Support NeoGAF

[Stasis]

Some people will love it, some people will defend it. I doubt it will catch on with the PC market and for most it will remain a big bag of nope. I see no reason to switch to it but I see several reasons not to and that's been the general consensus thus far among gamers and enthusiasts. I don't really see any reason to argue about it with the few that want to love it.

I wouldn't mind it on a phone or tablet, but I still don't believe in the long-term appeal or viability of Microsoft's all connected platform. I use Android phones but I'm not committing to a side for now.

 

[Subitai]

Shouldn't have swiped desktop mode from people.

Wouldn't be a problem if they kept selling Windows 7, but they've gone all in. You can see that from advertising they have everywhere on television.


I'm MS biased, so at first it was hard for me to see why everyone is going crazy. This is MS's first attempt at responding to everyone buying iPads and unlike Vista, Win 8 works very well.

Then tonight I was rewatching CNBC's profile of Coco-Cola. It seems to me MS is having a sort of similar "New Coke" moment. Pepsi was winning blind taste tests everywhere because it tastes better by the sip (hand/lap for Apple) where Coca-Cola tastes better by the can (desktop for MS). Wouldn't have been a problem if you could buy "New Coke" along side the original, but Coca-Cola was over reacting to all the press and marketshare Pepsi was taking. So they went all in as they felt they needed to remake the flagship product. People who hadn't bought a 2 liter in decades went crazy as they felt like they were losing something that would always be around. So after a lot of backlash we got "Coca-Cola Classic" and sales skyrocketed.

Maybe if MS will let OEMs at least continue to release Win 7 on desktops they could reap a similar benefit.

 

[Canis lupus]

you can't sell me what I don't want or need...

windows 7 works absolutely perfect for me

and change is pain

This, W7 works perfectly fine, why would I upgrade?

 

[hodgy100]

Windows 8 doesnt need fixing it isnt broken, its perfectly functional.. people just don't have a big enough reason to update.

Heck I only upgraded because it was free

 

[Walshicus]

This, W7 works perfectly fine, why would I upgrade?

It is faster, more stable, cheap, has a number of incredibly useful features and most of all can be made to *look* identical to Windows 7 with barely any effort.

Why wouldn't you upgrade?

 

[Loofy]

Touchscreen monitors will become ubiquitous within the next few years, partly due to Win8 and associated apps but also because adding more input options reduces the risk of RSI.

You think so?
I cant even reach my monitor from where Im sitting right now. Unless in the future we're all laying our monitors horizontally?

 

[Alx]

Those topics are getting ridiculous... can we agree to wait at least 6 months (or rather 1 year, I'd say) to start claiming a new OS is a failure/success ? The bloody thing released last month !

 

[SteveWD40]

Those topics are getting ridiculous... can we agree to wait at least 6 months (or rather 1 year, I'd say) to start claiming a new OS is a failure/success ? The bloody thing released last month !

The people who decided it was bad / failed about 6 months before it released are not going to bother with such logic.

 

[Al-ibn Kermit]

You think so?
I cant even reach my monitor from where Im sitting right now. Unless in the future we're all laying our monitors horizontally?

I can see it happening on laptops. Where eventually the trackpad becomes a thing of the past or is replaced by a nub like on thinkpads.

Everybody's going to be wearing those special gloves with the rubber tips though since touchscreens get smeared really fast.

 

[EvilDick34]

The live tiles/App store will fail spectacularly just like Windows Live for PC gaming did. Microsoft has lost touch with it's heritage in the pc market. I will not be upgrading to WIN 8 at all. I will stay on WIN7 or move to Linux. I work at a store that sells laptops/desktops/tablets and i refuse to sing false praise for WIN8 to my customers. Sure it boots up quick but that is all that is good about it honestly. The whole tile thing should have been on tablets only Microsoft.

 

[Zaptruder]

Those topics are getting ridiculous... can we agree to wait at least 6 months (or rather 1 year, I'd say) to start claiming a new OS is a failure/success ? The bloody thing released last month !

From my point of view, it's trending quite badly.

