Wuthering_Heights
Banned
Not until I can upgrade for a reasonable price.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Windows 8's uptake falls behind Vista's pace
- Thread starter Canis lupus
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Not until I can upgrade for a reasonable price.
br0ken_shad0w
Member
Metro is ingrained in Windows 8 the same way Touchwiz is ingrained in ICS/Jellybean. Like Touchwiz, there are fans, there are people who don't mind and/or just replace parts with a third-party app (Start8), and there are people who don't want it period. (like me)
CharlieDigital
Banned
<3 Windows 8.
Much faster than 7.
I'm not sure I understand this.
I've been using Windows 7 with an SSD (2 SSDs, in fact) and it feels plenty fast to me. I'm not sure that any software change could improve the performance gained by the hardware change to an SSD and I'm not sure that any marginal improvement in performance at the software level can be felt by the end user.
There is no part of Windows 7 that feels slow to me when used with an SSD.
Metro is ingrained in Windows 8 the same way Touchwiz is ingrained in ICS/Jellybean.
Disagree completely because there is a full out desktop mode where they've crippled it by taking out the code for the start button. They can easily put that code back in.
I still think Apple's approach to all of this is better. But then again this is why MS continues to fall behind Apple. Shame because I think if MS got their shit together, shrunk the fuck out of their windows teams (seriously it should take weeks to approve colors) get someone actually creative in charge they could turn things around.
/shrug.
Now that Sinnofsky is gone, the major shrinkage should be to get rid of Ballmer.
For all the haters, what do you suggest for MS to do for future Windows iterations?
For all the lovers, do you think arguing with people when a product isn't as successful is a good strategy to turn it around?
Metro for tablets only. Hybrid devices are not going to be the future, the only thing they have done is alienate the desktop market, their ARM support sucks. Selling tablets to people to replace what they would use laptops for isn't opening up new markets for them.
I still think Apple's approach to all of this is better. But then again this is why MS continues to fall behind Apple. Shame because I think if MS got their shit together, shrunk the fuck out of their windows teams (seriously it should take weeks to approve colors) get someone actually creative in charge they could turn things around.
/shrug.
I do hold Apple in high regards even if i don't like their ecosystem.
also love your avatar, who is it?
W8 is $40.Not until I can upgrade for a reasonable price.
ReturnOfTheRAT
Member
Well, instead of bashing Microsoft, I'll say this . . . XP and Windows 7 are such good products that you just don't feel the need to upgrade. Why fix what ain't broke?
They so desperately wanted to unify Xbox, Windows Phone 7/8/whatever, and the desktop that they shoehorned that interface into a desktop OS.
well, total number of "all Windows PC" are a lot higher now than 6 years ago, the percentages are good to show adaptation rates but comparing it wouldn't be any useful without the actual numbers. This is like the chart Apple was using to show how people were upgrading to newer OSX faster than Windows 7's when the actual numbers were on entirely different scale.
don't think Microsoft expected to sell 100m licenses like with Win7 launch, still the user base of 8 is going to end up at a few hundred millions in a couple of years with it's own built in store front.
sales of PCs in general is going to be rough though if they can't be price competitive with cheap tablets and in similar form factors , for simple tasks like web browsing and email many don't use PCs or laptops anymore.
don't think Microsoft expected to sell 100m licenses like with Win7 launch, still the user base of 8 is going to end up at a few hundred millions in a couple of years with it's own built in store front.
sales of PCs in general is going to be rough though if they can't be price competitive with cheap tablets and in similar form factors , for simple tasks like web browsing and email many don't use PCs or laptops anymore.
CharlieDigital
Banned
For all the haters, what do you suggest for MS to do for future Windows iterations?
"I want it to be like Windows 7."
Basically, you want MS to stagnate, do nothing new, and just want to keep the same way forever while other platforms keep changing.
