eHam

eHam Forums => Computers And Software => Topic started by: KC4YJI on June 02, 2014, 01:10:20 PM



Title: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KC4YJI on June 02, 2014, 01:10:20 PM
I need to upgrade my desktop computer. It is an Dell demention 3000 running XP. Should I get win 7 or go with win 8.1. I have not spent much time on win 8. I know "everybody" says it is junk, but why? Is it just the interface is a pain? Is there something wrong with the OS itself?

My brother got a win 8 net-book and upgraded it to win 8.1, then installed classic shell. He says it works a lot like win 7. I have seen on-line where some have done this and said you get the benefits of both win 7 & 8. Others say, if you are going to make win 8 work like 7, why not just get win 7.

Got me to thinking....Why is win 8 bad?

 


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: AA4PB on June 02, 2014, 01:35:12 PM
"if you are going to make win 8 work like 7, why not just get win 7."

Win8 will be supported longer than Win7. My granddaughter has a machine with Win8. The GUI takes a little getting used to but it has all the same features. Once you learn how to get to the desktop it is not that bad.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on June 02, 2014, 01:56:43 PM
It isn't that the OS is 'bad,' it's that it is such a radical departure from traditional Windows systems that the learning curve is very, very steep.  Win 8.1 is supposed to be better in that it has the  'classic' shell, but it is still a learning experience that most people just don't like.

I saw a news article recently that stated that many hardware producers (computer makers) have gone back to the Windows 7 OS, I don't know if it's true or not--I just know that Microsoft laid one hell of a big egg when they came out with Windows 8, the egg was cracked and spoiled, and they could well be backpedalling in that Windows 8.1 came out so fast.

BTW, if you do get Win8, see if you can quickly find the settings to change the appearance--it isn't at all easy to find!


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KD0REQ on June 02, 2014, 01:59:21 PM
if you can get to the desktop, it won't stay on the desktop.  it's like Microsoft finally knuckled under to 25-year-old memoes from IBM and implemented Presentation Manager v3.0.

finally got mine (mostly) tamed, combination of the 8.1 updates and disabling swipe in the mouse controller.  add a utility to run Tiles stuff in separate windows, and it's almost a computer.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: N5INP on June 02, 2014, 02:08:29 PM
Got me to thinking....Why is win 8 bad?

Well ... I don't think it's bad at all. I got a new laptop about 2 months ago, and I wanted Win 8 to see just what all the fussing was about. The problem is the new start screen confuses people, some people think that it is the desktop, but it isn't.

All you have to do is click on the desktop menu item in the start menu screen and poof - you are looking at the same desktop you always were used to. It also has no problems running any of the ham software I already run on Win 7.

Really - It ain't no big deal.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W4KYR on June 02, 2014, 02:36:01 PM
I need to upgrade my desktop computer. It is an Dell demention 3000 running XP. Should I get win 7 or go with win 8.1. I have not spent much time on win 8. I know "everybody" says it is junk, but why? Is it just the interface is a pain? Is there something wrong with the OS itself?

My brother got a win 8 net-book and upgraded it to win 8.1, then installed classic shell. He says it works a lot like win 7. I have seen on-line where some have done this and said you get the benefits of both win 7 & 8. Others say, if you are going to make win 8 work like 7, why not just get win 7.

Got me to thinking....Why is win 8 bad?


#1. No one should have to hack Windows to make it look like a Windows Operating System!

#2. People who need a new computer, cannot run to the local brick and mortar store and buy a Windows 7 machine. It is Windows 8 or nothing at all. (There are some refurb places and few computer stores that still sell Windows 7 machines. But the good news is that Windows 7 machines still readily available brand new online).

#3 Why does anyone have to take a course in re-learning Windows (or have to hack Windows) after using Windows products for the past 10 or 20 years? This is a huge step backwards for MSFT. At this point, one might as well learn Linux and just get off the "Microsoft Upgrade Train" once and for good.

#4. Microsoft probably knew it had a huge issue on it's hands even before Win 8's release when they were offering upgrades for Win 8 at a very low cut rate price. Microsoft could have easily avoided this whole mess by accommodating their customers by letting them choose which GUI they wanted, and not what Microsoft wanted to push.  And Microsoft's insistence in 'Secure Boot' (UEFI) didn't exactly sit well with the IT world and by itself gathered a lot criticism from within the IT community.

#5. Microsoft finally came up with a decent replacement for XP with Windows 7. And then they follow up with this mess.

#6. Windows 8 makes Windows Vista and Windows ME look like decent operating systems. Windows 8 is Microsoft's biggest mistake and I'm not the only one sharing these sentiments. Read the comments online from customers and from IT Pros. Windows 8 was not well received by the public.


Go with Windows 7, it is good till 2020. You can buy Windows 7 machines online or at any real computer store (Not Best Buy). Or try out Linux or the Android OS for Windows machines and get off the "Microsoft Upgrade Train" for good. Sure you will have to upgrade Linux Operating systems every few years, but the cost is FREE and you have a choice in what you want your GUI to look like.
.

 


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KA5PIU on June 02, 2014, 04:45:49 PM
Hello.

The single greatest event Apple computer had was when Microsoft came out with Vista.
They could not even get the game space cadet working.
So, Microsoft had to do something, and came out with 7.
Now, they are trying to reintroduce Vista.
They are calling it 8.
No, it is not a steep learning curve, there are things I just do not like.
Microsoft needs to listen to the customers, and not their people.
Who knows? Bill Gates senile and decided that this is it?
But, when people say it is easier to migrate to a Mac than Vista/8, something is really wrong.
AT&T for years tried to push Picture Phone.
Modern computers can do video conferencing, but very few do it.
Although now fully possible, people do not want it, at least not most.
Microsoft is the same way, trying to sell something people do not want.
If I want to play with hardware I run Linux.
If I want to get desktop publishing done I run a mac.
If I want to waste time and money, I look at a PC.
And, it is not just me, Microsoft is losing market share.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W9CLL on June 02, 2014, 05:20:46 PM
Windose 8 or better 8.1 is not "bad" its just different. From a consumer standpoint there really is no reason not to run it if you are willing to spend some time re-learning Windows. From a corporate standpoint its a mess, in-house apps that were coded(sloppily) for XP will not run without re-coding($$$). Most corporate IT departments are staying away from it and that is what is hurting M$.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KC4YJI on June 02, 2014, 06:06:41 PM
My brother downloaded "clasic shell" to his computer, and it does not even boot to the metro screen. it won't even go to it unless you click on a button to go there. He has the start button that looks and works like xp/vista/win 7 (you choose). I have not used it much, but when he boots up and does the few things he uses it for, it would be hard to tell it was not win 7. He likes it and said he can't tell much difference from win 7. He doesent do much with a computer but get on the net, and store photos.  I still use a drafting program that is dos, that is why I have held on to the desktop for so long.

I have a friend (another ham) who was an IT guy for 35 years or so. he said he could set me up, he highly recomends win 7.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W4KYR on June 02, 2014, 06:13:26 PM
.

I have a friend (another ham) who was an IT guy for 35 years or so. he said he could set me up, he highly recomends win 7.

If you decide to stay with Windows I also highly recommend Windows 7. If he can set you up with an Windows 7 machine, then great...

.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 02, 2014, 06:19:39 PM
There is nothing wrong with Win 8 or 8.1. I will say, 8.1 is better than 8 though. If you have a choice, I would go with 8.1.

The only problem with Win 8.1 is that part of it looks different and people don't like change. Yea there will be some apps that don't work with Win 8.x but that's expected over time. If someone is using apps from XP or Win 98/95 then they may or may not work. That's hard to tell . .  Maybe some people should consider getting newer apps.  8.1 will boot to the normal desktop that people are used to without going straight to the start screen. Instead of the old start menu, there is a start screen that looks like tiles. Right click on all the tiles you don't want and un-pin them from the start screen. Pin the ones you want to the start screen and it's set for you. I did that and it's on one screen. Touch the Windows key and click the Word tile and MS Word starts like normal.

You don't ever have to look at a "metro" or new style touch app. All the things I use on 8.1 are normal window'ed apps.

I am using 8.1 on my work laptop. I work for a large company and in a few weeks 8.1 will be officially supported for use in the company. I am on the early adopter program so I have had it for couple months now. 

That said, Win 7 is probably their best effort and works great. If I was buying a new computer, I would just get Win 8.1 or a Mac. Linux is just not all there yet. It works for a lot of people but for average folks, it's not there yet.




Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K3DCW on June 02, 2014, 06:23:54 PM
My brother downloaded "clasic shell" to his computer, and it does not even boot to the metro screen. it won't even go to it unless you click on a button to go there.

My Windows 8.1 machine boots straight to the desktop without needing the installation of any "classic shell" or other add on.  It takes one change to select whether you want to boot to the desktop or to the Metro start screen.  You simply right click on the taskbar and go to the Navigation tool.  Therein is a section called "Start screen"; simply put a check mark next to "When I sign in or close all apps on a screen, go to the desktop instead of start".  That's it.  And so what if the start button has changed shape?  It is still in the same place and does the same basic thing, so what's the big deal about that?