Following historical indicators, this OS launch may be one of their worst yet as far as public reception goes.

While it's very early yet - the expectations won't change suddenly and inexplicably (at least not in my opinion). Not without something been done to change that perception.

Vista managed to change course (albeit not a full turn around) after service pack 1 was released, which fixed a bunch of reliability issues.

W8... well, the main issues with it are more design and policy oriented. I don't know if those are problems that can be remedied with just bug and reliability fixes.

 

[Always-honest]

Maybe they could start with building Windows from the ground up again.

 

[tearsofash]

Windows 9 is probably going to be great. 8 seems like a weird transition that doesn't know exactly what it wants to be yet.

Pretty much came to say this. With windows not being my main operating system I can tolerate its awkwardness and enjoy the neat things it does offer.

 

[StudioTan]

From my point of view, it's trending quite badly.

Following historical indicators, this OS launch may be one of their worst yet as far as public reception goes.

While it's very early yet - the expectations won't change suddenly and inexplicably (at least not in my opinion). Not without something been done to change that perception.

Vista managed to change course (albeit not a full turn around) after service pack 1 was released, which fixed a bunch of reliability issues.

W8... well, the main issues with it are more design and policy oriented. I don't know if those are problems that can be remedied with just bug and reliability fixes.

It's certainly setting the record for most FUD about an OS in history.

Meanwhile it's selling on par or better than Windows 7 with 40 million licenses sold as of a week ago. Whether you want to believe those numbers are to manufacturer or not doesn't mean they haven't sold that many. There are many other factors such as lackluster or delayed launch hardware that needs to be considered. I think it's certainly fair to wait a few months before calling it a failure.

 

[rossonero]

I don't even have the recycle bin on the desktop. I have it in the taskbar instead: -

You can do that?! Mind blown.

 

[ghst]

the improvements to the desktop experience don't really go beyond good housekeeping. cleaning up the kernel and enhancing a couple of features that never really worked as well as they could have is nice and all, but it indicates to me is that as someone sitting behind a desk with a large monitor and perpetual mouse and keyboard interface, microsoft has run dry on the kind of invention which could enhance my experience. the low price point seems to be a concession to that.

that said, as a power user i'd likely pay the low price point just for the housekeeping if not for the walled garden that is metro.

even if my metro experience amounts to seeing the start screen for three seconds when i start up my computer, the locked down cert requirement and mandatory MS app store participation for programs which make use of metro leaves an extremely sour taste and little desire to see it succeed. the fact that these signed off apps seem to exist in a totally separate runtime from my preferred environment only bolsters this.

i don't think there's anything unique in my thinking, i'd wager that it's the default position of most power users. the few benefits upgrading would bring being mitigated by what amounts to little more than an intrusion of antagonistic business practice.

it's criticisms like these which should be looked at positively by microsoft in the wake of windows 8, should it continue along its tepid course. chalk it up to being a failed power grab and set to work making a truly open, interface homogeneous OS which once again makes its users feel like it's bending every sail to fulfil their wishes. they could even run it with the exact same marketing campaign as windows 7.

 

[Zaptruder]

It's certainly setting the record for most FUD about an OS in history.

Meanwhile it's selling on par or better than Windows 7 with 40 million licenses sold as of a week ago. Whether you want to believe those numbers are to manufacturer or not doesn't mean they haven't sold that many. There are many other factors such as lackluster or delayed launch hardware that needs to be considered. I think it's certainly fair to wait a few months before calling it a failure.

If that is true, then that's a fair enough point to make. At this point, I'm hearing conflicting reports.

From my perspective, I'd be more than happy if the metro component of the OS failed, if only so that MS would reconsider their (half) closed garden strategy.

 

[Drazgul]

If anyone from Windows 7 wants to be able to categorize their favorite apps and whatnot, I highly recommend Stardock's Fences. This was my Windows 7 setup:

How many of those did you use on a daily basis?

 

[Wazzim]

It's all about the e-mail app man.

