Windows 7 on a touchscreen device? If you had, you wouldn't claim that classic shell does nothing to compromise the UI in that situation.
 
2012-10-29 01:38:55 PM
(I think it's Google Drive that's causing the issue, it seems to go away when Google Drive is not running.)

Actually not sure why I wrote that, it's actually exiting dropbox that makes the problem go away. Need coffee I guess.
 
2012-10-29 01:42:16 PM

Flint Ironstag: ForgotMyTowel: Also, after you install Win8 for the first time it gives you a ever so brief tutorial on how to bring up the Start Screen and the Charms Bar on the right hand side....

I never got a tutorial!


Really? Did you install the retail version (released Friday) or are you still on the RTM preview? On the retail version, right before it dumps you into the Start Screen after installing it has this lil gif like animation that shows a finger going into the lower left corner for the Start Screen and lower right for the Charms Bar then tells you to try it. That's all there is but it at least tells you how to get started, lol.
 
2012-10-29 01:43:27 PM
Are you people really still biatching about this?

It works fine.
 
2012-10-29 01:45:38 PM
"I am not real thrilled they are changing things around," Dionne said. "Windows 7 does everything I want it to. Where is the return on my investment to learn a new OS?"

And that's pretty much hitting the nail on the head. One thing not mentioned is that from WIN95 thru WIN7 the basic system remained the same. Switching to something else meant having to relearn everything. The big excuse for business for NOT switching to some *Nix system was "OMG!! Retrains because DIFFERENTS!!". Now WIN8 makes everything different and that eliminates a major reason that prevented switching. If you're going to retrain anyway, why not retrain on something different?

/still running XP, in a virtual machine, on Debian
//how does WIN7 do in a VM?
 
2012-10-29 01:49:00 PM

Marine1: Are you people really still biatching about this?

It works fine.


So does MS DOS 6. The question isn't whether it works, but whether it's an improvement.
 
2012-10-29 01:55:34 PM

slayer199: What did they farking expect? You spend 17 years getting people accustomed to one way of doing things...the Start button. Then you eliminate it. It would have been one thing if it had been a gradual switch, giving users the option to go back to the Start Button/menu. But to make a radical change like that and expect consumers to adopt it? Someone at Microsoft must be stoned.

Additionally (and I've said this before), the Enterprise will not switch to Windows 8. Many companies are still on XP and are in the process of migrating to Windows 7. I can't see a situation where a company will embrace Windows 8 because of the amount of retraining it will require.

Furthermore, they've made the same UI changes to Server 2012. WTF Microsoft? I don't need the same farking interface that I'd have on a tablet on a server. Despite the fact that I'm more a VMware/Storage guy, I still have to do some support on the OSes. Thankfully, RedHat isn't stupid enough to make such radical changes.


Not only are many companies on Windows XP (and governments as well), they're still using the MS Office 2003. Since I used to work in the Canadian Government, I didn't bother upgrading my own Office to 2007 or 2010 since if I did any work on my home PC, I would need to make absolutely sure it was all back-compatible. After getting downsized (not unhappy about that all told, though I do miss the people and the regular paycheque) I've gone back to school and gotten a cheap student copy of MS Office 2010.

I farking hate MS Office 2010. I farking hate it with a farking passion. I hate the Ribbon. I hate all the damned buttons that make things look so pretty but are utterly useless for me. I don't need to have a crap load of cell formats taking up 75% of the ribbon - if I want to make a cell look a certain way I can damn well format it myself. hate that all the things I do need (like adding Macros to Excel, and Watermarks to documents) are hidden behind layers of obfuscation. I like computers. I like software. And I farking hate MS Office 2007-2010. I can see why the government refuses to upgrade; you've got hundreds of thousands of people in the government who would need to be retrained on how to use farking MS Office, even if that retraining was just a single days worth, going through MS Word, MS Excel and MS Powerpoint. I'm a guy who used all of those for 6 hours a day, 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year. I'm the guy in the office that everyone would come over to and ask for help. And I need to have a training course to use this crap.

Take all of that and say "Ditto" for Windows 8, from what I've seen of it.
 
2012-10-29 02:01:03 PM

MrSteve007: Flint Ironstag: This is my point, if Classic Shell can give you the W7 look and feel without in any way compromising the touchscreen functions then why the hell couldn't MS have done that in the first place?

I take it you never used Windows 7 on a touchscreen device? If you had, you wouldn't claim that classic shell does nothing to compromise the UI in that situation.


What does Classic Shell take away from W8? What can't I do because I have Classic Shell?
 
2012-10-29 02:02:28 PM

ForgotMyTowel: Flint Ironstag: ForgotMyTowel: Also, after you install Win8 for the first time it gives you a ever so brief tutorial on how to bring up the Start Screen and the Charms Bar on the right hand side....

I never got a tutorial!

Really? Did you install the retail version (released Friday) or are you still on the RTM preview? On the retail version, right before it dumps you into the Start Screen after installing it has this lil gif like animation that shows a finger going into the lower left corner for the Start Screen and lower right for the Charms Bar then tells you to try it. That's all there is but it at least tells you how to get started, lol.


I downloaded the $40 deal on Saturday. It might have offered me that, but I can't remember it.
 
2012-10-29 02:06:14 PM
Skip even numbered Microsoft OS releases.
 
2012-10-29 02:10:06 PM

MrEricSir: Marine1: Are you people really still biatching about this?

It works fine.

So does MS DOS 6. The question isn't whether it works, but whether it's an improvement.


It's an improvement at best and a lateral move at worst.

It's like everything else that changes: you'll get over it. We always have, we always will.
 
2012-10-29 02:17:34 PM

slayer199: What did they farking expect? You spend 17 years getting people accustomed to one way of doing things...the Start button. Then you eliminate it. It would have been one thing if it had been a gradual switch, giving users the option to go back to the Start Button/menu. But to make a radical change like that and expect consumers to adopt it? Someone at Microsoft must be stoned.

Additionally (and I've said this before), the Enterprise will not switch to Windows 8. Many companies are still on XP and are in the process of migrating to Windows 7. I can't see a situation where a company will embrace Windows 8 because of the amount of retraining it will require.

Furthermore, they've made the same UI changes to Server 2012. WTF Microsoft? I don't need the same farking interface that I'd have on a tablet on a server. Despite the fact that I'm more a VMware/Storage guy, I still have to do some support on the OSes. Thankfully, RedHat isn't stupid enough to make such radical changes.


You have one large oversight. Ipads and such are wildly popular with executives and management, but they are impossible to secure. Every single secure enterprise IT environment has been itching for Windows 8 simply so they can strip the farking Ipads out of their hands and hand them an actually secure tablet that they can actually use inside the network.
 
