You can customize it with various color schemes and choose from quite a few background designs but that's it.
Can Windows 8 be rescued at this point?
- Thread starter Zaptruder
- Start date
- Status
You can customize it with various color schemes and choose from quite a few background designs but that's it.
Sounds like you had an indexing problem. Just reinstalling Windows 7 would probably have fixed it, but instead you started from scratch with Windows 8. Of course you may well find that the Windows 8 search ends up with the same problem.
Yep, I've been directly accused of this in this thread. Even though I wouldn't even know about most of the problems I've listed if I hadn't used it.
Every time I see this "they haven't even tried it" condescending bullshit I want to reach through the internet and slap a fool upside the head.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Windows 8 has very nice search functions where an application can implement the Search contract and from the same search screen used for general searches, searches can be made for any app installed that implements said search contract. Pretty nifty.
Alx
Member
I guessed as much, but I always had those problems, on both my Win7 PC, from the start (and forcing indexation never helped). Since Win8 worked fine day 1, I'm assuming they improved the indexing in their search engine. So it's better. Maybe it won't last, but it's already more efficient than what I've been using for years.
Peterthumpa
Member
You guys are crazy. There was nowhere left to go for MS besides launching a touch oriented OS like Windows 8. They HAD to do it, or else the whole Windows branch would become pretty much pointless in 2 to 3 years when the inevitable Windows 9 launches.
Windows 8 is Microsoft's opportunity to tell the new tech generation that relies heavily on tablets that they have an option on an ocean of iOS and Android devices. They had no choice but to dive in this trend, since it's pretty much a given that desktop sales.will slow down in the coming years. They need their ecosystem to be known to offer an even more integrated OS with the next Windows, but they couldn't afford to wait any longer, and they're right.
Windows 8 is Microsoft's opportunity to tell the new tech generation that relies heavily on tablets that they have an option on an ocean of iOS and Android devices. They had no choice but to dive in this trend, since it's pretty much a given that desktop sales.will slow down in the coming years. They need their ecosystem to be known to offer an even more integrated OS with the next Windows, but they couldn't afford to wait any longer, and they're right.
It sounds like you are only making it difficult for yourself. I use my stationary computer as a development environment with no problem.
They will not move away from metro. Too much money and work has been invested there, not only by Microsoft, but also by thousands of 3. Party developers.
Are we using the same Microsoft Office 2013?
balladofwindfishes
Member
none of that required the same OS for both tablets and desktops. The vast, vast majority of desktop users do not have touch enabled monitors and will never, or not until it's standard in every monitor.
Most haven't tried it and are merely regurgitating any bullshit they can find on the net....
Others have spent 5 mins playing in PC world, Best Buy or whatever just so they can confirm the hate others have said they should have because apparently its different.
MS made Start more touch friendly and kept the desktop mouse friendly, they know the desktop guys will use desktop more and Start still functions as Start very well, and they know the Tablet guys will use start more.
the problem is that the result of combining OSes designed for radically different hardware and interaction modes is that you get a confusing product full of compromises.
simplified function tablets are going to be a big part of computing in the future. But MS blew their chance at making a good first impression by tying their Metro tablet UI to the desktop and this confusing mish mash of products.
Peterthumpa
Member
Notebooks sell more than desktops. Also, a touch oriented OS that also runs legacy Windows applications are extra points in Microsoft's thinking.
Peterthumpa
Member
You're looking at it from a Windows user perspective. From a tablet user perspective, the Metro start screen and the metro apps are enough to fulfill what they could achieve on an iPad. The Windows experience behind it is just a plus, an additional feature.
The truth is you admitted to theft on a forum that doesn't like thieves.
A tablet user does not want a desktop, tablet interface or not. They want a tablet interface on a tablet.
And if a tablet user wanted a desktop, chances are they would want to use a desktop for it's genuinely valuable features that are not possible on a tablet interface, otherwise they would use a tablet.
Maybe he turned indexing off because that's what the internet jungle drums said.
It was a regular bit of "advice" around Windows 7 launch, along with disabling Pre-Fetch.
balladofwindfishes
Member
but why is it touch oriented on the desktop? Desktop and tablet have very different uses, and trying to design a UI that works on both gives you a cluttered abomination of two fractured UI that don't work well together.