Now, I look at the metro start screen as a fancy Windows start button; in fact it is often quicker as I click once on the start button, and one on the program tile I'm interested in.  In older versions of Windows, you might have had to drill down through Start, Programs, Some Program Menu/folder, then to the executable.  Of course, you could setup shortcuts on the desktop and only be one click away...and you still can do that with no problems whatsoever.  

I'm truly surprised how many people hate 8.1...especially those that have never tried it.  Once you give it a fair shake, I'd bet that you'd enjoy it a lot more than you might think. Add significantly increased security, speed improvements and reduced memory and hard drive footprint when compared to Win7, and support and updates for several more years and all in all, 8.1 is a winner in my book.  

Of course, many are simply too stuck in their ways to change.  Others lament the change and then run from Windows to Linux and have to learn a whole new OS (although Linux is AWESOME), while others run to OS X (another AWESOME OS). Some just b*t*h because it is Microsoft, or because they just can't used to all the newfangled technology ever since the Model T went away.

If you give 8.1 a try, you'll be satisfied.  If you give Win 7 a try, you'll be satisfied.  So, it is a win-win whichever way you go.

73

Dave
K3DCW


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: NK7Z on June 02, 2014, 07:07:10 PM

Got me to thinking....Why is win 8 bad?
 

Hmmm...  Because it is Windows...  Try Linux!


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: NK7Z on June 02, 2014, 07:10:35 PM
My brother downloaded "clasic shell" to his computer, and it does not even boot to the metro screen. it won't even go to it unless you click on a button to go there.

My Windows 8.1 machine boots straight to the desktop without needing the installation of any "classic shell" or other add on.  It takes one change to select whether you want to boot to the desktop or to the Metro start screen.  You simply right click on the taskbar and go to the Navigation tool.  Therein is a section called "Start screen"; simply put a check mark next to "When I sign in or close all apps on a screen, go to the desktop instead of start".  That's it.  And so what if the start button has changed shape?  It is still in the same place and does the same basic thing, so what's the big deal about that?

Now, I look at the metro start screen as a fancy Windows start button; in fact it is often quicker as I click once on the start button, and one on the program tile I'm interested in.  In older versions of Windows, you might have had to drill down through Start, Programs, Some Program Menu/folder, then to the executable.  Of course, you could setup shortcuts on the desktop and only be one click away...and you still can do that with no problems whatsoever.  

I'm truly surprised how many people hate 8.1...especially those that have never tried it.  Once you give it a fair shake, I'd bet that you'd enjoy it a lot more than you might think. Add significantly increased security, speed improvements and reduced memory and hard drive footprint when compared to Win7, and support and updates for several more years and all in all, 8.1 is a winner in my book.  

Of course, many are simply too stuck in their ways to change.  Others lament the change and then run from Windows to Linux and have to learn a whole new OS (although Linux is AWESOME), while others run to OS X (another AWESOME OS). Some just b*t*h because it is Microsoft, or because they just can't used to all the newfangled technology ever since the Model T went away.

If you give 8.1 a try, you'll be satisfied.  If you give Win 7 a try, you'll be satisfied.  So, it is a win-win whichever way you go.

73

Dave
K3DCW

While I like and run Linux, that is one of the better thought out arguments for Windows I have seen in a while!  It is refreshing to not see yet another M$ Fanboy, but someone who actually thought it out!  THANK YOU!  I still like Linux better, and would always recommend it, but finally a decent discussion...  Again, thank you!


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 02, 2014, 07:23:22 PM
#1. No one should have to hack Windows to make it look like a Windows Operating System!

You mean to make it look like a old dated operated system because you have trouble with new concept?

#2. People who need a new computer, cannot run to the local brick and mortar store and buy a Windows 7 machine. It is Windows 8 or nothing at all. (There are some refurb places and few computer stores that still sell Windows 7 machines. But the good news is that Windows 7 machines still readily available brand new online).

No good news. Why is running to buy old technology hardware and software. Stuck in past?

#3 Why does anyone have to take a course in re-learning Windows (or have to hack Windows) after using Windows products for the past 10 or 20 years? This is a huge step backwards for MSFT. At this point, one might as well learn Linux and just get off the "Microsoft Upgrade Train" once and for good.

Times have changed. Maybe you should look for a commodore 64 at swap meets. 

#4. Microsoft probably knew it had a huge issue on it's hands even before Win 8's release when they were offering upgrades for Win 8 at a very low cut rate price. Microsoft could have easily avoided this whole mess by accommodating their customers by letting them choose which GUI they wanted, and not what Microsoft wanted to push.  And Microsoft's insistence in 'Secure Boot' (UEFI) didn't exactly sit well with the IT world and by itself gathered a lot criticism from within the IT community.

They knew there would be a LOT of people like you resiting change. If MS embraced you concept they would be out of business in 5 years. We are moving to a smart phone/tablet world and old windows has no road to there. On allowing custom GUI is dumb as you loose standards and open security holes. On secure boot, The real reason behind it is preventing a back door hijack boot. Many Trojans root at boot level so it is another layer to break. 

#5. Microsoft finally came up with a decent replacement for XP with Windows 7. And then they follow up with this mess.

7 is merely tweaked Vista. It was time for a real change.

#6. Windows 8 makes Windows Vista and Windows ME look like decent operating systems. Windows 8 is Microsoft's biggest mistake and I'm not the only one sharing these sentiments. Read the comments online from customers and from IT Pros. Windows 8 was not well received by the public.

While ME was bad Vista is rock solid on good hardware. I still have a few Vista machines and prefer it or 7. At first I did not embrace 8 but like it a lot now.

Go with Windows 7, it is good till 2020. You can buy Windows 7 machines online or at any real computer store (Not Best Buy). Or try out Linux or the Android OS for Windows machines and get off the "Microsoft Upgrade Train" for good. Sure you will have to upgrade Linux Operating systems every few years, but the cost is FREE and you have a choice in what you want your GUI to look like.

News flash, main stream support for 7 ends 7 months! Only security fixes for 5 years after that. Why rush to buy and set up a new system that main stream support ends for in 7 months??? Driod has some potential because it is on smart phones too. Linux has less and less apps and is a down grade not a upgrade.
 


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W9CLL on June 02, 2014, 07:42:00 PM
Linux has less and less apps and is a down grade not a upgrade.
  
Not for the business community and that is where M$ strength is. You could easily run a business with a Linux only network and Pc's.

Windows 8.1 is not bad, I have played with it for hours/days/weeks, changed all the configurations and tried to blow it up. It does work and has a lot of options. The real problem for M$ is the business community is NOT jumping on the band wagon and will not for a while. Microsoft is at a cross roads, they have a product, a decent product that nobody wants. They have a tablet that nobody wants even though the hardware is top notch. They are vulnerable now for the first time in the history of the company. They lost their chip, no one knocked it off it just blew off from the wind when everyone passed them by.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KF6QEX on June 03, 2014, 02:16:15 AM
Unnecessarily  annoying, but "new".
And this post reads a lot better if you read it from bottom to top.
for a long time, doesn't make it "wrong" or "stuck" in the past.
In conclusion, making it different doesn't make it better and just because it's been "the same"
Yikes.
We went from "My Computer" to "Computer"  to "This Pc".
without having to re-learn or wonder "where did they move it now"
use the silly "new version of the OS"
And since it is a freaking interface there should be an option to
than to make it look new or different.
There is no "reason" from the user standpoint to redo the interface other
Here is what I think about windows 8


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: NA4IT on June 03, 2014, 04:38:21 AM
With Puppy Linux, you can run FLDigi and Xastir (APRS) very easily (and lots of other stuff). And NOT have to put up with the garbage of Windoze 8.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 03, 2014, 05:24:26 AM
With Puppy Linux, you can run FLDigi and Xastir (APRS) very easily (and lots of other stuff). And NOT have to put up with the garbage of Windoze 8.

I luv my win rt 8.1 tablet (which I am typing this on). Easy to use and transparently shares with win 8 laptop. None of this is possible with Linux or 7. You can move forward with technology or shift into reverse with Linux. While I am not a die hard blind MS fan it does have wide support in software and hardware.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on June 03, 2014, 08:06:12 AM
...While I am not a die hard blind MS fan it does have wide support in software and hardware.

Jeesh, you could have fooled us all with the way you blow the horn for Microshaft and Windoze.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K3DCW on June 03, 2014, 08:39:13 AM
If you give 8.1 a try, you'll be satisfied.  If you give Win 7 a try, you'll be satisfied.  So, it is a win-win whichever way you go.

73

Dave
K3DCW

While I like and run Linux, that is one of the better thought out arguments for Windows I have seen in a while!  It is refreshing to not see yet another M$ Fanboy, but someone who actually thought it out!  THANK YOU!  I still like Linux better, and would always recommend it, but finally a decent discussion...  Again, thank you!