2012-10-29 02:19:40 PM
I'll jump from 7 when I'm done with it. I'll let other people work the kinks out of 8, or conclude that it's un-salvageable like most even-numbered MS OS releases. Microsoft is asking me to move from an OS I'm okay with to a total wildcard, and have me pay for the privilege.

Pass.
 
2012-10-29 02:20:18 PM

Techhell: I don't need to have a crap load of cell formats taking up 75% of the ribbon - if I want to make a cell look a certain way I can damn well format it myself. hate that all the things I do need (like adding Macros to Excel, and Watermarks to documents) are hidden behind layers of obfuscation.


In Office 2010 or 2012, you can customize the ribbon UI & quick start to do and show whatever you want - well beyond that of any of the menus in Office 2003 - right?
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net

Since you claim that you're the guy that people go to for answers, you're awfully misinformed.
 
2012-10-29 02:21:29 PM

Flint Ironstag: I have a HD DC7900 desktop with Core 2Duo E8400 at 3Ghz. Admittedly I was running XP, far older than the mobo and chip, but W8 is far faster.

Try it and see, the upgrade deal is very good, and I can certainly recommend Classic Shell if you find you really miss the Start button and other W7 features.


After reading here about Classic Shell and Start8, I think I will try it see what happens.
 
2012-10-29 02:23:11 PM
If I were buying a new tablet device - I'd probably get a Windows 8 tablet. The Surface looking pretty interesting and I really do enjoy Windows 8.

But I won't be replacing Ubuntu/Windows 7 on my tablet and I don't see any reason why I'd ever put Windows 8 on my desktop. And I say this as someone who would pay $0 for it.
 
2012-10-29 02:37:39 PM

Flint Ironstag: MrSteve007: Flint Ironstag: This is my point, if Classic Shell can give you the W7 look and feel without in any way compromising the touchscreen functions then why the hell couldn't MS have done that in the first place?

I take it you never used Windows 7 on a touchscreen device? If you had, you wouldn't claim that classic shell does nothing to compromise the UI in that situation.

What does Classic Shell take away from W8? What can't I do because I have Classic Shell?


Way to dodge the question. When attempting to use a touchscreen and the Classic shell/Vista/W7 start button system, it can be very difficult to select items in the menu, as they're quite narrow (especially on a 12" touchscreen device). Don't even think about trying it with a touchscreen device that isn't perfectly calibrated either. Even if you have small hands and perfect precision, it takes: -> click start menu -> select pull-out menu, Programs -> Accessories -> Paint. To launch a program. That's 5 taps. You could cut down the steps to two if you pin that program to the start menu, but digging down into the submenus is very touch via touch on the old system.

With Win 8, on a touch screen, it's swipe from the left -> start menu -> paint. Three taps (if you have paint pinned to the menu). But more importantly, the motions are much easier to do with your finger and far less precision is required.
 
2012-10-29 02:46:54 PM

Fark_Guy_Rob: But I won't be replacing Ubuntu/Windows 7 on my tablet and I don't see any reason why I'd ever put Windows 8 on my desktop..


You'd be missing out on a noticeably faster computer, with far more security, better multimonitor support, longer battery life (for a laptop) and a myriad of OS improvements (pausing/canceling of individual file transfers/deletes).

Heck, for $0 - the improvements in the task manager should be enough. Here's how mine looks right now.
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net

Care to see how much resources different programs have used over the current session?
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net

Or finally discrete breakdown of throughput on each hard drive and network source?
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net

Again, somewhat minor stuff, but I find it very, very useful - and frustrating when I go back to older systems like W7 and the archaic XP.
 
2012-10-29 02:50:10 PM
Was Windows 7 working too well? Yeah let's f**k that up.
 
2012-10-29 02:51:40 PM

Lost Thought 00: Krieghund: I have little demand for Windows 8, because I'm still happy with Windows 7.

They'll be releasing some updates soon in order to fix that problem


Yeah, can't wait until all my current computers start mysteriously slowing down to the point where I am forced to buy a new machine if I want to do anything internet-related. Yay.
 
2012-10-29 02:54:22 PM
Sounds like the interface on my wife's phone. Locks up for no reason and/or stops processing calls and texts.

Nice to know the re-boot still works ... sort-of ... for a while. It's traditional.
 
2012-10-29 03:04:13 PM

natazha: Sounds like the interface on my wife's phone. Locks up for no reason and/or stops processing calls and texts.

Nice to know the re-boot still works ... sort-of ... for a while. It's traditional.


She must have Android
My 12 year daughter old understood W8 within a hour
/She's not a wiz by any standard
 
2012-10-29 03:04:52 PM
Also, for those of you who like to refresh/reinstall your operating system, these new settings in the control panel of Win8 are pretty damned nice.
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2012-10-29 03:06:46 PM

MrSteve007: Also, for those of you who like to refresh/reinstall your operating system, these new settings in the control panel of Win8 are pretty damned nice.


Hey, so how well will it install over an existing Win 7 installation?

Can it be uninstalled leaving the original Win 7?
 
2012-10-29 03:07:34 PM

MrSteve007: Flint Ironstag: MrSteve007: Flint Ironstag: This is my point, if Classic Shell can give you the W7 look and feel without in any way compromising the touchscreen functions then why the hell couldn't MS have done that in the first place?

I take it you never used Windows 7 on a touchscreen device? If you had, you wouldn't claim that classic shell does nothing to compromise the UI in that situation.

What does Classic Shell take away from W8? What can't I do because I have Classic Shell?

Way to dodge the question. When attempting to use a touchscreen and the Classic shell/Vista/W7 start button system, it can be very difficult to select items in the menu, as they're quite narrow (especially on a 12" touchscreen device). Don't even think about trying it with a touchscreen device that isn't perfectly calibrated either. Even if you have small hands and perfect precision, it takes: -> click start menu -> select pull-out menu, Programs -> Accessories -> Paint. To launch a program. That's 5 taps. You could cut down the steps to two if you pin that program to the start menu, but digging down into the submenus is very touch via touch on the old system.

With Win 8, on a touch screen, it's swipe from the left -> start menu -> paint. Three taps (if you have paint pinned to the menu). But more importantly, the motions are much easier to do with your finger and far less precision is required.




But Classic Shell doesn't take away the touch functions. I still have the Charm pop up on the right, the last used windows on the left, the Metro desktop etc etc.

If you're using it with touch go right ahead. Don't use the Start button and menu. Use the W8 menu, like Metro instead. AFAIF Classic Shell doesn't take away any of those functions. It just adds the W7 functions like Start. You can customise what things like the Windows button do to suit you.
 
2012-10-29 03:14:09 PM
Man, they really screwed the pooch on PR for this one. Everything I've seen is negative.
 