No. Windows 7 should evolve, but that evolution does not mean that your desktop OS must share functionality and interaction patterns with your tablet OS because they are fundamentally two different experiences.
It's not about stagnation; it's about making the right product decisions. Forcing touch conventions into non-touch interactions is a bad idea.
I believe this is part of the issue - a big part. Windows 7 was a fantastic OS. It is *still* a fantastic OS. The other issue I think is that they just tacked on metro to the desktop UI without integrating it at all or making it work with mice.
The big part of the issue is people trying to make comment without actually using it.
It's not perfect, no os is, so what? Some of the new stuff is actually pretty good.
Describe a way then to evolve Windows to the next level.No. Windows 7 should evolve, but that evolution does not mean that your desktop OS must share functionality and interaction patterns with your tablet OS because they are fundamentally two different experiences.
It's not about stagnation; it's about making the right product decisions.
W8 is $40.
And the irony is that you can run Win8 with just a desktop interface using third party apps for $5 or less.
Networking in 8 is very good.
Souless_PJ
Banned
This strategy is obviously not working for them. Their tablet and phone sales are abysmal and show no signs of improving. All the while they are probably hurting their share of the PC market among more casual consumers by releasing a confusing mess with lots of negativity surrounding it.
Yeah it was always going to be a bad idea but since they were non existent in those markets they presumed that since everyone uses Windows they would get some sort of halo effect by cross pollinating. But the sales haven't turned out that way.
Personally I've always hated the tile interface but Bullmer must thinks its cool. He is the epitome of style after all.
Randolph Freelander
Member
I think this is more of a PC selling problem than it is a Windows 8 problem. I don't know, but I just don't feel like the *average* consumer upgrades their OS. They just buy new computers. I think PCs aren't selling themselves as well as they used to now that Moore's Law seems to be spreading into more cores than it is easily recognizable increases in Hz. Another easily recognizable number, RAM, seems to be plateauing as well. At the very least, RAM and disk space are not increasing exponentially like they were in years past, and the Hz number isn't increasing, and to the average person, these are what say "this is more powerful than what I already have."
And then on the other hand, you have tablets becoming increasingly attractive.
It seems like Microsoft really really needs the Surface to grow in popularity, as well as other slimmed-down laptop offerings from other providers because if Windows 8 is going to take off, that's where it's going to happen in the near term.
And then on the other hand, you have tablets becoming increasingly attractive.
It seems like Microsoft really really needs the Surface to grow in popularity, as well as other slimmed-down laptop offerings from other providers because if Windows 8 is going to take off, that's where it's going to happen in the near term.
CharlieDigital
Banned
Describe a way then.
The desktop paradigm works well; people will not be leaving this paradigm any time soon.
They can just bring back the start button and maintain the desktop experience with all of the improvements from 8 like improved Task Manager, file transfer, etc. Improving the product does not mean that you have to change the fundamental assumptions about how users want to interact with the product. For me, personally, there is no bigger failure of this broken vision than Server 8, where it is subject to the same Metro touch paradigm, even though in 99.9% of use cases, it will be accessed as a virtual server or via remote desktop and not as a touch interface.
They can evolve the Windows Phone OS platform and scale it up to meet the needs for a tablet format just as Apple and Google have done. Take advantage of the parallels in how users use these physical formats as secondary computing and infotainment devices and take advantage of the synergies (yes, I used a buzzword, but it's completely applicable here) in the business and software distribution model around an app market.
Microsoft should not stagnate, but that doesn't mean that they should make terrible software just for the sake of change either.
I saw this coming from a mile away when they made the decision to force the Metro UI on all users, permanently disable the start menu and have no way to boot into desktop by default (without third party tweaks). Not to mention the whole Windows RT vs Windows 8 issue. Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen.
I'm surprised Microsoft didn't see this coming.
Also Steve Ballmer is a dumbass. I can't believe they haven't fired him yet.
I'm surprised Microsoft didn't see this coming.