Encouraging your customers to ignore half of your product is ridiculous. That's basically saying "yea, we know it's not really great for all uses, just ignore it"
I don't have a touch monitor. I have no interest in one. I have an iPad. I have a gaming PC. I would totally ignore Metro. Why should I upgrade to Windows 8? I'm paying for features I have no plan on using and actually will need to find workaround to actively ignore.
Peterthumpa
Member
And they got it with Metro. There's no need to use the old Windows environment, but it is there if they want to.
As a business owner the Windows 8 pro tablets look to be an attractive proposition, because of their flexibility.
Maybe. You should only be turning indexing off if you do have an SSD.
Actually, I'm looking at it from an iPad user's perspective. The ARM Windows desktop (with a second version of IE and with some settings located here and some in Metro) and the slow, non touch optimized ARM version of Office are compromises that make the product less desirable or, at least, more confusing.
Additional features are not always plusses. They can betray a lack of focus. I know some people here think this line is bullshit but I've worked on enough hardware product design to have been a victim of feature creep and to see how it can destroy an idea.
As for Windows 8 (not RT) on Intel hardware, well, I don't think that's a tablet competitor due to price, heat generation, battery life, etc. It's an ultrabook variation. Might do OK, but it's competition with the Macbook Air, not the iPad. MS needs a stronger iPad alternative.
Well two things here.
1. This is Microsoft, in Gretzky speak, skating to where they think the puck will be instead of where it is. They're trying to anticipate the future. Will it work? Heck I don't know. It's a riskier strategy but a better one than just releasing a late clone of iOS or Android.
2. More importantly it's a unique pitch for app developers. Write an app and have it available easily across desktops, laptops, tablets, phones and I bet you set top boxes under the TV as well (Xbox Next).
We'll see how it works out but it's far from a dump play. Risky certainly but the worst that will happen is that desktop people will just stick with 7. The potential reward is getting into markets that they're locked out of right now with a unique offering.
Right now Microsoft have a desktop operating system and a tablet (touch screen) operating system in the same product. This would be alright except for the fact that you have to use both whether you have a touch screen or not. For the next version they need to either separate the two entirely so that you only have to use one of them, or merge them so that you can switch between the two seamlessly (kind of like how PC games can adapt their interface when you switch from the mouse+keyboard to a controller).
Well, I get results instantly with only a laptop hard disk. That's with indexing of course.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Sure, if you as the business owner are willing to spend the time and money to retrain all of your employees to use the new UI.
Most companies will not, and they will stay with Win7. I hope MS is looking forward to supporting Win7 for a decade the way they had to with XP.
And others have used it themselves on their own PC and decided they don't like certain aspects of it, which they are well within their rights to do, and which doesn't mean they "don't like advancement" or whatever other accusations get directed at them by some who like metro.
You know it has been out for free for months? I had it installed on my PC not twelve hours after it became available. Try again.
Also it would do good for the validity of your arguments to stop referring to Metro as merely a replacement for the start menu. That goes for everyone using it.
I think you're missing the point. Metro should have never been included in the desktop version of Windows.
You run a Microsoft fansite don't you.
Peterthumpa
Member
I think you didn't understood the main point. IMO, Microsoft isn't that worried about current users. That's why its damn cheap to upgrade to Windows 8. They're worried with new devices. They want Windows to be seem as also a tablet OS alternative. Their main product hasn't even launched yet (Surface X64), and they're hyping the hell out of it.
For me, Windows 8 is their bet on future computing, not today's one. Even if there's confusion until it establishes, they NEED to have their brand recognizable as an option for computing new trends like tablets.
Why not? Its a useful aggregator of info. One button to check my email, Facebook, weather and application updates. Don't use it much, but I am glad it is there.
balladofwindfishes
Member
This is the same pitch Adobe uses to sell Flash. And that's working out well, right?
You have to develop your application with an audience in mind, and the tablet audience and desktop audience are different in their expectations for UI control. Just look at the compromises made to games like Megaman on iOS. The different controls, resolutions and uses means that certain aspects of the UI need to be different.
The same thought process to designing cross-platform software should have been used by Microsoft, but instead they went with the one size fits all approach and as we know from novelty socks, this statement is meaningless because very much often one size does not fit all.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Internet traffic has almost nothing to do with install base numbers, as anybody who has ever looked at traffic from iOS compared to Android is well aware. If you believed the Internet traffic statistics, you would think that iOS outsells Android 10:1. This could not be further from the truth.