2012-10-29 03:16:42 PM

RoyBatty: MrSteve007: Also, for those of you who like to refresh/reinstall your operating system, these new settings in the control panel of Win8 are pretty damned nice.

Hey, so how well will it install over an existing Win 7 installation?

Can it be uninstalled leaving the original Win 7?


I had a pretty old (3 year) installation of Win 7 Pro 64-bit, with a ton of corporate cruft on it. It warned me that some of my old programs from the OEM (like Toshiba update) won't work on the new OS, and the major one that I had to uninstall was an older version Symantec.

During my first update attempt, it appeared to have frozen up during the last stages, so I crossed my fingers and did a hard reboot (mind you, this was mid-install). It came up with a prompt saying something along the lines: "It appears your install did work, restoring Windows 7." It had fully restored Win 7 without issue.

I decided to try again (this time with a reboot, after removing Symantec) and I left for lunch. When I came back, W8 was ready to go. So far I haven't had any program issues (Adobe CS6 Master suite works without issue, same goes for the Autodesk 2013 suite), with exception for the occasional crash of the Outlook 2013 preview during startup - which frankly, for a beta piece of software, is expected.

As for rolling back to Win 7 after full install, it should be doable if you haven't deleted the gigantic windows.old folder, and still have the Win 7 disk. Instructions
 
2012-10-29 03:18:59 PM

MrSteve007: Again, somewhat minor stuff, but I find it very, very useful - and frustrating when I go back to older systems like W7 and the archaic XP.


Shame they didn't release it with a cogent UI.

solyhhit: Was Windows 7 working too well? Yeah let's f**k that up.


Welcome to how MSFT has operated its entire existence. They scramble to please their customers, then get cocky and think they should be an "innovator" and proceed to utterly embarrass themselves. Now they'll have to scramble again.
 
2012-10-29 03:24:08 PM

NowhereMon: It's a tablet, it's a laptop , it's a tablet, it's a laptop...


Relax, man, you're two tents!
 
2012-10-29 03:26:19 PM

AcneVulgaris: Man, they really screwed the pooch on PR for this one. Everything I've seen is negative.


It's a shame because I like it (at least with Classic Shell or Start8) and it seems to run very fast, and supposedly far more secure under the hood.

It's a shame they screwed up the 'classic' desktop by taking away things for no reason. As I have said above they can exist perfectly well side by side and let you use it exactly like W7 with a mouse and keyboard but if and when you want to use it by touch all the touch functions are still there.

They should have either kept Desktop as a pure mouse/keyboard US and had Metro as the touch UI or added touch to Desktop without taking away the classic functions like Start etc.

It'll be interesting to see if they get feedback on how many people install Classic Shell or Start 8. If the numbers are significant and keep growing then how can any business ignore that and refuse to offer that option themselves? I could see MS producing their own and calling it the Enterprise Accessibility Pack or something.
 
2012-10-29 03:26:41 PM
Here's a trick if you want to replace the "All Programs" functionality on the Win 8 taskbar, without installing a shell -- the taskbar still supports "toolbars", which are essentially just folders with shortcuts in them. So unlock the taskbar, right-select Toolbars > New Toolbar, and enter "C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\" in the path window. Select the "Programs" folder. Now just drag that toolbar to the far left of the taskbar, then drag the pinned apps back up against it until there's just "Programs >>" there on the left.

When you want to access a program, just click the little ">>".

Installer programs still put shortcuts there. There are still the Admin Tools and other Win 8 desktop programs shortcuts in there.

Want shutdown/restart buttons? Make a quick powershell script using variations of the "shutdown" command, and put the shortcuts there.

Haven't figured out a different non-Metro "search" yet, but with all my toolbar/taskbar and desktop project folder OCD, I don't really need it.


...I'm still only monkeying around with it in a VM, but I'm tempted by the multimonitor improvements (different toolbars on different monitors? Joy!), HyperV (but no 3-D acceleration, boo!), the new taskmanager (cleaner than procshow), and the performance improvements. But I'm still not convinced enough to put it on the bare metal yet.

*shrug*
 
2012-10-29 03:31:23 PM

jaylectricity: I thought everybody knew to use every other new OS from Microsoft...2000, XP, 7...I'll be waiting for whatever comes AFTER 8.



Ya nailed it.
 
2012-10-29 03:47:02 PM

MrSteve007: Also, for those of you who like to refresh/reinstall your operating system, these new settings in the control panel of Win8 are pretty damned nice.
[sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 614x671]


You work for Microsoft, don't you?
 
2012-10-29 04:01:48 PM

sjmcc13: StrikitRich: Krieghund: I have little demand for Windows 8, because I'm still happy with Windows 7.

Meanwhile, the major corporation I now work for is still has us using XP because they're married to the customized version they force on us. Can't believe how slow it runs on an i7.

XP can not use multi-core processors properly. You are probably better off with an old single core processor then a modern multi-core...


I know, but I didn't know about the XP install when I bought the laptop. I asked for them to create a partition, but was turned down. Most likely it was because the person didn't know how to make one.
 
2012-10-29 04:27:31 PM

AcneVulgaris: Man, they really screwed the pooch on PR for this one. Everything I've seen is negative.


They made some horrible design decisions. Deleting the start menu, requiring keyboard shortcuts to do simple tasks, changing the whole "look and feel" of the way a Windows computer works. It's like selling a new car that gets better mileage, more horsepower, is more safe in an accident-and requires you to steer with your feet. Yeah, you can figure it out eventually, but why fark with what works?
 
2012-10-29 04:43:58 PM

Lumpmoose: Vista to work reliably


Vista SP2 is a totally different beast than Vista original. The service packs fix a lot of issues, and 3rd party drivers were a lot more stable by the time SP2 was out.


lilbjorn: Everyone knows that every other Microsoft OS is utterly useless.


Windows 2000 and XP were both very good versions, and they are side-by-side.


slayer199: What did they farking expect?


Given the huge discount for those buying an upgrade edition, they were expecting a lot of people who were still on XP to take advantage of that discount and finally upgrade.

Had I not already upgraded my home systems from XP to W7, I totally would have jumped on W8 as a cheap upgrade solution.
 
2012-10-29 05:04:08 PM
If you're on Vista, it's a damn fine upgrade. Pay £25, another £3 for Start 8 and get a whole new OS that runs faster and looks like Windows 7.
 
2012-10-29 05:12:44 PM

slayer199: You work for Microsoft, don't you?


No, but I work as IT director for an architecture firm not all that far from Redmond. Once or twice a year I volunteer as a guinea pig for Microsoft's "User Research" testing, which is pretty fun. About a third of my friends from college work there, or are contractors of MS (the rest are split evenly between Amazon and Boeing).
 