Also Steve Ballmer is a dumbass. I can't believe they haven't fired him yet.
The desktop paradigm works well; people will not be leaving this paradigm any time soon.
What? People have been replacing the traditional Windows desktop with iPads and smartphones.
They can just bring back the start button and maintain the desktop experience with all of the improvements from 8 like improved Task Manager, file transfer, etc. Improving the product does not mean that you have to change the fundamental assumptions about how users want to interact with the product. For me, personally, there is no bigger failure of this broken vision than Server 8, where it is subject to the same Metro touch paradigm, even though in 99.9% of use cases, it will be accessed as a virtual server or via remote desktop and not as a touch interface.
Touchscreens are already a huge part of the computing world. You will need a UI to back it up. As of right now, Windows 7's UI or Windows 8 desktop mode is not going to be a suitable replacement. There's a reason why Windows XP/Vista/7 touchscreen devices did not sell at all.
They can evolve the Windows Phone OS platform and scale it up to meet the needs for a tablet format just as Apple and Google have done. Take advantage of the parallels in how users use these physical formats as secondary computing and infotainment devices and take advantage of the synergies (yes, I used a buzzword, but it's completely applicable here) in the business and software distribution model around an app market.
Metro is MS's mobile platform.
?Microsoft should not stagnate, but that doesn't mean that they should make terrible software just for the sake of change either.
true, they are using their marketshare in the Laptop/Desktop space to drive them into the tablet space but I do like their idea of having a unified OS. And when I am using my desktop it is extremely easy to just use Windows 8 like I have been for 20 years. So I don't really see a problem there. I do use a few new applications like Music, Skype, Netflix and a few others but I mostly stay on the desktop when using....my desktop PC. I don't expect that to change anytime soon. Now where Windows 8 really shines is devices that can be a tablet, or a laptop. That is the future of the PC market imo. Desktops are already being outsold by laptops and I believe tablets have recently passed them as well. The real market is the laptop and tablet market and bringing those two form factors together is logical. Just like the phone market, some phones have optional keyboards and some don't. The Laptop/Tablet market will be the same. Most laptops will come with Touchscreens as well have a bunch with the option of removing or twisting the keyboard off/around etc... to make it more of a tablet. You really need new hardware for Windows 8 to shine, and that is something where the OEMs and Microsoft have failed miserably.They so desperately wanted to unify Xbox, Windows Phone 7/8/whatever, and the desktop that they shoehorned that interface into a desktop OS.
(my thinkpad tablet needs to hurry up, they market it as "the tablet you have been waiting for", at least they are correct.)
No. Windows 7 should evolve, but that evolution does not mean that your desktop OS must share functionality and interaction patterns with your tablet OS because they are fundamentally two different experiences.
It's not about stagnation; it's about making the right product decisions. Forcing touch conventions into non-touch interactions is a bad idea.
I think the point is that desktops as we run them probably *are* going to disappear for most users. Years ago my employer started a program to replace desktops with laptops, as I'm sure most business' did. Now we're looking ahead to the next four or five years and wondering whether the laptops will be replaced with Surface-like hybrids for portability with docking stations and monitors on desks.
In that context it makes sense to have one operating system that can work in both environments, and despite protestations that's what Windows 8 does. Now yes, there are some rough edges where the two meet. But the core concept works for the hybrid device, just as it still works for the desktop.
*You* can easily "put that code back in". It takes minutes and it's free, if that's the one thing that's pissing you off about it.Disagree completely because there is a full out desktop mode where they've crippled it by taking out the code for the start button. They can easily put that code back in.
Bornstellar
Member
I'm not sure I understand this.
I've been using Windows 7 with an SSD (2 SSDs, in fact) and it feels plenty fast to me. I'm not sure that any software change could improve the performance gained by the hardware change to an SSD and I'm not sure that any marginal improvement in performance at the software level can be felt by the end user.
There is no part of Windows 7 that feels slow to me when used with an SSD.