 

[Sofo]

When I was talking to a nephew of my boyfriend about the new PC I was gonna build, he mentioned Windows 8, to which I politely refused after he kept talking about it. Ever since then he's been pestering other familiars about it, when it clearly offers nothing that 7 can do better (I absolutely loathe the metro screen). I honestly think he's on the Windows payroll or something now.

 

[20cent]

I dunno.. I think they don't push enough on anything, on the RT thing, their phone OS, now Win 8.
They produce new hardware/software platform..with no content...even the basic stuffs... and they expect a commercial success so then (maybe) they can satisfy their customers.

 

[Tacitus_]

If that is true, then that's a fair enough point to make. At this point, I'm hearing conflicting reports.

From my perspective, I'd be more than happy if the metro component of the OS failed, if only so that MS would reconsider their (half) closed garden strategy.

People have such a hateboner for Win8 that it could be doing Win7 + WinXP numbers combined and you'd still see conflicting reports.

When I was talking to a nephew of my boyfriend about the new PC I was gonna build, he mentioned Windows 8, to which I politely refused after he kept talking about it. Ever since then he's been pestering other familiars about it, when it clearly offers nothing that 7 can do better (I absolutely loathe the metro screen). I honestly think he's on the Windows payroll or something now.

Faster booting, better file copying, better resource monitor and other under the hood improvements. It's not like this is rocket science.

 

[Zaptruder]

People have such a hateboner for Win8 that it could be doing Win7 + WinXP numbers combined and you'd still see conflicting reports.

Faster booting, better file copying, better resource monitor and other under the hood improvements. It's not like this is rocket science.

People speaking well about Windows Vista wasn't an uncommon sight to see back then as well. But in the course of time, we know that Vista is regarded as an 'unsuccessful' Windows OS (although it certainly wasn't as bad as ME).

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Those topics are getting ridiculous... can we agree to wait at least 6 months (or rather 1 year, I'd say) to start claiming a new OS is a failure/success ? The bloody thing released last month !

To be fair, people have been using Windows 8 for several months, just as we did for Windows 7. People were hype as shit when Win 7 launched after the Beta. Win8 response seems decidedly muted.

It does not need saving. I've been using it for almost two weeks now, both profesionally and for entertainment and I can't say I miss Win7 for a second;
I want to play a game, or a movie, Win8 saves me 2 mouseclicks over Win7

Why?

Why wouldn't you have set that software up on the task bar so that it would only take 1 click in Windows 7? These are the kinds of posts that irritate people because they seem dishonest. Nobody wants to be bullshitted.

 

[SteveWD40]

To be fair, people have been using Windows 8 for several months, just as we did for Windows 7. People were hype as shit when Win 7 launched after the Beta. Win8 response seems decidedly muted.

Plenty of us are talking about how much we love it, we just get shouted down as MS fans by the echochamber.

Edit: and 7 was taking people away from Vista, 7 wasn't bad so 8 isn't going to seem such a big leap.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I dunno, MS could easily save Win8 simply by bringing back the classic desktop as a user-selectable option. If users could banish Metro with a single check in a box, it would have no further problems. As it is, Win8 is DOA in the corporate market and it's being soundly rejected by consumers as unnecessary changes to a desktop OS UI paradigm which has worked for decades.

 

[Tacitus_]

People speaking well about Windows Vista wasn't an uncommon sight to see back then as well. But in the course of time, we know that Vista is regarded as an 'unsuccessful' Windows OS (although it certainly wasn't as bad as ME).

Vista had actual problems due to shitty driver support and OEMs slapping Vista on machines that would've struggled with XP. But for Win8, all the hate is coming from the new UI and the possibility of an IOS-style lockdown in Win9 or Win10.

I dunno, MS could easily save Win8 simply by bringing back the classic desktop as a user-selectable option. If users could banish Metro with a single check in a box, it would have no further problems. As it is, Win8 is DOA in the corporate market and it's being soundly rejected by consumers as unnecessary changes to a desktop OS UI paradigm which has worked for decades.

What do you mean? Bringing back the classic desktop? The desktop is almost exactly the same as it was in Win7, with just the difference of having the Win8 'Charms' style options. The only thing that is missing is that it would go straight to desktop after booting, but a single click isn't exactly worth pulling my hair out.