2012-10-29 05:27:25 PM

Dinjiin:

Windows 2000 and XP were both very good versions, and they are side-by-side.



ME was between 2000 and XP.
 
2012-10-29 05:37:36 PM
//how does WIN7 do in a VM?

I have a Windows 7 VM on my machine at work and it works fine.


Microsoft seems to have forgotten step 1 of software design - assemble a requirements list by talking to representatives of all the stakeholders. They seem to have concentrated on tablet users, PR people and upper MS management and completely ignored people who use desktops at work or at home.
 
2012-10-29 06:16:06 PM

offmymeds: [us.acidcow.com image 700x525]


That AOL interface was actually very user friendly. Would have been even more so with touch screens.
 
2012-10-29 06:20:09 PM

DigitalCoffee: And that's pretty much hitting the nail on the head. One thing not mentioned is that from WIN95 thru WIN7 the basic system remained the same. Switching to something else meant having to relearn everything. The big excuse for business for NOT switching to some *Nix system was "OMG!! Retrains because DIFFERENTS!!". Now WIN8 makes everything different and that eliminates a major reason that prevented switching. If you're going to retrain anyway, why not retrain on something different?


Like what? Linux is still less than viable for a mass audience (I don't care what flavor you go with).

And the pricing and lack of selection of Macs makes those a non-starter in most serious enterprise environments.

In summary, there isn't really a very good "different" option because thus far Microsoft is the only company that understands enterprise needs.
 
2012-10-29 06:31:54 PM

NotARocketScientist: //how does WIN7 do in a VM?

I have a Windows 7 VM on my machine at work and it works fine.


Thanks for the verification. I seem to remember some noise made a few years ago about making Windows 'VM proof' (or some such, maybe I'm misremembering). Might be time to upgrade the sandbox from XP to 7.
 
2012-10-29 06:43:48 PM
www.ssidisplays.com
 
2012-10-29 06:50:14 PM
As one of the few people who downloaded Windows 8, I've got to say it's actually a nice improvement over 7. There's less of a learning curve to it then to the average Facebook redesign.
 
2012-10-29 06:56:18 PM
I do IT for a small municipality. We are having this discussion right now. A big issue is 3rd party vendors adapting their software. Most can't address 64 bit, much less Windows 8. So, our next upgrade round will be to Windows 7 and a Server 2008 forest.
 
2012-10-29 06:58:06 PM

Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

pants on fire stupid stuff from Redmond, and no amount of attempted hipster branding is going to change it.


I was so happy when we got away from Romper Room XP. Granted Metro is pastels, but I do like the changes to the Desktop mode. It is easier on the eyes than 7 was,
 
2012-10-29 06:58:19 PM

whistleridge: That, and 7 is in no way outdated yet.

If I could use XP for 8 years, no problem, I don't see any reason why I shouldn't get the same sort of life out of 7. Especially since big OS changes mean issues with a lot of the other programs I've purchased. Even if 8 didn't look totally idiotic (and it does), I would see zero reason to change. It ain't broke, after all...


8 is basically 7 with a silly front-end and a bunch of backend usability stuff stripped out. At least that was my take on it from the several hours of toying around with it in a VM a couple months ago. I have little to no interest in a further nerfed OS.
 
2012-10-29 07:03:32 PM

Dinjiin: Windows 2000 and XP were both very good versions, and they are side-by-side.


Windows 2000 was the last major change in NT that was headed up by Dave Cutler.

He managed to oversee a major rewrite of the OS that still managed to work very well indeed right from the start. This was a particularly noteworthy accomplishment since none of his successors have managed the same.

XP was just a point release of an OS that already worked quite well.
 
2012-10-29 07:04:10 PM

MrSteve007: Techhell: I don't need to have a crap load of cell formats taking up 75% of the ribbon - if I want to make a cell look a certain way I can damn well format it myself. hate that all the things I do need (like adding Macros to Excel, and Watermarks to documents) are hidden behind layers of obfuscation.

In Office 2010 or 2012, you can customize the ribbon UI & quick start to do and show whatever you want - well beyond that of any of the menus in Office 2003 - right?

Since you claim that you're the guy that people go to for answers, you're awfully misinformed.


Thank you for so totally proving my point for me with a single, glorious graphic. Seriously, thank you - there's no way I could have done it better. And I'm totally saving that image to use in the future so I can prove my point when I need to make it again.
 
2012-10-29 07:17:06 PM

Techhell: Thank you for so totally proving my point for me with a single, glorious graphic. Seriously, thank you - there's no way I could have done it better. And I'm totally saving that image to use in the future so I can prove my point when I need to make it again.


Your point is that you don't like being able to customize every iota of menu within Office? Because just a little bit ago, you were whining that you couldn't change anything in the ribbon.
 
2012-10-29 07:25:38 PM
Maybe because I JUST bought a new machine capable of running 7, I'LL BE DAMNED if i'm dropping more cash to buy another machine with the hardware necessary to take advantage of all the whiz bang?
 
2012-10-29 07:43:06 PM

MrSteve007: Techhell: Thank you for so totally proving my point for me with a single, glorious graphic. Seriously, thank you - there's no way I could have done it better. And I'm totally saving that image to use in the future so I can prove my point when I need to make it again.

Your point is that you don't like being able to customize every iota of menu within Office? Because just a little bit ago, you were whining that you couldn't change anything in the ribbon.


No, my point is that everything I needed to find in 2003 was damned easy to find. You went to one of the menus - File, Edit, Insert, Format, Tools, etc. It was all there - now if you want to find things, you have to figure out where they're hidden. Then you have to display them. And if you aren't going to be using it on a constant basis, you either leave it on there so your ribbon gets full of crap you don't need, or you are constantly selecting it and unselecting it. Or you're keeping a list somewhere else of all the keyboard controls to use them instead.

And your graphic beautifully showed that.
 
2012-10-29 07:49:04 PM

Techhell: MrSteve007: Techhell: Thank you for so totally proving my point for me with a single, glorious graphic. Seriously, thank you - there's no way I could have done it better. And I'm totally saving that image to use in the future so I can prove my point when I need to make it again.

Your point is that you don't like being able to customize every iota of menu within Office? Because just a little bit ago, you were whining that you couldn't change anything in the ribbon.

No, my point is that everything I needed to find in 2003 was damned easy to find. You went to one of the menus - File, Edit, Insert, Format, Tools, etc. It was all there - now if you want to find things, you have to figure out where they're hidden. Then you have to display them. And if you aren't going to be using it on a constant basis, you either leave it on there so your ribbon gets full of crap you don't need, or you are constantly selecting it and unselecting it. Or you're keeping a list somewhere else of all the keyboard controls to use them instead.