Disagree completely because there is a full out desktop mode where they've crippled it by taking out the code for the start button. They can easily put that code back in.
I'm not saying Win 7 on SSD isn't fast, but I am saying that Windows 8 is faster.
CharlieDigital
Banned
What? People have been replacing the traditional Windows desktop with iPads and smartphones.
No, they've augmented, not replaced.
I don't get the need to defend Microsoft. Microsoft is a billion dollar company that does not need your pity.
I evaluate the software based purely on how good it is and the decisions that they've made here make the system unusable out of the box for me. Primarily, in windowed mode, Server 8 -- with all of the Metro interactions -- make it highly unproductive to use. Whatever great features of Server 8 there are, they are overshadowed by the poorly thought out product decisions they've made.
I'm not saying Win 7 on SSD isn't fast, but I am saying that Windows 8 is faster.
Example?
krypt0nian
Banned
Can Windows 8 be rescued?
Describe a way then to evolve Windows to the next level.
Apple has already shown the way. You carry over the design language and UI from tablets that makes sense, while leaving the desktop as a separate OS.
Different form factors have different use cases and needs. One size does not fit all.
Apple has already shown the way. You carry over the design language and UI from tablets that makes sense, while leaving the desktop as a separate OS.
Different form factors have different use cases and needs. One size does not fit all.
You just described Apple.
What about Microsoft?
Can Windows 8 be rescued?
It doesn't need to be rescued, everything is going fine. It's only haters on the Internet.
that is something I can't agree with. The thing I love about this new OS is that I can have a device that can do everything.One size does not fit all.
The Abominable Snowman
Member
For all the haters, what do you suggest for MS to do for future Windows iterations?
"I want it to be like Windows 7."
Basically, you want MS to stagnate, do nothing new, and just want to keep the same way forever while other platforms keep changing.
99% of the criticism for Windows 8 is around the non-windowed Metro apps for Metro apps and the start menu not being similarly windowed, as well as not having a Recent Apps/docs tile. Also, the universal switch to launch all apps in Desktop mode by default is hidden. There are already tons of apps that mitigate these complaints, and they're less than 1-2MB total. If MS were to officially implement something like those, I'm willing to bet W8 would somehow immediately turn into the "go to, must-have" OS.
krypt0nian
Banned
It doesn't need to be rescued, everything is going fine. It's only haters on the Internet.
This is actually true since everyone IRL is on the Internet. It definitely needs saving though.
Bornstellar
Member
No, they've augmented, not replaced.
I don't get the need to defend Microsoft. Microsoft is a billion dollar company that does not need your pity.
I evaluate the software based purely on how good it is and the decisions that they've made here make the system unusable out of the box for me. Primarily, in windowed mode, Server 8 -- with all of the Metro interactions -- make it highly unproductive to use. Whatever great features of Server 8 there are, they are overshadowed by the poorly thought out product decisions they've made.
Example?
http://www.techspot.com/review/561-windows8-vs-windows7/page2.html
You just described Apple.
What about Microsoft?
What, like they've never copied Apple before?
I'm not sure I understand this.
I've been using Windows 7 with an SSD (2 SSDs, in fact) and it feels plenty fast to me. I'm not sure that any software change could improve the performance gained by the hardware change to an SSD and I'm not sure that any marginal improvement in performance at the software level can be felt by the end user.
There is no part of Windows 7 that feels slow to me when used with an SSD.
Disagree completely because there is a full out desktop mode where they've crippled it by taking out the code for the start button. They can easily put that code back in.
I've never really felt 7 to be slow, but this reasoning on why it's not just made my brain asplode.
CharlieDigital
Banned
You just described Apple.
What about Microsoft?
I'm not an Apple defender and I don't own a single Apple produced product.
In fact, I build enterprise software on Microsoft platforms and have developed software for Microsoft platforms in an enterprise environment for over a decade now.