Peterthumpa
Member
See my previous post. Desktop / notebook versions of Windows 8 are the same, and tocu computing in notebooks is pretty much here. Even desktop monitors are starting to be easier to find with touch screens.
No, UK based travel/tourism, upper middle class demographic. We massively outpace the industry as far as iOS use goes too...
Gadgets in Windows 7 would accomplish the same thing.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Cramming Metro down the throats of desktop users isn't exactly going to endear them to potential tablet buyers. And I'm not sure how tablets are a 'new trend' when hundreds of millions have already been sold. iOS and Android are already increasingly well-entrenched in tablets, just as they are in smartphones. How exactly is angering your legacy desktop customers supposed to make them want to switch away from the iPads they already own?
Takamura-San
Member
I love it when keeping it real goes wrong.
Win8 threads are fascinating. I have been using it a week from release and love it.
LCfiner already said why:
Additionally, I'll add that it should've been kept away from the desktop version of Windows simply because it creates bad press and bad impressions. Desktop users want a desktop that takes advantage of the usefulness of a desktop. Metro should not even be present -- because it detracts from the usefulness of the product and platform, a violation of good design.
No - and I think Microsoft are in big trouble now. The desktop experience is their bread and butter yet they've taken a massive dump on it in order to go after the tablet market, a market in which they're going to have a lot of difficulty making any headway. Meanwhile the price of computing continues to plummet and something like a Chromebook and/or an iPad/Nexus is going to be sufficient for a lot of home users and probably even preferable to a Windows PC. Not to mention that's only the beginning - by this time next year I'm betting there will be both a Nexus tablet and an ARM-based Chromebox under the $100 mark.
I think what they should have done is on systems where there's a pointer and keyboard is simply had live tiles as a desktop background, getting rid of the traditional icons while retaining the traditional start bar, instead of this two-faced mess they currently have.
I think what they should have done is on systems where there's a pointer and keyboard is simply had live tiles as a desktop background, getting rid of the traditional icons while retaining the traditional start bar, instead of this two-faced mess they currently have.
Maybe, but for most people they didn't.
iOS and Android traffic comparisons were difficult to relate back to install base or units sold for one HUGE reason. The usage-profiles for the two devices were completely different. iOS users were far more likely to actually use their phones for internet surfing, because a big portion of Android users were non-tech savvy, non-engaged and very low end. As time has progressed and Android has increased it's competitiveness at the top-end, you can see Android picking up higher web traffic share at the expense of iOS.
I think you'd be VERY hard pressed to demonstrate that the usage-profiles of Windows 7 and Windows 8 are significantly different to the extent that higher Win 8 traffic doesn't correlate to more Win 8 users.
This is really just your opinion man. Some people actually enjoy it and find it useful.
Windows 7 is smart and if it needs to do that it will do. Windows 7 knows its running on a SSD and adjusts accordingly, including adjusting how it manages its pagefile.
Frustrated_me
Member
How is there comprimises?
It has Windows 7 (so to say..) in a "desktop" app & it also has a tablet touch friendly interface as well. Best of both worlds. Choose which one you want to work in and voila.
I dont know any other OS that can do both.
It has Windows 7 (so to say..) in a "desktop" app & it also has a tablet touch friendly interface as well. Best of both worlds. Choose which one you want to work in and voila.
I dont know any other OS that can do both.
I've already implemented it..... It was fairly pain free I'm finding that the non technical users are having few problems, the change from XP to 7 was worse as I remember it to be honest.
Would you not agree that those who enjoy it and find it useful would be better suited to buying a tablet that offers hardware more suited to Metro?
The presence of both is a compromise in itself, lol. It is also clutter and a nuisance for many users.
The desktop is sandboxed away from the Metro environment. In Metro, you can't see the taskbar or the clock, and if a program pops up a notification you won't be able to see it. If you have two programs open on the desktop and one app, you can't choose which desktop window to switch back to when you're in the app - you can only go back to the last one you used. You can't have a desktop window in the 1/4 split view with a Metro app. Those are some of the compromises in Windows 8.
No? I mean clearly the majority of the changes made are better on tablets and laptops, but that doesn't mean they're bad on desktops.
- Status