And your graphic beautifully showed that.


A ribbon is a menu with pictures. Serious question: why is clicking "developer ribbon -> macros" in 2010 more work than clicking "tools -> macros" in 2003? The difference is that whichever ribbon is currently open is one click away instead of two. It sounds like your real complaint is that you have gotten used to where everything was and don't want to change, which is a very different complaint than "ribbons suck".
 
2012-10-29 07:58:06 PM

StoPPeRmobile: [www.ssidisplays.com image 480x452]


Do they make a 42" version of that?
 
2012-10-29 07:59:37 PM

DigitalCoffee: NotARocketScientist: //how does WIN7 do in a VM?

I have a Windows 7 VM on my machine at work and it works fine.

Thanks for the verification. I seem to remember some noise made a few years ago about making Windows 'VM proof' (or some such, maybe I'm misremembering). Might be time to upgrade the sandbox from XP to 7.


I have just gone from XP to 8 and (with Classic Shell or Start 8) can strongly recommend it. The install kept all my documents and I haven't had anything not work except for my video card. It still worked with a default Microsoft driver but not the dual screen output.
 
2012-10-29 08:09:40 PM

Lost Thought 00: pkellmey: Windows 8 is ridiculously fast.

There is a caveat to this. Windows 8 is ridiculously fast IF you allow Microsoft to store all your information in their "cloud" and you keep your computer connect to the net at all times. Violate either of those, and it behaves just like every other version of windows and will get bogged down once you've installed a bunch of stuff on it (aka, after using it for a year)


Pass. I'm pretty irritated that Blizzard and Ubisoft do this for some of their games. I don't want my operating system to do the same...
 
2012-10-29 08:11:28 PM
Picked it up for $15. I'll probably install it in 6 months after the bug fixes come out.
 
2012-10-29 08:13:03 PM

oren0: Techhell: MrSteve007: Techhell: Thank you for so totally proving my point for me with a single, glorious graphic. Seriously, thank you - there's no way I could have done it better. And I'm totally saving that image to use in the future so I can prove my point when I need to make it again.

Your point is that you don't like being able to customize every iota of menu within Office? Because just a little bit ago, you were whining that you couldn't change anything in the ribbon.

No, my point is that everything I needed to find in 2003 was damned easy to find. You went to one of the menus - File, Edit, Insert, Format, Tools, etc. It was all there - now if you want to find things, you have to figure out where they're hidden. Then you have to display them. And if you aren't going to be using it on a constant basis, you either leave it on there so your ribbon gets full of crap you don't need, or you are constantly selecting it and unselecting it. Or you're keeping a list somewhere else of all the keyboard controls to use them instead.

And your graphic beautifully showed that.

A ribbon is a menu with pictures. Serious question: why is clicking "developer ribbon -> macros" in 2010 more work than clicking "tools -> macros" in 2003? The difference is that whichever ribbon is currently open is one click away instead of two. It sounds like your real complaint is that you have gotten used to where everything was and don't want to change, which is a very different complaint than "ribbons suck".


Way to miss the point by focusing on the singular example I used.

1) In the University Edition of MS Office, the Developer ribbon isn't active by default. You have to go in and activate it.
2) Most of the ribbons don't correspond to the 2003 menus; there isn't a "Tools" or "Edit" ribbon, for example. So you have to look through all of them to see if the command you want is on one of the ribbons. And then if it isn't, you have to go through options to figure out where they actually are now. With new menus like "Developer" instead of Tools (to continue to use my example you so doggedly latched onto to insult me with. good job with that.) and five or so ones that are quite new (Blog ribbons? Mailing ribbon? WTF? Fine, whatever.), trying to find the old commands is annoying as hell; I don't bother going to look anymore since it's moronic. I've used the Help option more times in the two months I've had 2010 than I did in the previous 6 years of learning 2003 and using it daily at work. Not because there's new things I want to try out in 2010 but because there's old things that I want to continue doing and I need to figure out whether I can still do it or not.
3) Why change the titles for the menus, if they are (as you seem to insinuate) supposed to be simply replacements for the menus?

/Really, what it sounds like to me is that you're one of those kinds of people who think that change = good because change is good, and anyone who thinks change isn't good is wrong because change is good.
 
2012-10-29 08:19:42 PM

jaylectricity: I thought everybody knew to use every other new OS from Microsoft...2000, XP, 7...I'll be waiting for whatever comes AFTER 8.


God I still miss windows 2000. And I'm only 21. I never could crash or get that thing to lag.
/Also the OS-tan for it is awesome. ultrx.net
 
2012-10-29 08:21:09 PM

Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

pants on fire stupid stuff from Redmond, and no amount of attempted hipster branding is going to change it.



Does anybody remember Microsoft Bob? Could Windows 8 be the next Bob?
 
2012-10-29 08:25:35 PM
7.mshcdn.com

What's a Windows 8?
 
2012-10-29 08:39:40 PM

Techhell: Way to miss the point by focusing on the singular example I used.

1) In the University Edition of MS Office, the Developer ribbon isn't active by default. You have to go in and activate it.
2) Most of the ribbons don't correspond to the 2003 menus; there isn't a "Tools" or "Edit" ribbon, for example. So you have to look through all of them to see if the command you want is on one of the ribbons. And then if it isn't, you have to go through options to figure out where they actually are now. With new menus like "Developer" instead of Tools (to continue to use my example you so doggedly latched onto to insult me with. good job with that.) and five or so ones that are quite new (Blog ribbons? Mailing ribbon? WTF? Fine, whatever.), trying to find the old commands is annoying as hell; I don't bother going to look anymore since it's moronic. I've used the Help option more times in the two months I've had 2010 than I did in the previous 6 years of learning 2003 and using it daily at work. Not because there's new things I want to try out in 2010 but because there's old things that I want to continue doing and I need to figure out whether I can still do it or not.


So you're upset that you first have to enable a single, fairly obscure menu (developer)? And then you complain about fairly useful tools, like being able to directly mail a document for review.

It's also true that items are located in different ribbon menus than the ancient system of 'edit.' Now it's much more obvious what to select. You want to insert something? Click on the "Insert" ribbon. Want to deal with layout issues? "Page Layout" Etc. It's pretty damned easy to figure out.
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
Looks to me like everything is pretty simple to find within, *at most,* 2-clicks. And if it isn't, you can customize a ribbon menu with all of your obscure controls.

That's the thing, you can't customize shiat in Office 2003. Some commands take 3-4 menus deep before you can get to them. Considering they're prepping Office 2012 for shipping, and you're still grasping to the hobbled 9-year old version of office, you have some issues adapting to change. Yes, it requires you to do something different. The thing is though, once you get used to it, the ribbon interface is much, much faster to work with in documents (let alone the 'right-click' context menu in Office '07, '10, '12 is a big productivity booster).
 