I run Windows 8.1, OS X and Linux here in my shack/home office and love them all.  Windows 8.1 is my primary ham radio OS simply because so much good software is written for it.  Linux is fun as well and while it is rock-solid and also has great ham radio software, I still use Linux primarily as a way to satisfy my need to tinker.  Finally, OS X is my "home" machine, where I do most of my "work". 

All three are good, all three have their strengths and weaknesses, and all three have a place in my shack/office.  If I had to choose only one for all-around use, it would be OS X. However, if I was looking at one OS to use for ham radio only, it would be Windows 8.1.  Fortunately I don't have to choose and I can run all three just fine; turf wars and eHam diatribes aside. 

73

Dave
K3DCW


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KU4UV on June 03, 2014, 11:54:13 AM
Some computer manufacturers such as Dell still give you the option of choosing between Win7 or Win8 when you buy a new computer.  Most of the stores that sell new computers will have Win8 as the operating system.  I am sticking with Win7 for the foreseeable future.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: AA4PB on June 03, 2014, 01:13:34 PM
Yes, but Dell charges more for Win7 than they do for Win8.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 03, 2014, 01:59:43 PM
Some computer manufacturers such as Dell still give you the option of choosing between Win7 or Win8 when you buy a new computer.  Most of the stores that sell new computers will have Win8 as the operating system.  I am sticking with Win7 for the foreseeable future.

Pay a new system price for a OS that is loosing full support in 7 months is kinda stupid. After 7 months their will be no updates or enhancements to Win 7 period. It will only have extended security fix updates and nothing more. I do not think many understand this.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: NK7Z on June 03, 2014, 03:00:38 PM
Some computer manufacturers such as Dell still give you the option of choosing between Win7 or Win8 when you buy a new computer.  Most of the stores that sell new computers will have Win8 as the operating system.  I am sticking with Win7 for the foreseeable future.

Pay a new system price for a OS that is loosing full support in 7 months is kinda stupid. After 7 months their will be no updates or enhancements to Win 7 period. It will only have extended security fix updates and nothing more. I do not think many understand this.
I suspect most that are getting Win7, are looking for another long run like XP.  While I hope M$ does this, I doubt they will make the same mistake a second time...  They are having enough trouble getting people off of 7 now...  :)  I expect all of this jostling of OS's, will just up the number of folks using Linux.  Linux has really seen some improvements in the past two years...


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 03, 2014, 03:55:31 PM
Some computer manufacturers such as Dell still give you the option of choosing between Win7 or Win8 when you buy a new computer.  Most of the stores that sell new computers will have Win8 as the operating system.  I am sticking with Win7 for the foreseeable future.

Pay a new system price for a OS that is loosing full support in 7 months is kinda stupid. After 7 months their will be no updates or enhancements to Win 7 period. It will only have extended security fix updates and nothing more. I do not think many understand this.
I suspect most that are getting Win7, are looking for another long run like XP.  While I hope M$ does this, I doubt they will make the same mistake a second time...  They are having enough trouble getting people off of 7 now...  :)  I expect all of this jostling of OS's, will just up the number of folks using Linux.  Linux has really seen some improvements in the past two years...

I do not look for linux to gain anything in this. MS will kill 7 when it can because they are moving to a new environment. Those that cling to 7 like XP will fall behind and loose in end. Trouble is you cannot tell them, they will have to find out the hard way.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W4KYR on June 03, 2014, 04:23:47 PM
Microsoft will release Windows 9 on April 2015 and they are reportedly bringing back their traditional GUI which is what most of the public wants. Until then there is always Windows 7 which is supported until 2020. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/lifecycle

For what it's worth, Vista is supported till 2017. So you can always get a used Vista machine next to nothing these days and use it until Windows 9 comes out in 2015. Or get off the "Microsoft Upgrade Train" and go with Apple, Linux or Android.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 03, 2014, 05:03:23 PM
Microsoft will release Windows 9 on April 2015 and they are reportedly bringing back their traditional GUI which is what most of the public wants. Until then there is always Windows 7 which is supported until 2020. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/lifecycle

What some old stuck in the mud types might want. It is not what I heard. 9 is going to be a tweaked 8 like 7 was tweaked vista. 10 will bring further changes. To back peddle would be a death sentence because 7 type GUI has no place it smart phone and tablet world. Apple got foot in door because MS should have made 7 more like 8


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: NK7Z on June 03, 2014, 06:06:47 PM
I do not look for linux to gain anything in this. MS will kill 7 when it can because they are moving to a new environment. Those that cling to 7 like XP will fall behind and loose in end. Trouble is you cannot tell them, they will have to find out the hard way.
Linux has already made gains, and the folks wanting to run XP, and or 7, will probably get good service for the next few years, assuming they are very careful.  I reinstalled Windows XP on my Ham radio machine, then took a clone of it, and put the clone on a drive I keep around for recovery.  I keep my log on a linux box.  The XP machine uses the shared drive for logging etc...Works well.  If the windows XP box explodes, the log is in a safe linux machine, and I just recover the clone.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W9CLL on June 03, 2014, 07:12:22 PM
. Apple got foot in door because MS should have made 7 more like 8
The IPad was the best tablet and only got passed because of competition. Apple has always been a innovator and hopefully will continue to be now that Jobs has passed. Micro$oft has never been an innovator and because of that will never be a player in the tablet market even though their HW is very good. Ubuntu has a very viable OS for tablets that works well and could be a real competition for Android if the hw vendors adopt it. I have a Samsung Galaxy running Ubuntu tablet OS, smoother then Android, better memory management and very cool desktop (launcher).


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KC4YJI on June 04, 2014, 10:22:24 PM
I will have to upgrade at some point. I have a vista laptop, and win 7 starter netbook, but the desktop is XP. I have hung on to it because I use it for drawing cabinets using "Generic CADD". This is a DOS program. I have used this program for about 19 years. Yes, I could (and have several times) buy a new program for windows. The problem is I don't want to spend 40-80 hours to learn a new program, just to be right back where I started. I have tried 6-7 new programs over the years. I can draft about 10 times faster using "Generic CADD" than I can using "General CADD" (General CADD is the windows version of Generic CADD). I can literaly type in a two letter shortcut much faster than I can move the mouse to click on something. Not to mention that I can type in a shortcut with one hand while doing something else with the mouse.

I am not afraid to learn something new , and don't mind change. I don't like to take 3 hours to do a 30 min job. And this is just one program, not to mention the other 10 or so I use on a regular basis. I don't get new programs every year simply because I don't want to waste time to relearn what I already know.

I view me computer as a tool, to get a job done. Just like a hammer. A hammers job is to drive and pull nails. I don't buy a new hammer every year when the new ones come out. I don't up grade to a newer model unless the new one helps me finish the job faster. I don't mind spending the time and money learning a new hammer if it makes the job faster or easier. The time and money I spent on a pneumatic hammer was well spent. It was an upgrade, made the job both easier and faster. This translates to making more money per hour.

My computers is a tool, to get a job done. It is not about the using a dated OS or program. This is about doing a job. I have put off getting a new computer for the same reason I don't want to trade my pneumatic hammer for a regular one.

I think the new win metro would be great on a tablet. And I would love to be able to run the same program on my tablet that I do on my desktop. But a tablet is not a production tool. Yes it has its place, and is becoming more of a production tool as they improve. But my desktop is a production tool, it is used for a job, not entertainment.

When I am working on a job, weather it be drafting, desktop publishing, mp3 editing, photo-editing, video editing, ect. I prefer to stick with what I know. This saves time and that translates into money.

I have been a cabinet maker for about 21 years. And when someone wants a price on a set of cabinets, I want to draw them and have them something to look at as quickly and as easily as possible. With 19 years of using the same program, this does not take long. With my current program, I can make about $400 an hour (while drafting). When I "upgrade" I will make about 1/10 that an hour.

When I "upgrade", I want to have to relearn only once and be able to use it for a long time. That is where I am coming from when I think of upgrading. I have heard very good things about win 7, and bad things about win 8 (although it seems it is just the way the  new metro interface is). I want to relearn a OS that will be here for a long time, so I am considering win 8.1, simply because it should be supported longer than win 7. I will probably install "Classic Shell". That should get me back to a production machine again.



 


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 05, 2014, 06:28:04 AM
The IPad was the best tablet and only got passed because of competition. Apple has always been a innovator and hopefully will continue to be now that Jobs has passed. Micro$oft has never been an innovator and because of that will never be a player in the tablet market even though their HW is very good. Ubuntu has a very viable OS for tablets that works well and could be a real competition for Android if the hw vendors adopt it. I have a Samsung Galaxy running Ubuntu tablet OS, smoother then Android, better memory management and very cool desktop (launcher).

The iPad got passed? I don't think so. A cool desktop launcher does not make a good tablet.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 05, 2014, 06:32:25 AM
{snip}

My computers is a tool, to get a job done. It is not about the using a dated OS or program. This is about doing a job. I have put off getting a new computer for the same reason I don't want to trade my pneumatic hammer for a regular one.

I think the new win metro would be great on a tablet.