 

[Zaptruder]

Vista had actual problems due to shitty driver support and OEMs slapping Vista on machines that would've struggled with XP. But for Win8, all the hate is coming from the new UI and the possibility of an IOS-style lockdown in Win9 or Win10.

What I say is true even after Vista managed to get its act together (post service packs). The hate train kept rolling with or without justification.

I think the opportunity is there for Win 8 to address the design issues inherent to itself... but I think like Vista the hate train will probably keep on rolling, keeping Win 8 down.

That said, the possibility of an iOS-style lock down in later versions of Windows is scary enough for the hate to be more than justifiable.

I mean... what's it going to mean for the PC gaming crowd? A good portion of us are tech mavens - and we hate the idea of been walled into a shitty closed garden. Just like we're hating on the idea of not having swappable processors (thanks to Intel). If that crowd splinters across multiple PC platforms (Linux/Windows) what does that mean for a recently strengthening PC game development in the future?

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Plenty of us are talking about how much we love it, we just get shouted down as MS fans by the echochamber.

Edit: and 7 was taking people away from Vista, 7 wasn't bad so 8 isn't going to seem such a big leap.

More the later than the former.

Also, 7 didn't change core mechanics of Windows UI; it just made the same shit faster, prettier and more efficient. That's really all people wanted at the end of the day. 8 has not generated universal excitement for many reasons. Shouting those reasons down as though they're invalid concerns is part of the problem in these threads. The people that swear it's shit just argue with the people that swear their lives were changed by the wonderment only found once Win8 is installed and that its just WORLDS better than 7. Give me a break! It's all extremely tiresome because neither position is rationale or honest and is more interested in "winning" than simply telling the uninspiring, hyperbole-devoid truth. It does some things better than 7 and it does some things that frustrate the hell out of people, all in all making it a "mild upgrade" that you may or may not be happy with. Hopefully SP1 will address some of the worries and problems people are having. If not, Win 9 won't be far away.

What I say is true even after Vista managed to get its act together (post service packs). The hate train kept rolling with or without justification.

Even after the driver issues were sorted, Vista still had plenty of problems. It still used entirely too many system resources just to operate, in a time when system memory was expensive and small (capacity). Vista performed noticeably slower on the same machines that XP hummed on, which was a big reason people downgraded. By contrast, 7 ran just as fast as XP and required little in the way of RAM to kick ass.

 

[Raonak]

windows8 from a design standpoint is such a fucking mess.

they literally had two operating systems and just haphazardly mashed it up together.

 

[Tacitus_]

What I say is true even after Vista managed to get its act together (post service packs). The hate train kept rolling with or without justification.

I think the opportunity is there for Win 8 to address the design issues inherent to itself... but I think like Vista the hate train will probably keep on rolling, keeping Win 8 down.

That said, the possibility of an iOS-style lock down in later versions of Windows is scary enough for the hate to be more than justifiable.

I mean... what's it going to mean for the PC gaming crowd? A good portion of us are tech mavens - and we hate the idea of been walled into a shitty closed garden. Just like we're hating on the idea of not having swappable processors (thanks to Intel). If that crowd splinters across multiple PC platforms (Linux/Windows) what does that mean for a recently strengthening PC game development in the future?

That may be, but at least Vista had concrete faults behind the hate train. Win8 has only unliked UI design and future possibilities. And I say possibilities since MS has a virtual monopoly on PC operating systems and thus won't be allowed to lock it down.

 

[ChackanKun]

I don't get it. Windows 8 is faster, more stable, has a new GUI - which I think it's a welcome change, yet people bash. I find it funny that one of the most wanted features in iOS is *GASP* a new GUI!! Thank God they don't do that! - while maintaining the old GUI...

Really don't get it lol

Now, if that Windows Blue shit is really true...W8 sure is a failure lol

 

[PaulLFC]

Now I've installed Start8, my install looks nearly identical to Windows 7, so I like it. Can't even remember the last time I used the Metro menu, I never need it now I have the start button and menu back.