2012-10-29 09:04:56 PM

MrSteve007: It's also true that items are located in different ribbon menus than the ancient system of 'edit.' Now it's much more obvious what to select. You want to insert something? Click on the "Insert" ribbon. Want to deal with layout issues? "Page Layout" Etc. It's pretty damned easy to figure out.


See, I don't think that's true. I think it is like taking people who learned on a QWERTY keyboard then giving them a LINOTYPE machine and saying, you can do a lot more, but you have to customize it first. It's more powerful though! Why are you complaining! It's like taking WORD away and giving them TeX and saying, you can do a lot more, but you have to learn about your new powerful tool first and customize it.

No, I don't give a fark about your new powerful tool, Microsoft, I want to do my goddamn job but this time without crashing in the middle and supporting my new printer.

I want to spend ZERO time up front reading howtos and watching videos and signing up for classes. I want it to work EXACTLY like it used to but faster UNTIL I need a new feature.

Making me customize it and recognize entries I never will use and return it to what it once was is a disfeature that strips added value.

Only when I want to learn about a new feature am I at all interested in reading about it. Otherwise, get it out of my face.

And I am sure my coworkers are even less tolerant about this than I am.

Anyway, that's how I feel.

My other problem with 2010 on all my computers is that it does weird broken things with mouse clicks. When I mouse over and click on FILE for instance, it almost always takes two clicks before the damn thing moves to FILE. Maybe it's just slow, but my computer while older ain't that slow, with a Core2 Quad CPU Q8300 @2.5Ghz and 6Gb running W64. But there are lots of places in the WORD 2010 app, and only the WORD 2010 app that my mouse clicks just go poof.
 
2012-10-29 09:14:32 PM

Great_Milenko: [7.mshcdn.com image 600x375]

What's a Windows 8?


Something that's better than OS X.
 
2012-10-29 10:23:23 PM
Windows 8 is wicked fast - been running it since RTM, and I'm still getting sub-10 second boot times - it takes longer to go through BIOS than it does to boot the OS and get to a usable screen.

You must be a Microsoft tool because they've been pushing this as an OS "goal" since NT 5.0 and somehow it never seems to happen.
 
2012-10-29 10:40:04 PM
I don't think anyone's mentioned the video player stinks. Can't play a video in anything other than full screen, and there's no volume control in the player. The video stops playing as soon as you switch away from a player. All of these problems probably wouldn't even be noticed in a phone or on a tablet. But on a 28" LCD, it's a colossal flaw. I want to run a little video off to the side while I'm running another program in a different window. This version of Windows is the least window-y of all.
 
2012-10-29 10:47:55 PM
let me share something I have been working on with windows 8..
all I want to do is add my music network folder on my NAS.
In windows 7 i can go to network and see the NAS no problem.. in windows 8 it does not show up. but i can go to the IP..

This is from the help file.

To Add a network folder that isn't indexed to a library

Open Computer by swiping in from the right edge of the screen, tapping Search (or if you're using a mouse, pointing to the up
per-right corner of the screen, moving the mouse pointer down, and then clicking Search), entering Computer in the search box, tapping or clicking Apps, and then tapping or clicking Computer.

Create a folder on your hard drive for your network folders, for example c:\share.

Create another folder within that folder, for example c:\share\music.

Select the subfolder you just created, tap or click the Home tab, tap or click Easy access, choose Include in library, and then select the library to which you want to add the folder.

Delete the folder.

Swipe in from the right edge of the screen, and then tap Search.
(If you're using a mouse, point to the upper-right corner of the screen, move the mouse pointer down, and then click Search.).

Enter cmd in the search box, and then tap or click Apps.

Press and hold or right-click Command Prompt in the search results, and then tap or click Run as administrator.

Enter mklink /d, and then enter the path of the folder you just deleted and the path of the network folder. For example, mklink /d c:\share\music \\server\music. This creates what is called a symbolic link.
 
2012-10-29 10:56:15 PM

Kuroshin: StoPPeRmobile: [www.ssidisplays.com image 480x452]

Do they make a 42" version of that?


Yep, and have been eyeballing. Curious as to how it will work. About to pull the trigger on a 24".
 
2012-10-29 11:02:12 PM

syrynxx: I don't think anyone's mentioned the video player stinks. Can't play a video in anything other than full screen, and there's no volume control in the player. The video stops playing as soon as you switch away from a player. All of these problems probably wouldn't even be noticed in a phone or on a tablet. But on a 28" LCD, it's a colossal flaw. I want to run a little video off to the side while I'm running another program in a different window. This version of Windows is the least window-y of all.


That's the video player in Metro? Download Windows Media Player (Free at the moment for W8) and open it in Desktop and it works exactly like WMP in W7 or XP.
I also use Media Player Classic.
Both of these will happily run in the background or minimised.
 
2012-10-29 11:05:20 PM

ColSanders: LesserEvil: With Windows 8, I feel like "Windows 8 Secrets" would be the manual for doing all the "normal" things I need to do to be productive... need to close an app? Look at secret tip #45.

This I agree with, even though I like 8 overall. Microsoft actually made 8 very Apple-like in some ways. It took me a while to realize that, as with OS X, closing a program doesn't really close it. It's cute that you can swipe down to close an app, but would it have killed them to leave a red X in the corner, too?


All this talk about making Win8 easier to use on a desktop makes no sense considering that their goal is to kill the desktop, and finally move on.

"This transformation is going to make some people uneasy because the PC has taken us a long ways. It's brilliant. We like to talk about the post-PC era, but when it really starts to happen, it's uncomfortable." -- Steve Jobs, 2010
 
2012-10-29 11:09:16 PM

Mcavity: all I want to do is add my music network folder on my NAS.


Yikes. Reminds me of trying to add NAS folders to a library in Win7.
 
2012-10-29 11:34:17 PM

Kazan: NowhereMon: : It's a tablet, it's a laptop , it's a tablet, it's a laptop...

i'm on a horse!


Is it in a bathroom?

/nothing is obscure on Fark
 
2012-10-29 11:34:46 PM

sendtodave: Reminds me of trying to add NAS folders to a library in Win7.


Agreed. I found the Win 7 Library Tool (from Zorn Software) to be really handy for adding SMB shares to a library. Otherwise, Win 7 will throw up errors about adding mapped drives and the like.
 
2012-10-29 11:35:40 PM

Fark Me To Tears: Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

pants on fire stupid stuff from Redmond, and no amount of attempted hipster branding is going to change it.

Does anybody remember Microsoft Bob?


No, of course not. And no one else has ever thought it clever to skip even-numbered MS OSes, either.
 