{snip}


Exactly. It's not about the Operating system, it's about the apps.

The thing people that have never actually tried Win 8.x don't see, is that the Metro Interface is not used for desktop apps. You have a standard desktop and apps are window'ed just like in Win 7. The biggest difference is the start menu. It looks like tiles but you can customize it down to just the few apps you use regularly and it's very useful. I find it faster to launch apps than the old start button menu structure.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: AE4RV on June 05, 2014, 06:48:18 AM
I get your well-made point, YJI, but the hammer analogy, while pertinent to your argument, leaves me cold. Of course you do not upgrade your hammer, why the heck would you? It's not like Moore's law is improving it by leaps and bounds every couple of years.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 05, 2014, 07:43:55 AM
. Apple got foot in door because MS should have made 7 more like 8
The IPad was the best tablet and only got passed because of competition.

Ipad was the best for a bit only because THERE WAS NO REAL COMPETITION for a while. Once competition arose to challenge Ipad was easily over taken and it will never hold crown again. Apples success in these ventures lasts only as long as followers drink the koolaid. Apple lack the creativity to sustain anything long term. Their keep it all in house and do it their way or not at all mentality will choke them again as it has in past. MS knows it has to change to new techno world and knows it will be painful to many. Apple on other hand has not really changed anything in Ipad/Iphone world and fade is dying and with it sales. When Apple recently tried to block sales of Samsung phone it was a sign of its hey days ending because it knows it lacks resources and innovation to compete otherwise and will wither without help.     


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KF6QEX on June 05, 2014, 10:20:46 PM
I get your well-made point, YJI, but the hammer analogy, while pertinent to your argument, leaves me cold. Of course you do not upgrade your hammer, why the heck would you? It's not like Moore's law is improving it by leaps and bounds every couple of years.

You are confusing Moore;s law that usually refers to hardware leaps and bounds with Moron's law where software speed decreases with each new version.
The most common misconception with software is that the "new" version has to look and feel different and along the way to accomplish the same task you now have to learn "the new way". It's software. Soft as in not hard, rigid, fixed, non configurable, written in stone.
SO to spring the "ribbon" interface in office in 2007 was one of the most idiotic things ever done. All of a sudden, it feels like you never user word or excel before, because ...you haven't. Having a way to switch to the original style interface would have been the perfect thing.

It' no different that your mother coming in and re arranging your wife's kitchen cabinets because her way "is better". Give it a try and see what happens.




Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 08, 2014, 01:55:42 PM
...While I am not a die hard blind MS fan it does have wide support in software and hardware.

Jeesh, you could have fooled us all with the way you blow the horn for Microshaft and Windoze.

I have just always assumed that he is a reputation manager employed by MS directly or a PR firm hired by MS.  Sadly his defenses of Windows 8 all boil down to the same tired responses about how it's time to "upgrade" to a "touch screen world." 

I would like to see somebody convince me to get Windows 8 by explaining exactly what it can do that XP or 7 or OS X or Linux can't.  Of course it really can't do anything more than those other OSs, so I doubt anybody will try.

It's very telling that most "real" software like Solidworks, Matlab, Mathematica, Autocad, Maple, and so forth *ALL* still support XP. I know of several businesses that are all switching to Linux, FreeBSD, or the Mac because they do not want to replace a bunch of systems every few years as MS would like.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 08, 2014, 02:03:58 PM
. Apple got foot in door because MS should have made 7 more like 8
The IPad was the best tablet and only got passed because of competition.

Ipad was the best for a bit only because THERE WAS NO REAL COMPETITION for a while. Once competition arose to challenge Ipad was easily over taken and it will never hold crown again. Apples success in these ventures lasts only as long as followers drink the koolaid. Apple lack the creativity to sustain anything long term. Their keep it all in house and do it their way or not at all mentality will choke them again as it has in past. MS knows it has to change to new techno world and knows it will be painful to many. Apple on other hand has not really changed anything in Ipad/Iphone world and fade is dying and with it sales. When Apple recently tried to block sales of Samsung phone it was a sign of its hey days ending because it knows it lacks resources and innovation to compete otherwise and will wither without help.    

Why would you just tell flat out lies like this?  I mean, if you are going to tell lies at least make up stuff that people can not easily look up.  Just so you know, the iPad has never been "easily taken over", as it is still the best selling tablet on the market, as well as the most profitable.

Anyway there still isn't any real competition for the iPad.  The Android tablets are OK but they spy on you like crazy (thanks Google) and software compatibility is a total nightmare.  The Surface is a bit of a joke, and MS loses money on each one sold AFAIK!  I suppose they will just shuffle losses from division to division again like they were busted doing earlier this year to illegally conceal enormous losses from their shareholders.

MS is doomed, don't push this dead-end, brain-dead technology on your fellow hams.  We have tolerated Windows and MS's dirty tricks and low quality for far too long already.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 08, 2014, 03:43:34 PM
I have hung on to it because I use it for drawing cabinets using "Generic CADD". This is a DOS program.

If this DOS program is essential to you, you really need to look at DOSBox.  It is a full virtual DOS computer that can run windowed or full screen, and it is *the best* solution for running old DOS software.  DOSBox runs on almost any computer, so you can just install your CAD software and move it from computer to computer without ever having to re-install it ever again.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 08, 2014, 06:26:35 PM
 Just so you know, the iPad has never been "easily taken over", as it is still the best selling tablet on the market, as well as the most profitable.

Apple Ipad lost number one slot last year. Guess you have had your head in sand. It slips more everyday. It IS NOT number one selling tablet OS.

Anyway there still isn't any real competition for the iPad.  The Android tablets are OK but they spy on you like crazy (thanks Google) and software compatibility is a total nightmare.
 

When last time you used one? Since about Andriod 4.1x their has been very few problems.  Driod has matured a lot and grow while IOS has stayed the same with mere window dressing changes. When I use a Ipad it kinda feels like a school kids toy of sorts that gets old quick.

The Surface is a bit of a joke, and MS loses money on each one sold AFAIK!  I suppose they will just shuffle losses from division to division again like they were busted doing earlier this year to illegally conceal enormous losses from their shareholders.

Have you used a Surface? I have a clone of it in a Dell running WinRT 8.1 and it BLOWS IOS away big time. I use Win and Driod Tablets daily. Would not use a Ipad if you gave it to me. Too limited. Not even a micro SD slot. Lame. 



MS is doomed, don't push this dead-end, brain-dead technology on your fellow hams.  We have tolerated Windows and MS's dirty tricks and low quality for far too long already.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W9CLL on June 08, 2014, 07:27:03 PM
As much as I dislike Microsoft I think the Surface is one of the better tablets. M$ finally got one thing right.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 08, 2014, 10:10:10 PM
 Just so you know, the iPad has never been "easily taken over", as it is still the best selling tablet on the market, as well as the most profitable.

Apple Ipad lost number one slot last year. Guess you have had your head in sand. It slips more everyday. It IS NOT number one selling tablet OS.

Anyway there still isn't any real competition for the iPad.  The Android tablets are OK but they spy on you like crazy (thanks Google) and software compatibility is a total nightmare.
 

When last time you used one? Since about Andriod 4.1x their has been very few problems.  Driod has matured a lot and grow while IOS has stayed the same with mere window dressing changes. When I use a Ipad it kinda feels like a school kids toy of sorts that gets old quick.

The Surface is a bit of a joke, and MS loses money on each one sold AFAIK!  I suppose they will just shuffle losses from division to division again like they were busted doing earlier this year to illegally conceal enormous losses from their shareholders.

Have you used a Surface? I have a clone of it in a Dell running WinRT 8.1 and it BLOWS IOS away big time. I use Win and Driod Tablets daily. Would not use a Ipad if you gave it to me. Too limited. Not even a micro SD slot. Lame. 



MS is doomed, don't push this dead-end, brain-dead technology on your fellow hams.  We have tolerated Windows and MS's dirty tricks and low quality for far too long already.

1.  "Android" outsells Apple devices, but this is including every device from every manufacturer that sells anything Android.  No single Android tablet manufacturer even comes close to Apple, whether you count shipped units or profits.  Anyway it's tough to even get good numbers out of Android manufacturers - Google talks about "activations" but who knows what they mean, and Samsung talks about shipped units but they don't mention how many were sold.  I figure if there was no reason to be shady about how many phones you sell to the customer, you wouldn't be, but Google and Samsung both choose to be shady.  I wonder why?

2.  iOS is like OS X, where most of the changes are very minor over time.  If you design a good OS from the get-go you don't have to redo it from the ground up every year.

3.  I have used a Surface and it'd be great if it had better real life battery time, and a different OS.  Damn that sucker gets hot too!  Nah I'm off the Windows treadmill and I'm not going back.  Not to mention that Windows 8 has freakin' banner ads built into the system!


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 08, 2014, 10:12:11 PM
Just so you know, the iPad has never been "easily taken over", as it is still the best selling tablet on the market, as well as the most profitable.