 

[kitch9]

With those two changes, I'd say it operates like an enhanced version of Win 7.

Ok, assuming they keep Aero skin as well.

The main issue is that Win 8 makes desktop seem like the secondary UI, not the primary one (which is a very uncomfortable change for everyone that is used to desktop).

But there are some for real enhancements to Win 8 file handling; cut, copy, paste file functions where you can see what's going on and can pause and start files as you want.

There's also better multi-monitor handling that I would enjoy myself.

No, its you who thinks that desktop is the secondary UI.....Get out of that mindset and 8 is a nice OS.

windows8 from a design standpoint is such a fucking mess.

they literally had two operating systems and just haphazardly mashed it up together.

No, they changed Start to full screen, and made it more functional..... Have you even used Windows 8, or are you just listening to internet jungle drums?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

What do you mean? Bringing back the classic desktop? The desktop is almost exactly the same as it was in Win7, with just the difference of having the Win8 'Charms' style options. The only thing that is missing is that it would go straight to desktop after booting, but a single click isn't exactly worth pulling my hair out.

No longer being able to launch apps from the desktop is a pretty big change. It's not almost exactly the same as in Win7. If you could ignore the Metro overlay entirely and work in Win8 exactly the same as in Win7, it wouldn't be a problem. It's MS trying to cram Metro down the desktop users' throats which is causing the backlash.

 

[kitch9]

No longer being able to launch apps from the desktop is a pretty big change. It's not almost exactly the same as in Win7. If you could ignore the Metro overlay entirely and work in Win8 exactly the same as in Win7, it wouldn't be a problem. It's MS trying to cram Metro down the desktop users' throats which is causing the backlash.

LOL WTF are you on about? You can launch what the fuck you like from desktop ie exactly what you could before....

 

[Deleted member 1235]

I love love Metro. I HATE this "dual UI" bullshit. Pick one and stick with it. I hate having a second UI there laying dormant. Makes the whole product seem unfocused.

You can make Metro into a better user experience, and more productive too. You can also make it just as "productive" as the regular desktop.


The traditional desktop is ancient. We dont need that shit. There's a reason why most people take all icons off their desktop for their widgets or wallpaper.

EDIT:

I feel the same way about OSX's "launcher" screen that looks like iOS homescreen. Why the hell do we need that when we got the desktop and the dock? Just looks like there's 2 different OS there. Not very elegant, but at least in OSX I have the choice to never bring it up.

yes, we do.

think of literally everything that wouldn't work if you ditched desktop.

 

[xenist]

I agree with the Win 8 defenders. It's not bad if you treat it in a way that basically turns it into a paid Win 7 service pack.

Too bad this is not the way MS wants to take it.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

LOL WTF are you on about? You can launch what the fuck you like from desktop ie exactly what you could before....

With the non-existent Start menu? You can put icons on the desktop but that's not the same as having the Start menu. I don't fill my entire desktop with all the icons for my apps like it's a smartphone launcher, I like then tucked away in the Start menu.

 

[Nero3000]

With the non-existent Start menu? You can put icons on the desktop but that's not the same as having the Start menu. I don't fill my entire desktop with all the icons for my apps like it's a smartphone launcher, I like then tucked away in the Start menu.

Then just treat the new start screen, as a more powerful start menu (which it is).

The only thing that needs rescuing is people who cannot deal with change. As with all versions of windows, its is better than the prior version (provided it is run on adequate hardware).

 

[kitch9]

With the non-existent Start menu? You can put icons on the desktop but that's not the same as having the Start menu. I don't fill my entire desktop with all the icons for my apps like it's a smartphone launcher, I like then tucked away in the Start menu.

Open your programs from the Start menu then? Put all your frequent apps in a folder and have it in the bottom left corner of the desktop?

In 7 you click the flag in the bottom left corner, click through the small file tree, then select your program.

In 8 you click the bottom left corner then click the program you want to start..... Just make sure your program shortcuts that are important are pinned to start.

Whats the problem again?

I agree with the Win 8 defenders. It's not bad if you treat it in a way that basically turns it into a paid Win 7 service pack.