2012-10-29 11:55:40 PM
DRTFA, DRTFT: Probably because Windows 7 is great, Vista was crap, 8 looks garbage, and people are leary of getting burned on an upgrade, and tech-heads are conflicted on recommendations.
 
2012-10-30 12:09:09 AM

MrSteve007: Techhell: Way to miss the point by focusing on the singular example I used.

1) In the University Edition of MS Office, the Developer ribbon isn't active by default. You have to go in and activate it.
2) Most of the ribbons don't correspond to the 2003 menus; there isn't a "Tools" or "Edit" ribbon, for example. So you have to look through all of them to see if the command you want is on one of the ribbons. And then if it isn't, you have to go through options to figure out where they actually are now. With new menus like "Developer" instead of Tools (to continue to use my example you so doggedly latched onto to insult me with. good job with that.) and five or so ones that are quite new (Blog ribbons? Mailing ribbon? WTF? Fine, whatever.), trying to find the old commands is annoying as hell; I don't bother going to look anymore since it's moronic. I've used the Help option more times in the two months I've had 2010 than I did in the previous 6 years of learning 2003 and using it daily at work. Not because there's new things I want to try out in 2010 but because there's old things that I want to continue doing and I need to figure out whether I can still do it or not.

So you're upset that you first have to enable a single, fairly obscure menu (developer)? And then you complain about fairly useful tools, like being able to directly mail a document for review.

It's also true that items are located in different ribbon menus than the ancient system of 'edit.' Now it's much more obvious what to select. You want to insert something? Click on the "Insert" ribbon. Want to deal with layout issues? "Page Layout" Etc. It's pretty damned easy to figure out.
[sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net image 850x177]
Looks to me like everything is pretty simple to find within, *at most,* 2-clicks. And if it isn't, you can customize a ribbon menu with all of your obscure controls.

That's the thing, you can't customize shiat in Office 2003. Some commands take 3-4 menus deep before you can get to them ...


Look how much space that takes up. Look how cluttered all the icons are. Look how offset and unaligned all the words are. Now look at one of the old drop down menus:

www.addintools.com

Clean, stacked, packed, efficient, aligned, all right there.

Sometimes change is great. Sometimes it isn't. Dropdown file menus have been standard for a long time for a reason. They're simple, effective, fast. Also, you could customize toolbars in Word 2003.
 
2012-10-30 12:42:41 AM

natmar_76: Look how much space that takes up. Look how cluttered all the icons are. Look how offset and unaligned all the words are. Now look at one of the old drop down menus:

Clean, stacked, packed, efficient, aligned, all right there.


You say the ribbon takes up too much space, then show an example of how efficient the old system is. You ever notice how much empty space that menu has? You call that packed and efficient? Dude, it's 75% empty, gray area.

Most of the ribbon menus have a 'carrot' in the bottom corner, pulling out all the rest of the options for that area. Doesn't get much more simple and data packed than that.

Example: two clicks to bring up all of the colors in one menu.
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net

It's been a while (about 5 years now) since I've used the old interface of 2003. Care to show me how many steps it takes to do that up in the old menus? If you're feeling extra smug about the old menu, why don't you tell me how much more efficient it is to pull up a print preview. If you take a look at the example above, you'll see it takes one click with the 'quick access toolbar' in the top left.
 
2012-10-30 12:53:51 AM
To change font color? You can put a button on the toolbar that takes one click.
 
2012-10-30 01:03:14 AM

MrSteve007: Looks to me like everything is pretty simple to find within, *at most,* 2-clicks. And if it isn't, you can customize a ribbon menu with all of your obscure controls.


The thing I don't like about the Ribbon is that I'm very keyboard centric. I know that isn't the typical user but I like pressing "Alt-T" and seeing all my tools. The commands I still remember do still work, to MS' credit, but all this Metro and Ribbon stuff is for mouse and touchscreen users. I end up using Help far more often just to look up how to do things I learned back in Office 97, and that's another thing about Win8 I'm resistant to. The change for no reason other than Microsoft decided to change it.

/Get off my lawn
//even though I'm only 30
 
2012-10-30 01:10:50 AM

natmar_76: To change font color? You can put a button on the toolbar that takes one click.


Try again. It isn't just a single font color, its changing the document's default colors to match theme.
 
2012-10-30 01:19:24 AM

Gig103: The change for no reason other than Microsoft decided to change it.


I have a bit of a different view, since MS uses me occasionally for their user studies, (all of what I've done is under NDA) but you realize that when people click the "send usage stats," MS tracks every click, selection and default setting of Office (aka. telemetry).

With some 1.4 billion users and decades of data, they know how many trillions of times a certain setting is opened or adjusted. They sift through that data and decide to make changes to better fit the usage patterns of 98% of the users out there. They spend $9-billion a year in pure R&D to figure this stuff out.

Yet, people think this sort of stuff is just randomly changed for no reason . . .
 
2012-10-30 01:23:59 AM

MrSteve007: Try again. It isn't just a single font color, its changing the document's default colors to match theme.


Well that's nice. Doesn't mean you couldn't make it a customizable toolbar button and still have dropdown menus, or optional dropdown menus and optional toolbar buttons and optional ribbons.
 
2012-10-30 01:58:27 AM
if javascript must be enabled to view this site, then why can I see the entire site behind the message? And why does it still let me scroll?
 
2012-10-30 02:18:51 AM

Babwa Wawa: Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

NowhereMon: I tried it out, if you have a touch screen PC it is pretty cool. It's pretty useless if you don't.

whistleridge: 7 is in no way outdated yet.

Take aside the interface for a minute. Windows 8 is wicked fast - been running it since RTM, and I'm still getting sub-10 second boot times - it takes longer to go through BIOS than it does to boot the OS and get to a usable screen. Also enjoying the enhanced multi-monitor support, and full-blown Hyper-V. It's quite nice.

I personally prefer the new start menu. I hated it at first, but after I customized it, I have everything that I use on a daily basis in one pane, no scrolling around. And anything I use hourly is on the task bar anyway. The biggest thing I don't like is how some metro-enabled apps would sometimes launch in metro mode when you want them in desktop mode. It seemed to happen willy-nilly at first, but after some poking around and customizing, it doesn't happen anymore.

Just my experience. But if you think the only new thing about Windows is MEtro, you're sorely mistaken.


How do you like the fact that you cannot install any apps from the windows store, even free ones, on a local account. I don't like being forced to login with my email address that is tied to a windows account just to use my computer normally.
 
2012-10-30 02:23:27 AM
Oh yeah, and I forgot that they farked up the update system too. You now only get 2 options in windows 8, download and install automatically, or no updates at all.
 