Apple Ipad lost number one slot last year. Guess you have had your head in sand. It slips more everyday. It IS NOT number one selling tablet OS.

Anyway there still isn't any real competition for the iPad.  The Android tablets are OK but they spy on you like crazy (thanks Google) and software compatibility is a total nightmare.
 

When last time you used one? Since about Andriod 4.1x their has been very few problems.  Driod has matured a lot and grow while IOS has stayed the same with mere window dressing changes. When I use a Ipad it kinda feels like a school kids toy of sorts that gets old quick.

The Surface is a bit of a joke, and MS loses money on each one sold AFAIK!  I suppose they will just shuffle losses from division to division again like they were busted doing earlier this year to illegally conceal enormous losses from their shareholders.

Have you used a Surface? I have a clone of it in a Dell running WinRT 8.1 and it BLOWS IOS away big time. I use Win and Driod Tablets daily. Would not use a Ipad if you gave it to me. Too limited. Not even a micro SD slot. Lame.  



MS is doomed, don't push this dead-end, brain-dead technology on your fellow hams.  We have tolerated Windows and MS's dirty tricks and low quality for far too long already.

1.  "Android" outsells Apple devices, but this is including every device from every manufacturer that sells anything Android.  No single Android tablet manufacturer even comes close to Apple, whether you count shipped units or profits.  Anyway it's tough to even get good numbers out of Android manufacturers - Google talks about "activations" but who knows what they mean, and Samsung talks about shipped units but they don't mention how many were sold.  I figure if there was no reason to be shady about how many phones you sell to the customer, you wouldn't be, but Google and Samsung both choose to be shady.  I wonder why?  Anyway this is actually good for Apple, while their competitors are trying to out-do one another in a race to the bottom, they can just sit back and laugh and rake in the cash.

2.  iOS is like OS X, where most of the changes are very minor over time.  If you design a good OS from the get-go you don't have to redo it from the ground up every year.

3.  I have used a Surface and it'd be great if it had better real life battery time, and a different OS.  Damn that sucker gets hot too!  Nah I'm off the Windows treadmill and I'm not going back.  Not to mention that Windows 8 has freakin' banner ads built into the system!


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 09, 2014, 04:42:12 AM
1.  "Android" outsells Apple devices, but this is including every device from every manufacturer that sells anything Android.  No single Android tablet manufacturer even comes close to Apple, whether you count shipped units or profits.

Kinda a irrelevant comment because Samsung is not only Droid tablet maker just like HP is not only Windows PC maker duh. Android is Android regardless of who built it they are buying OS. BTW Samsung alone nearly tripled its own market share while Apple lost about 35 percent last year alone and will loose more this year. MS will gain more traction with time too.   

2.  iOS is like OS X, where most of the changes are very minor over time.  If you design a good OS from the get-go you don't have to redo it from the ground up every year.

This is a bit of a joke because they are falling behind because they are not changing. Example, how do you multitask split window on a Iphone or tablet? You cannot but you can on Droid and Win 8.1 tablets. It is Apples "do it our way" mentality that will kill it just like it did over 20 years ago when it had PC market and lost it. They lacked vision then and now long term.

3.  I have used a Surface and it'd be great if it had better real life battery time, and a different OS.  Damn that sucker gets hot too!  Nah I'm off the Windows treadmill and I'm not going back.  Not to mention that Windows 8 has freakin' banner ads built into the system!

The original Surface has long been replaced. Maybe we should talk about old Ipads too? In first tablet MS was limited to use the few CPU's available but that has changed and so has battery life. My old Dell RT tablet has excellent battery life and runs cool too. Dell used Snapdragon 400 in its tablet which was more efficient than Tegra 3 MS used in first RT tablet. MS now uses a advanced Tegra 4 in Surface 2 that is a lot more powerful and efficient. MS also makes Surface 2 pro series that are full Win 8x PC's in a tablet and more efficient Intel CPU's too. Intel CPU's are making it into Droid tablets too. (i have one of those too) BTW never seen any banners on my tablets.

The point is industry evolves and when Apple try to take on whole market they loose in end because too many giants waking up and working against them. From CPU makers to displays and chipsets and packaging there is this innovation that Apple lacks long term. Apples efforts on trying unsuccessfully to stifle market in court would be better spent on cross licensing their OS and letting others innovate on it but that window is closing too.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 09, 2014, 06:28:43 AM
This is a bit of a joke because they are falling behind because they are not changing. Example, how do you multitask split window on a Iphone or tablet? You cannot but you can on Droid and Win 8.1 tablets. It is Apples "do it our way" mentality that will kill it just like it did over 20 years ago when it had PC market and lost it. They lacked vision then and now long term.

This is the argument I don't buy. Why would I want split screen anything on a phone? The screen is too small. Now a tablet, maybe but I would rather just switch apps. I can switch from app to app where I left off on each with the iPad. Copt/Paste from one app to another.

Someone mentioned SD slots . . So what? I don't care about SD slots on my tablets. I don't even use them on my phone. With online storage line DropBox/Box.net etc I think they are becoming less needed. There is simply not that much data that I need on my phone. If I need heavy duty data or app capability, that's what the laptop is for.

I think too many people are trying to make tablets out to be laptop replacements and non of them are there yet. Unless the only thing you do with a laptop is browse the web, then maybe.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 09, 2014, 06:54:56 AM
This is the argument I don't buy. Why would I want split screen anything on a phone? The screen is too small. Now a tablet, maybe but I would rather just switch apps. I can switch from app to app where I left off on each with the iPad. Copt/Paste from one app to another.

Give the very small and low res screen on a Iphone I agree there it is not practical but it is on Android phone with larger high res displays and tablets. Windows too. You can video chat and look something up on tablet/phone, read mail etc at same time. You always dismiss or ignore big short comings in Apple stuff to defend it. This is why they will loose in end.

Someone mentioned SD slots . . So what? I don't care about SD slots on my tablets. I don't even use them on my phone. With online storage line DropBox/Box.net etc I think they are becoming less needed. There is simply not that much data that I need on my phone. If I need heavy duty data or app capability, that's what the laptop is for.


In today market of cheap micro SD it is silly to not have a slot for media. But see the Apple koolaid wants you to pay them 100 or 200 more for 15 or 25 bucks more of ram respectfully. They have you blind sided. Same about lack of USB support.

I think too many people are trying to make tablets out to be laptop replacements and non of them are there yet. Unless the only thing you do with a laptop is browse the web, then maybe.

None are out there in Apple world and never likely will be but there are some Surface pro tablets that can today. My RT tablet does most laptop functions and has Office 2013 and Outlook for free. One day the koolaid will loose its appeal for you as it has for others. I used to be a diehard BlackBerry person for many years and still miss some things it did so well like Email and messaging but I changed and glad I did overall and moved forward. On day you will see the light too. I just read Intel is launching a new series of mobile CPU's with latest LTE built into chip that supports Droid and Windows. Future is bleak for Apple on its current path.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: AG6WT on June 09, 2014, 07:58:07 AM

Someone mentioned SD slots . . So what? I don't care about SD slots on my tablets. I don't even use them on my phone. With online storage line DropBox/Box.net etc I think they are becoming less needed. There is simply not that much data that I need on my phone. If I need heavy duty data or app capability, that's what the laptop is for.


You'll want a SD slot if you store a lot of movies. Many people are using their phones and tablets to watch movies while on travel where they don't have high speed wi-fi. If you don't have an SD slot, your viewing library is limited to what you can fit on the resident memory. A typical HD movie will take 2-5 GB.

If you take a lot of pictures or movies you'll want an SD slot. Most phones and tablets can take high quality picture and record video in HD. Camera and camcorder sales our down since most people are satisfied with the quality produced by recent vintage phones and tablets.  Pictures and especially video can fill up a devices memory very quickly. Uploading your content to your cloud service is a possibility but if you have GB's of files, you are going to need a very fast connection. On the road that is often NOT the case. If you are running out of space, the easiest thing to do is to put in a new, empty SD card then do all your uploads when you get home.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: HAMMYGUY on June 11, 2014, 10:40:33 AM
Windows 8 was the best present Microsoft has ever given Apple.  

Why would I want to boot into the "metro" screen on a desktop or laptop?  Why did I have to download Windows 8.1 for two machines that use 8.0?  Not to mentioned it was a very large download on our back country slow DSL.  Even after the "upgrade" it takes a little bit of searching to click the taskbar and find the appropriate box to click under "navigation".   Then it will begin to respond more like Windows 7.  

If it weren't for the hassles of finding drivers to these two very new machines, I'd dump Window 8/8.1 for the much more civilized interface of Windows 7. Just recently my employer finally upgraded to Win 7.  Only the abandonment of Win XP finally forced the change.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 11, 2014, 05:19:31 PM
Windows 8 was the best present Microsoft has ever given Apple.  

Why would I want to boot into the "metro" screen on a desktop or laptop?  Why did I have to download Windows 8.1 for two machines that use 8.0?  Not to mentioned it was a very large download on our back country slow DSL.  Even after the "upgrade" it takes a little bit of searching to click the taskbar and find the appropriate box to click under "navigation".   Then it will begin to respond more like Windows 7.  