With that preface, I will say that Apple has been more profitable, Apple has captured the consumer market, Apple transformed the smartphone market, Apple has defined the user experience when it comes to interaction with mobile devices (tablets included).
If you can improve on it, then absolutely, the innovation is justified. But is Windows 8 -- being a hybrid of desktop and tablet OS -- an improvement on the Apple design? Don't think so.
I've never really felt 7 to be slow, but this reasoning on why it's not just made my brain asplode.
The question is if it's a side by side, scientific comparison or if comparisons are being made with clean systems, newer, faster SSDs, etc. A side by side comparison -- on the same hardware, clean install, same software at startup -- would probably yield imperceptible differences in performance. Perceived speed differences from newer, faster hardware and clean installs are not an objective measurement of speed.
I would like to know where Windows 7 is "slow" because I generally don't have an issue with Windows 7 being slow in any aspect with an SSD installed. As an enterprise software developer, I look at performance more objectively and want to have quantifiable, measurable differences and not just seat of the pants, butt dyno assumptions.
ripastraea
Member
Sticking with Windows 7 until W9
2012 1.6% != 2007 2.2% of the Windows PC market.
Absolutely correct.
Windu said:that is something I can't agree with. The thing I love about this new OS is that I can have a device that can do everything.
Once again we agree.
XP was awful later on.
Windows 8 is a mess. Metro should have stuck to tablets and phones. And the 'desktop' ui should have stuck to desktops.
Windows tablets are an unholy mess. You can skip metro mostly in windows 8, its still there fucking things up occasionally though, but you are still stuck with desktop on laptops which works about as well as it did in windows 7.
Instead of catering to 2 markets, they tried to force an unholy union onto both of them. Laziness? Half assing? A demented vision of the future? Incompetence? I dont know!
Windows 8 is a mess. Metro should have stuck to tablets and phones. And the 'desktop' ui should have stuck to desktops.
Windows tablets are an unholy mess. You can skip metro mostly in windows 8, its still there fucking things up occasionally though, but you are still stuck with desktop on laptops which works about as well as it did in windows 7.
Instead of catering to 2 markets, they tried to force an unholy union onto both of them. Laziness? Half assing? A demented vision of the future? Incompetence? I dont know!
I'm not an Apple defender and I don't own a single Apple produced product.
In fact, I build enterprise software on Microsoft platforms and have developed software for Microsoft platforms in an enterprise environment for over a decade now.
With that preface, I will say that Apple has been more profitable, Apple has captured the consumer market, Apple transformed the smartphone market, Apple has defined the user experience when it comes to interaction with mobile devices (tablets included).
If you can improve on it, then absolutely, the innovation is justified. But is Windows 8 -- being a hybrid of desktop and tablet OS -- an improvement on the Apple design? Don't think so.
The question is if it's a side by side, scientific comparison or if comparisons are being made with clean systems, newer, faster SSDs, etc. A side by side comparison -- on the same hardware, clean install, same software at startup -- would probably yield imperceptible differences in performance. Perceived speed differences from newer, faster hardware and clean installs are not an objective measurement of speed.
I would like to know where Windows 7 is "slow" because I generally don't have an issue with Windows 7 being slow in any aspect with an SSD installed. As an enterprise software developer, I look at performance more objectively and want to have quantifiable, measurable differences and not just seat of the pants, butt dyno assumptions.
With that addendum your other post makes sense. By itself it was like you were trying to say because I have screaming fast hardware that can brute force comparable performance I disagree with the idea Windows 7 is slow.
I saw this coming from a mile away when they made the decision to force the Metro UI on all users, permanently disable the start menu and have no way to boot into desktop by default (without third party tweaks). Not to mention the whole Windows RT vs Windows 8 issue. Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen.
I'm surprised Microsoft didn't see this coming.
Also Steve Ballmer is a dumbass. I can't believe they haven't fired him yet.