2012-10-30 02:28:52 AM
And how about having to move my mouse to the extreme edges of the screen to conjure up invisible menus from the digital ether? This is hell on my multi monitor/multi desktop system... Gotta get it juuuuuuuuuust right or I am onto the other computer and cursing the fool who made this pile of crap...
 
2012-10-30 02:44:01 AM
I have no problem whatsoever with Microsoft attempting to reduce the ridiculous boot times for the behemoth that is the Windows operating system. I would love it if they could make it more streamlined and less glitchy and security failure-prone.

But that's all back-end stuff. They didn't have to make the front-end user-facing side look like a retard's version of AOL.
 
2012-10-30 03:11:40 AM

Babwa Wawa: Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

I personally prefer the new start menu. I hated it at first, but after I customized it...


About right here is where I see a very, very big chunk of the home computer market getting hung up. A lot of my customers couldn't find a string of with both hands and Ctrl + F, let alone being adventurous enough to try and dabble with something more than desktop deep.
 
2012-10-30 03:14:25 AM

Rich Cream: Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

I know they've always tried to make using a pc simpler for the average person (My Documents) but they went a little too far this time. I just see this.

[img688.imageshack.us image 300x285]


As a side note, I had that exact same one when I was a toddler. I just now remembered that.
 
2012-10-30 03:15:03 AM

Maul555: Oh yeah, and I forgot that they farked up the update system too. You now only get 2 options in windows 8, download and install automatically, or no updates at all.


Oh, wow... major deal breaker.

We still say "deal breaker" in 2012, right?
 
2012-10-30 04:28:15 AM
hmm, I wonder if the Windows 7 "Explorer.EXE" will run on Windows 8.

Start Menu, welcome back, my friend.

----------

Regarding the whole "if you hate the UI so bad you can customize it, install a Start menu replacement".

This was often the reasoning for why Linux could not compete on the home/business desktop vs Windows, the whole reassigning your steering wheel as the brake discussion of how linux works and why "normal people" can't deal with all the complexity of Linux.

Well now Microsoft is forcing complexity onto people to the point that, eh, the difficulties of Linux really don't look so tough by comparison to all the bullshiat Windows 8 forces you to deal with.

---------

As someone working in IT, I use group policy to define how the Start menu looks and works. So lets say I use a replacement Start menu from someone else. Sure it may look "Start-menu-ish" on the skin of it, but does it also implement all the back-end group policy and registry controls of the original? I highly doubt it.

We bought windows 7 when it was brand new in 2010, and I don't see us upgrading until we are forced to do so, in 2021 or so.
 
2012-10-30 06:11:35 AM
It looks like a Speak and Spell. Like it was designed by Fisher-Price.
 
2012-10-30 06:50:16 AM

Max Awesome: It looks like a Speak and Spell. Like it was designed by Fisher-Price.


Computers should be that easy.
 
2012-10-30 07:16:17 AM
I don't know what the hell is wrong with you people who couldn't get Vista to work. I'm still running it on 2 computers, and it works fine.
 
2012-10-30 08:02:49 AM

enry: My employer is advising against Win 8, partially because of retraining that's necessary to use it. Now I've been in IT for about 20 years and have used every consumer version of Windows since 1.0. How much training is really necessary?


You don't answer the help desk too much anymore do you?
People are still to stupid to use google to figure out how to do pivot tables, drop downs, or saving as a PDF.
 
2012-10-30 08:43:00 AM

wildlifer: enry: My employer is advising against Win 8, partially because of retraining that's necessary to use it. Now I've been in IT for about 20 years and have used every consumer version of Windows since 1.0. How much training is really necessary?

You don't answer the help desk too much anymore do you?
People are still to stupid to use google to figure out how to do pivot tables, drop downs, or saving as a PDF.


For some people there needs to be only two big buttons on the screen. "Do the thing" and "Stop doing the thing". Even then you have to show them how to use a mouse.

Idiocracy got it spot on with the ER diagnosis screen.
 
2012-10-30 09:37:40 AM

majestic: Dinjiin:

Windows 2000 and XP were both very good versions, and they are side-by-side.



ME was between 2000 and XP.


Also you cant really count 2000 in that cycle. 2000 was a business operating system, and ME was for consumers. ME failed so hard that consumers adopted the business OS that eventually birthed XP...
 
2012-10-30 11:02:27 AM

Rich Cream: Generation_D: Why would anyone want an OS that looks like AOL Junior 1996?

I know they've always tried to make using a pc simpler for the average person (My Documents) but they went a little too far this time. I just see this.


Ha ha that's right!
 
2012-10-30 11:45:27 AM

Caelistis: I am not Linux_Yes by any stretch of the imagination. However, that being said, I use Mint almost exclusively save for the reboot in to Win7 for gaming.

Good shiat, but definitely not ready for the enterprise environment.

Cinnamon > Metro



you would use Mate in an enterprise environment, not cinnamon. ta-dah!
 
2012-10-30 02:38:57 PM

Maul555: Also you cant really count 2000 in that cycle. 2000 was a business operating system, and ME was for consumers.


I disagree. Windows 2000 Professional was for power users with higher-end hardware. Windows ME was for legacy users, especially those with a large base of DOS software that had to run in tandem with Windows software. NT4 was probably the last of the NT series to really be business workstation specific.

Remember that Windows 2000 included hardware accelerated support for GDI and DirectX. It also included automatic hardware detection via ACPI and PnP BIOS extensions. So it was fairly good for home use. I played all of my Windows games under it and rarely had a problem. It really wasn't that much different from XP.
 
2012-10-30 04:13:28 PM

Kazan: NowhereMon: : It's a tablet, it's a laptop , it's a tablet, it's a laptop...

i'm on a horse!


It's a taptop! A laplet!
 
2012-10-30 07:59:00 PM

Modguy: About right here is where I see a very, very big chunk of the home computer market getting hung up. A lot of my customers couldn't find a string of with both hands and Ctrl + F, let alone being adventurous enough to try and dabble with something more than desktop deep.


I think you underestimate the average user. The dynamics and metaphors in iOS and Android are no more alien than those in Windows 8, and I see people being pretty successful with those OSes.

To be sure, there are complete morons out there. But most of the people who are comfortable with computers (nearly the entire working population) will be comfortable with W8 after a quick tutorial.
 
2012-10-30 11:45:44 PM

NowhereMon: A nice tablet running a full version of Windows 8, with a cool flippy keyboard and trackpad: It's a tablet, it's a laptop , it's a tablet, it's a laptop...


This is my laptop:

www.notebook-driver.com

It's a laptop and a Wacom tablet. (It's also seven freakin' years old. And the battery still holds 2hr worth of charge)

Windows 8 will never sully its drives. I like XP far too much.
 
Displayed 222 of 222 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report