If it weren't for the hassles of finding drivers to these two very new machines, I'd dump Window 8/8.1 for the much more civilized interface of Windows 7. Just recently my employer finally upgraded to Win 7.  Only the abandonment of Win XP finally forced the change.

Some embrace change and move forward with technology and some are stuck in a time warp and cling to past ways. If MS had clung to XP/7 still OS, THAT would of been a big gift to apple and buried MS in next few years. There is no place for 7 in the smart phone and tablet world. 7 is a dead end.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W9CLL on June 11, 2014, 07:38:11 PM
Micro$oft came too late to the party, while they make good products they are also rans. The Surface hardware is very good but crippled by an OS that no one wants. Droid has a very strong hold on the tablet market and IOS is second, Win 8 is barely hanging on in he tablet world.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 11, 2014, 08:52:46 PM
Windows 8 was the best present Microsoft has ever given Apple.  

Why would I want to boot into the "metro" screen on a desktop or laptop?  Why did I have to download Windows 8.1 for two machines that use 8.0?  Not to mentioned it was a very large download on our back country slow DSL.  Even after the "upgrade" it takes a little bit of searching to click the taskbar and find the appropriate box to click under "navigation".   Then it will begin to respond more like Windows 7.  

If it weren't for the hassles of finding drivers to these two very new machines, I'd dump Window 8/8.1 for the much more civilized interface of Windows 7. Just recently my employer finally upgraded to Win 7.  Only the abandonment of Win XP finally forced the change.

Some embrace change and move forward with technology and some are stuck in a time warp and cling to past ways. If MS had clung to XP/7 still OS, THAT would of been a big gift to apple and buried MS in next few years. There is no place for 7 in the smart phone and tablet world. 7 is a dead end.

What practical computing tasks can a person accomplish with Windows 8 that they can not accomplish with XP?  Would you care to address this question?

Of course not, you can't do anything with 8 that you couldn't do with XP.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KA5PIU on June 12, 2014, 04:16:30 AM
Hello.

YES! that is the problem.
Windows 8 does NOTHING that XP can not.
So, Micro$oft is now in this campaign making it sound like XP is going to simply go away.
Windows 8 has features that nobody wants.
Sure, it can support dozens and dozens of cores, it needs it.
But, XP running on an 800 MHz machine is just as fast!
Run XP on a 1200 MHz machine, and it is FASTER!
That is the whole point, what is Micro$oft bringing the consumer?
Unlike a fancy sports car, computers are not sexy, so screw that.
Unlike a nice luxury car, computers are not a status symbol.
It is like an excavator, anybody can operate one, and although it might be impressive at first, when you realize that a wetback who can not even read in Spanish can run one well?


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 12, 2014, 04:40:35 AM
Micro$oft came too late to the party, while they make good products they are also rans. The Surface hardware is very good but crippled by an OS that no one wants. Droid has a very strong hold on the tablet market and IOS is second, Win 8 is barely hanging on in he tablet world.

It will take some time to get some traction but it will get a foothold that will grow. Most likely looser will be Apple because it is not changing and evolving enough. I have a Win RT tablet and it blows Apple and Droid away. It just lacks apps.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 12, 2014, 04:49:02 AM
Hello.

YES! that is the problem.
Windows 8 does NOTHING that XP can not.
So, Micro$oft is now in this campaign making it sound like XP is going to simply go away.
Windows 8 has features that nobody wants.
Sure, it can support dozens and dozens of cores, it needs it.
But, XP running on an 800 MHz machine is just as fast!
Run XP on a 1200 MHz machine, and it is FASTER!
That is the whole point, what is Micro$oft bringing the consumer?
Unlike a fancy sports car, computers are not sexy, so screw that.
Unlike a nice luxury car, computers are not a status symbol.
It is like an excavator, anybody can operate one, and although it might be impressive at first, when you realize that a wetback who can not even read in Spanish can run one well?


I see this a lot from people stuck in past and technology challenged. Hardware has changed and so has the web and technology. The only apps 8 will not run are old poorly written apps that XP tolerated because it fully supported old 16 bit Windows code and sloppy poorly written 32bit code.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on June 12, 2014, 07:22:55 PM
Some time to gain traction??  Tell us another one.  They introduced Win 8, and the response was so bad they had to rush to introduce Win 8.1.  And the response still isn't there after months of giveaways and special favors to get people to accept it.

Win 8 and 8.1 is a flop, Microsoft isn't getting what they want--a dual purpose OS that runs on both platforms--and nobody (manufacturers) want Win 8.1 for their tablets or smartphone anyway.  Traditional systems are losing market share, but they're not disappearing--AND WON'T, not for a long, long time.  THAT is where Microsoft is strongest, and that's where they should have stayed instead of gambling on a loser of a dual purpose OS that is doing nothing but giving them a black eye that they may not recover from.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 12, 2014, 10:12:18 PM
Hello.

YES! that is the problem.
Windows 8 does NOTHING that XP can not.
So, Micro$oft is now in this campaign making it sound like XP is going to simply go away.
Windows 8 has features that nobody wants.
Sure, it can support dozens and dozens of cores, it needs it.
But, XP running on an 800 MHz machine is just as fast!
Run XP on a 1200 MHz machine, and it is FASTER!
That is the whole point, what is Micro$oft bringing the consumer?
Unlike a fancy sports car, computers are not sexy, so screw that.
Unlike a nice luxury car, computers are not a status symbol.
It is like an excavator, anybody can operate one, and although it might be impressive at first, when you realize that a wetback who can not even read in Spanish can run one well?


I see this a lot from people stuck in past and technology challenged. Hardware has changed and so has the web and technology. The only apps 8 will not run are old poorly written apps that XP tolerated because it fully supported old 16 bit Windows code and sloppy poorly written 32bit code.

What a lot of crap.  8 obsoletes tons of useful hardware and software and people aren't standing for that kind of awful customer service any more.  I read a while back that the most popular option at Dell is not RAM or extra drive space, but the Windows 7 "downgrade."


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 13, 2014, 04:28:04 AM
I see this a lot from people stuck in past and technology challenged. Hardware has changed and so has the web and technology. The only apps 8 will not run are old poorly written apps that XP tolerated because it fully supported old 16 bit Windows code and sloppy poorly written 32bit code.

What a lot of crap.  8 obsoletes tons of useful hardware and software and people aren't standing for that kind of awful customer service any more.  I read a while back that the most popular option at Dell is not RAM or extra drive space, but the Windows 7 "downgrade."

Useful depends on a point of view. Yes, a 10 year old machine could be useful to someone. But I don't blame MS for moving forward and ending support for old stuff. If they had to keep code in Windows for all the old stuff, while useful for some, Windows would then be bigger, more bloated and actually less secure and useful in it's own right. A total re-write to accommodate old hardware doesn't make sense either. At some point MS should move on and if people want to run old useful hardware then they need to live with old operating systems or Linux.

Win 8 has sold over 200 Million licenses. If as a lot of people are saying, it's not wanted, that's a lot of licenses. Yes it's a bit behind Win 7 in says for the same time frame, but I doubt it's as big of a flop as people think. 



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W4KYR on June 13, 2014, 05:25:30 AM
I see this a lot from people stuck in past and technology challenged. Hardware has changed and so has the web and technology. The only apps 8 will not run are old poorly written apps that XP tolerated because it fully supported old 16 bit Windows code and sloppy poorly written 32bit code.

What a lot of crap.  8 obsoletes tons of useful hardware and software and people aren't standing for that kind of awful customer service any more.  I read a while back that the most popular option at Dell is not RAM or extra drive space, but the Windows 7 "downgrade."

Useful depends on a point of view. Yes, a 10 year old machine could be useful to someone. But I don't blame MS for moving forward and ending support for old stuff. If they had to keep code in Windows for all the old stuff, while useful for some, Windows would then be bigger, more bloated and actually less secure and useful in it's own right. A total re-write to accommodate old hardware doesn't make sense either. At some point MS should move on and if people want to run old useful hardware then they need to live with old operating systems or Linux.

Win 8 has sold over 200 Million licenses. If as a lot of people are saying, it's not wanted, that's a lot of licenses. Yes it's a bit behind Win 7 in says for the same time frame, but I doubt it's as big of a flop as people think. 



How many were downgrades to Windows 7? How many had to install "Classic Shell"? Do we know the number? Businesses find that Windows 8 is " disruptive to productivity and a needless cost that would require employee retraining". If consumers still want Windows 7 , read below.

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9246387/Microsoft_sets_Oct._31_as_stop_date_for_Windows_7_consumer_PC_sales

"Microsoft now notes that Oct. 31, 2014, is the end-of-sales date for new PCs equipped with Windows 7 Home Basic, Home Premium or Ultimate."


".... Microsoft will allow computer makers such as Lenovo, HP and Dell to continue selling PCs with Windows 7 Professional until at least February 2015."