Nothing has happened though... If you think nobody at MS considered the risks then you are crazy.
They know exactly what the are doing, and they know reversing decades of habit will take time when it comes to pc's. It's an unfortunate truth that pc's are becoming increasingly dated and they need to catch up with the rest of the market, dragging the knuckle dragging Start button worshippers along with it.
Have they got it quite right? Possibly not, but it's nothing a few tweaks can't sort.
Windows 8 for Desktops really feels like an afterthought, like all Microsoft cared about was tablets and touch devices.
That said I am using Windows 8 myself and it's pretty good once you start using something like Startisback.
That said I am using Windows 8 myself and it's pretty good once you start using something like Startisback.
Bornstellar
Member
Ah, a clear message that people don't want that Metro rubbish - Makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Now give me Windows 7 with a more polish, focus on performance and rustle up the visuals a bit then slap on a 9 at the end, watch it sell like warm pie on a winter day.
That's Windows 8. Really.
Blood Diamonds
Banned
Heh, it's not about that.Condescending bullshit that contributes nothing.
How about you articulate why you feel this topic is unworthy of a thread?
Honestly I hated 8 at first, so I went back to 7. But it felt like going back to windows 95. So I reinstalled 8, and now I am more than happy with it.
Once customized, metro looks good and I don't want a prehistoric start menu anymore. The desktop interface is better, the "optimize" function that takes into consideration SSDs a relief, it's smoother... For now, except more elaborated metro apps I can't really ask for more.
People bullshit a lot about windows 8, but once you're getting used to it, you really can't go back to any previous windows.
Once customized, metro looks good and I don't want a prehistoric start menu anymore. The desktop interface is better, the "optimize" function that takes into consideration SSDs a relief, it's smoother... For now, except more elaborated metro apps I can't really ask for more.
People bullshit a lot about windows 8, but once you're getting used to it, you really can't go back to any previous windows.
Windows 8 could not be an anymore unnecessary creation right now.
It was necessary if MS was to have a chance to grow. Their main markets are not expanding that much.
If they break even/lose on Win8, they will make it up with the next version. Good to see them become device agnostic. It will come in handy for all of us.
I don't think the article implied that. It's talking about marketshare uptake, after all. That relies on percentages.2012 1.6% != 2007 2.2% of the Windows PC market. Anyway, with people not upgrading PCs as much as well as the emergence of the 7 inch tablet market and the delays of new touch PCs (I am waiting on a Lenovo Tablet that was supposed to release in October, will arrive in January). Windows 8 starting off slow I think was to be expected. Businesses were never going to upgrade to Windows 8 (on laptops and desktops) and that has always been a big mover for Windows. Vista sold something like 200+ million in a couple of years, that is plenty to get support from developers.
Thank god for Apple.
When Vista dropped, I bought an iMac when I needed a new box for home.
Thanks to Win 8, an iPad mini is going to be my home pc for the next couple years.
One of these times, I'm not going back to MS, and I get the feeling this may be it. They've bumblefucked their last OS in my house.
I had to reformat my work PC to put 7 back on it, which also made me less than happy.
When Vista dropped, I bought an iMac when I needed a new box for home.
Thanks to Win 8, an iPad mini is going to be my home pc for the next couple years.
One of these times, I'm not going back to MS, and I get the feeling this may be it. They've bumblefucked their last OS in my house.
I had to reformat my work PC to put 7 back on it, which also made me less than happy.
that is something I can't agree with. The thing I love about this new OS is that I can have a device that can do everything.
Yea it can do everything! Poorly.
Meanwhile even apple isnt stupid enough to make this kind of mistake. Its just smacks of desperation, "WE MUST BEAT APPLE!!!!!! TOUCH EVERYWHERE!" Even where it makes no sense and is counter intuitive. Even where that means half assing their tablet os. Instead of having a great desktop ui and a great tablet ui, they have a half assed 'both' ui.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.