Too bad this is not the way MS wants to take it.

I'm sorry but you have no idea "how MS want to take it."

MS are not stupid, they realise the importance of the desktop, and they know most will use Start on a desktop PC pretty much how they used Start before. (If they are smart.) This is clearly a long term exercise of breeding familiarity across all the mainstream consumer devices available on the market today around the Windows eco system.

 

[surly]

You can do that?! Mind blown.

It's a little free third party app. It works in XP and any version of Windows released after that.

Here's the full version of it: -

http://www.e-sushi.net/minibin/

That gives you various options, but I use this cut down version: -

http://www.e-sushi.net/microbin/

With that version, the only options are double-clicking the bin to empty it or right-clicking it to bring up a small menu with "open" and "empty" on it.

I don't fill my entire desktop with all the icons for my apps like it's a smartphone launcher, I like then tucked away in the Start menu.

Or in Windows 8, tucked away in the All Apps screen, which is just an expanded Start menu.

The people who hate Windows 8 seem to either never have used it, or know bugger all about it.

 

[Xanonano]

No, its you who thinks that desktop is the secondary UI.....Get out of that mindset and 8 is a nice OS.

But it is secondary: it's sandboxed away from the Metro environment, which is the default interface. For example, if you're in a Metro app, you can only use the top-left corner thumbnails to go back to the desktop, not to a specific program. And if you're in the desktop, you can't launch a Metro app without going through the start screen. There's also the fact that the desktop and Metro versions of programs are treated as completely separate.

No, they changed Start to full screen, and made it more functional.....

What makes the start screen more functional than it was before, when they've only removed features from it, and made other features harder to access?

 

[Lucius86]

Windows 9 is probably going to be great. 8 seems like a weird transition that doesn't know exactly what it wants to be yet.

I have to entirely agree with this. I am enjoying using Windows 8, but it does feel a transitional OS.

 

[kitch9]

But it is secondary: it's sandboxed away from the Metro environment, which is the default interface. For example, if you're in a Metro app, you can only use the top-left corner thumbnails to go back to the desktop, not to a specific program. And if you're in the desktop, you can't launch a Metro app without going through the start screen. There's also the fact that the desktop and Metro versions of programs are treated as completely separate.



What makes the start screen more functional than it was before, when they've only removed features from it, and made other features harder to access?

Metro is just the Start menu, its not the damn default interface jesus people, its not hard....

 

[Alx]

What makes the start screen more functional than it was before, when they've only removed features from it, and made other features harder to access?

* it's mostly faster : to come up, to browse (instead of exploring a tree structure)
* search function is much, much better (I never could use the Win7 search because it was sluggish and inefficient... but the Win8 search function is the most useful feature of the Start screen)
* the big tiles make it easier to locate and click your desired software. They're also (arguably) prettier than menus and submenus.
* for the software that supports it (metro), you can display additional info in the tiles (new mails, available updates,...)

 

[SteveWD40]

The people who hate Windows 8 seem to either never have used it, or know bugger all about it.

Well, as said, many of them made their minds up a long time ago (before the test client even) or have some kind of agenda.

 

[krypt0nian]

Without a major PR Turnaround push by Microsoft, I don't see things changing.

Frankly, the word of mouth defense here is annoying, and probably counter productive. You all may be right, but the tone in which it's communicated is highly off putting at this point.

 

[Zeouterlimits]

It's not the worst, but it has a poor perception that they need to combat badly.
They've let the groundswell of bad news go on for months and haven't been proactive at selling it to non-Touch users.

 

[Zaptruder]

Metro is just the Start menu, its not the damn default interface jesus people, its not hard....

Windows 8 launches in metro. Can do everything you need (or at least operate a significant suite of programs) while in Metro. Desktop is an icon you click to get to like other apps.

Meanwhile, in desktop, you can do everything you need in desktop (or at least operate a significant suite of programs), and metro is accessed not via a start menu, but through a metro like affectation of moving to the bottom left corner to reveal its presence.


If that doesn't make it a secondary interface, then... secondary interfaces simply don't exist.