"Windows 7 has become the standard version for businesses, which have spurned Windows 8, largely because of its two-user interface (UI) model, which they consider disruptive to productivity and a needless cost that would require employee retraining."

"Most analysts believe that Windows 7 will remain the most popular Microsoft operating system deployed by companies for years to come.

"There's a good chance that enterprises will stay on Windows 7 as long as possible," said Gartner analyst Michael Silver in an October 2013 interview. If his prediction turns out to be accurate, Windows 7 may reprise the stubborn persistence of Windows XP, the nearly-13-year-old OS that Microsoft will retire in April."


.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 13, 2014, 06:05:30 AM
I see this a lot from people stuck in past and technology challenged. Hardware has changed and so has the web and technology. The only apps 8 will not run are old poorly written apps that XP tolerated because it fully supported old 16 bit Windows code and sloppy poorly written 32bit code.

What a lot of crap.  8 obsoletes tons of useful hardware and software and people aren't standing for that kind of awful customer service any more.  I read a while back that the most popular option at Dell is not RAM or extra drive space, but the Windows 7 "downgrade."

Useful depends on a point of view. Yes, a 10 year old machine could be useful to someone. But I don't blame MS for moving forward and ending support for old stuff. If they had to keep code in Windows for all the old stuff, while useful for some, Windows would then be bigger, more bloated and actually less secure and useful in it's own right. A total re-write to accommodate old hardware doesn't make sense either. At some point MS should move on and if people want to run old useful hardware then they need to live with old operating systems or Linux.

Win 8 has sold over 200 Million licenses. If as a lot of people are saying, it's not wanted, that's a lot of licenses. Yes it's a bit behind Win 7 in says for the same time frame, but I doubt it's as big of a flop as people think. 



How many were downgrades to Windows 7? How many had to install "Classic Shell"? Do we know the number? Businesses find that Windows 8 is " disruptive to productivity and a needless cost that would require employee retraining". If consumers still want Windows 7 , read below.

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9246387/Microsoft_sets_Oct._31_as_stop_date_for_Windows_7_consumer_PC_sales

"Microsoft now notes that Oct. 31, 2014, is the end-of-sales date for new PCs equipped with Windows 7 Home Basic, Home Premium or Ultimate."


".... Microsoft will allow computer makers such as Lenovo, HP and Dell to continue selling PCs with Windows 7 Professional until at least February 2015."


"Windows 7 has become the standard version for businesses, which have spurned Windows 8, largely because of its two-user interface (UI) model, which they consider disruptive to productivity and a needless cost that would require employee retraining."

"Most analysts believe that Windows 7 will remain the most popular Microsoft operating system deployed by companies for years to come.

"There's a good chance that enterprises will stay on Windows 7 as long as possible," said Gartner analyst Michael Silver in an October 2013 interview. If his prediction turns out to be accurate, Windows 7 may reprise the stubborn persistence of Windows XP, the nearly-13-year-old OS that Microsoft will retire in April."


That article is 4 months old and the quote from Gartner, who always is right?, is 8 months old. I know of several large companies that are adopting 8.1. The very large company I work for has both Win 7 and 8.1 as approved corporate laptop images. Companies will stay on 7, because it's still supported and easier than moving again. They probably recently just got to 7 after hanging on to XP for so long. 

I don't doubt that people will hang onto 7 also. I am using it on an older machine for my Ham Radio dedicated laptop. The laptop is too old for me to attempt Win 8 on and I don't want to go to Linux on it.

I wonder if most of the people who complain about Win 8 have actually used it? I don't mean walk up to a computer in Best Buy and check it out, I mean really use it. . . . I doubt it.

I was in the camp that complained about Win 8 and it's dumb Metro interface a year ago. I thought it was stupid for a laptop. I was at some company training last year (May 2013) and a guy was using Win 8. I asked him about it, told him the normal "Metro" complaint and he showed me his machine and how Win 8 had a normal desktop look that Win 7 has . . minus the start button. When I got home, later in 2013 I loaded Win 8 on my work laptop when my company started releasing Beta corporate images to early adopters. I found that actually using Win 8, I never had to look at a Metro app. Everything works like I expected with the exception of the start button/menu. I came to not miss the start button. The Windows key on the keyboard is actually useful bringing up the start screen. That didn't require any training. I am now on Win 8.1 on my work laptop and it's better and there is nothing about Win 7 that I miss being on 8.1.

Now that said, the Metro interface for apps is dumb for non-touch screen computers like laptops. I don't see the tiled start screen as a Metro thing, it's just a different start "menu".  It's easy to customize for the apps that I use. I took all the tiles away for things I don't use everyday and that pared down the start screen to a single non-scrolling screen and it's very fast to start programs. I find I don't have to wade through the Win 7 menu to find and start apps. It's faster than the Win 7 menu structure I think.

Before you call me a MS fanboy . . My home machine is a Mac running OSX. I also use Linux for a small special purpose virtual machine So I use/own 3 different operating systems. 


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: VK6IS on June 13, 2014, 06:07:20 AM
Quote
Of course not, you can't do anything with 8 that you couldn't do with XP.

there is a lot of software that used to run on XP, - that won't run under win_8.
- M$O 2003 is just one, & there are others, as XP had a simply huge software list.

 each new M$ release needs another boost in hardware requirements,
so, win_8 will remove another pile of older hardware.
- you don't care?  neither does your local landfill, coz thats where it all goes.

and yeah - M$ has sold millions of copies, and so do the hardware suppliers that sell millions of PCs.
but - the new PC market has slowed, somewhat.

it's the upgrade market that doesn't like win_8
- you don't get a choice with your new PC. .. ..

Quote
My home machine is a Mac running OSX. I also use Linux for a small special purpose virtual machine So I use/own 3 different operating systems. 

which is how it should be.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on June 13, 2014, 06:11:46 AM
...Win 8 has sold over 200 Million licenses. If as a lot of people are saying, it's not wanted, that's a lot of licenses. Yes it's a bit behind Win 7 in says for the same time frame, but I doubt it's as big of a flop as people think.  

The ONLY reason that that many licenses have been sold is that they've been 'force sold.'  People buy a new computer from a supplier--and it comes with Win 8 installed.  That counts as a license 'sale' as it is, but what about the number of people who have either dumped that version and installed an earlier one that they already have--or whom have gone out and bought an earlier version of Windows to reinstall on that new computer?

Counting license sales isn't a good indicator of popularity for forced sales items.  A better one would be to see how many of the older systems have sold since the newer system was introduced--if it were possible, then do some figuring of that number versus the number of new license 'sales' done.

An even better one--how many of the new stand alone OS packages have been sold?  That is the OS package alone without hardware.  Compare that to the number of Win 7 packages sold during the same period.  Win 7, though it costs more, is still outselling Win 8 AND Win 8.1, hands down!


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 13, 2014, 01:52:28 PM
Quote
Of course not, you can't do anything with 8 that you couldn't do with XP.

there is a lot of software that used to run on XP, - that won't run under win_8.
- M$O 2003 is just one, & there are others, as XP had a simply huge software list.

I guess we should go back to MS DOS?  As I have said before XP supported sloppy 16/32bit code and 8 does not. As far as MS Office 2003, the reason it does not run is it is blocked because it is not secure and stopped getting updates long ago. Myself I like moving forward and not clinging to outdated software and hardware.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KD0REQ on June 13, 2014, 02:12:58 PM
corporations with a zillion-seat license for Windows have the option to downgrade using the current license on new PCs.  so that's a sale of, maybe, 3 pallets of Windows 8.  the machines end up running Windows 7.  Microsoft claims Windows 8 licenses were sold.

those license-sale numbers are pretty bogus.  the companies could run legally WFW 3.1 for all Microsoft cares, until they get a support call from IT.  it's still a Win8 license.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 13, 2014, 02:22:00 PM
Why bother with computers . . . Let's just go back to all paper logging etc.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W4KYR on June 13, 2014, 02:38:48 PM
I guess we should go back to MS DOS? 

In some cases, the answer is yes. Some of the LMR radios sold on ebay require DOS for their programming software to work. The software for the Icom M710 (to open the radio to all the ham bands) requires DOS. And in both cases require serial ports. I am sure there are other examples as well. This is why it pays to keep computers with older operating systems around the ham shack.
.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: AA4PB on June 13, 2014, 02:55:54 PM
That's the downhill slope. A company makes a radio and writes a configuration program that runs on the then latest version of DOS. MS comes along and discontinues selling DOS. The radio company is no longer selling that radio so they aren't going to invest the time and money to write a configuration program for a current operating system. The looser is the customer who has a perfectly good radio but no way to program it. Everything becomes a throw-away. That's pretty much the cost of technology.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: AH6RR on June 13, 2014, 04:32:18 PM
I guess I am one of the fools that happen to like Windows 8.1 it is SOOOOOOOOO much better than XP or 7 ever was. I have yet to have that dreaded BSOD that was most frequent with XP and somewhat less with 7. I just bought a Dell venue 8 pro tablet that runs a full version of 8.1 so I can access my home computer and do a little digital mode work while at work on my lunch break. I tried Linux for a short time but that is for people who like to tinker with the software some and there is not as much software for it as with windows and Apple is for rich folks who can throw their money away on software that there is not as much of for ham applications. And as far as the tablet market goes Apple is falling off it's high horse rapidly.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KF6QEX on June 13, 2014, 07:35:42 PM
Quote
Of course not, you can't do anything with 8 that you couldn't do with XP.

there is a lot of software that used to run on XP, - that won't run under win_8.
- M$O 2003 is just one, & there are others, as XP had a simply huge software list.

I guess we should go back to MS DOS?  As I have said before XP supported sloppy 16/32bit code and 8 does not. As far as MS Office 2003, the reason it does not run is it is blocked because it is not secure and stopped getting updates long ago. Myself I like moving forward and not clinging to outdated software and hardware.

MS-DOS 5 was great. Version 6 ....not so much
Office is secure as long as you don't open strange documents from strange people.
You waste less time this way anyway.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 14, 2014, 04:06:45 AM
Quote
Of course not, you can't do anything with 8 that you couldn't do with XP.

there is a lot of software that used to run on XP, - that won't run under win_8.
- M$O 2003 is just one, & there are others, as XP had a simply huge software list.

I guess we should go back to MS DOS?  As I have said before XP supported sloppy 16/32bit code and 8 does not. As far as MS Office 2003, the reason it does not run is it is blocked because it is not secure and stopped getting updates long ago. Myself I like moving forward and not clinging to outdated software and hardware.

MS-DOS 5 was great. Version 6 ....not so much
Office is secure as long as you don't open strange documents from strange people.
You waste less time this way anyway.


Office 2003 is best retired. It was not very secure and there a lot of Office documents in public domain and some could be tainted.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KF6QEX on June 14, 2014, 02:47:02 PM
Quote
Of course not, you can't do anything with 8 that you couldn't do with XP.

there is a lot of software that used to run on XP, - that won't run under win_8.
- M$O 2003 is just one, & there are others, as XP had a simply huge software list.

I guess we should go back to MS DOS?  As I have said before XP supported sloppy 16/32bit code and 8 does not. As far as MS Office 2003, the reason it does not run is it is blocked because it is not secure and stopped getting updates long ago. Myself I like moving forward and not clinging to outdated software and hardware.

MS-DOS 5 was great. Version 6 ....not so much
Office is secure as long as you don't open strange documents from strange people.
You waste less time this way anyway.


Office 2003 is best retired. It was not very secure and there a lot of Office documents in public domain and some could be tainted.

It's kinda like meeting people. You shake their hands and god knows where they have been and if they washed them. And yet it happens everyday. for the last few hundred years at least and we still don't live in personal bubbles to avoid contamination.

As for those documents that "could" be tainted. Sure they could and when someone figures out how to "tain" Office 2014 or Office 2019 documents. they will "retire" those as well. Instead of slapping MS upside the head for allowing .vbs files to be a) discguised by maining the interface "more friendly" by hiding extensions, and B) executed without warning from the old version of Outlook or word. or Excel .
But saying the old version is "best retired" because of the "possible tainted public domain documents" smells just as bad as it sounds.

I've always run it with scripts disabled only because it didn't want "something" happening I didn't know about whether it was "malicious" or not.

I 'm not that concerned about office 2003, since my Office 97 still runs fine on my XP machine :)


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KA5PIU on June 14, 2014, 04:48:24 PM
Hello.

And, that is the point.
If Micro$oft were in charge when I was growing up, I would have never touched a typewriter!


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 14, 2014, 05:08:34 PM
As for those documents that "could" be tainted. Sure they could and when someone figures out how to "tain" Office 2014 or Office 2019 documents. they will "retire" those as well. Instead of slapping MS upside the head for allowing .vbs files to be a) discguised by maining the interface "more friendly" by hiding extensions, and B) executed without warning from the old version of Outlook or word. or Excel .
But saying the old version is "best retired" because of the "possible tainted public domain documents" smells just as bad as it sounds.

You miss the point totally. During Office 97 and 2003 hey day security was not a concern. Starting with 2007 they made it more secure and added a LOT more features. They changed file format too. I like the extra whistles and bells on 2007 and 2010 especially in Outlook. Your are pretty naive if you think tainted documents is a idle threat. I have seen it happen and its not pretty.

I've always run it with scripts disabled only because it didn't want "something" happening I didn't know about whether it was "malicious" or not.

Again very naive if you think it is that easy to be safe with a old OS. 

I 'm not that concerned about office 2003, since my Office 97 still runs fine on my XP machine :)

Man you are in stone age.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: VK6IS on June 15, 2014, 05:40:48 AM
Quote
Man you are in stone age.

Meh: Iron Age:

still dual_boot win3.1 & win98se
- not kidding - it's a 486 DX100 w/ 32mb ram. ..


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W4KYR on June 15, 2014, 05:44:28 AM
Quote
Man you are in stone age.

Meh: Iron Age:

still dual_boot win3.1 & win98se
- not kidding - it's a 486 DX100 w/ 32mb ram. ..


What do you run on it?


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KV7W on June 15, 2014, 07:46:42 AM
Quote
Times have changed. Maybe you should look for a commodore 64 at swap meets. 

10 PRINT: "The Atari 800 has better graphics and the cassette drive is a better transition from reel than 5 1/4 floppy - how are people going to figure out which way that sucker goes in?"
20 END


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KF6QEX on June 16, 2014, 01:31:36 AM
As for those documents that "could" be tainted. Sure they could and when someone figures out how to "tain" Office 2014 or Office 2019 documents. they will "retire" those as well. Instead of slapping MS upside the head for allowing .vbs files to be a) discguised by maining the interface "more friendly" by hiding extensions, and B) executed without warning from the old version of Outlook or word. or Excel .
But saying the old version is "best retired" because of the "possible tainted public domain documents" smells just as bad as it sounds.

You miss the point totally. During Office 97 and 2003 hey day security was not a concern. Starting with 2007 they made it more secure and added a LOT more features. They changed file format too. I like the extra whistles and bells on 2007 and 2010 especially in Outlook. Your are pretty naive if you think tainted documents is a idle threat. I have seen it happen and its not pretty.

I've always run it with scripts disabled only because it didn't want "something" happening I didn't know about whether it was "malicious" or not.

Again very naive if you think it is that easy to be safe with a old OS. 

I 'm not that concerned about office 2003, since my Office 97 still runs fine on my XP machine :)

Man you are in stone age.

Naive behavior is to depend on the OS to "keep you safe".

I use technology to my advantage every day. Depending on the problem, someone gets to decide what technology what the right amount is and whether or not there is an advantage to scrapping what presently works and fulfills my objectives.  And that person is the same guy I see in the mirror every day. No one else.
What matters in the end is me getting to do what I want. Yes, my world is a pretty nice place. For me. 
I am a very bad consumer.
I like what I like and I stick with it until I decide do do something else.




Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 16, 2014, 04:11:41 AM

Naive behavior is to depend on the OS to "keep you safe".


Actually not. While you need to use some common sense you need a OS that is actively being updated/secured to meet threats that you cannot even begin to predict. There is also hardware changes it CPU to block againt certain boot level threat that XP was never designed to work with. Also with new OS (8x) the GUI opens new possibilities in programing.  XP had a good run but is day is long past.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: G8YMW on June 16, 2014, 09:11:01 AM
Quote

 

UX designer for Microsoft here.

 

I want to talk about why we chose Metro as the default instead of the desktop, and why this is good in the long run - especially for power users.

...but not in the way you might think.

 

At this point you're probably expecting me to say that it's designed for keyboard execution, or some thing about improved time trials for launching programs, or some other way of me trying to convince you that Metro is actually useful. I've talked about those in the past extensively on reddit, but for this discussion let's throw that all out the window. For this discussion, assume that Metro is s*** for power users (even if you don't believe it to be).

 

Now that we're on common ground, let's dive into the rabbit hole. Metro is a content consumption space. It is designed for casual users who only want to check facebook, view some photos, and maybe post a selfie to instagram. It's designed for your computer illiterate little sister, for grandpas who don't know how to use that computer dofangle thingy, and for mom who just wants to look up apple pie recipes. It's simple, clear, and does one thing (and only one thing) relatively easily. That is what Metro is. It is the antithesis of a power user. A power user is a content creator. They have multiple things open on multiple monitors - sometimes with multiple virtual machines with their own nested levels of complexity.

 

"But wait," you're thinking, "You said Metro is good for power users, yet now you're saying it's the worst for them, what gives?"

 

Before Windows 8 and Metro came along, power users and casual users - the content creators and the content consumers - had to share the same space. It was like a rented tuxedo coat - something that somewhat fit a wide variety of people. It wasn't tailored, because any aggressive tailoring would make it fit one person great, but would have others pulling at the buttons. Whatever feature we wanted to add into Windows, it had to be something that was simple enough for casual users to not get confused with, but also not dumbed down enough to be useless to power users. Many, MANY features got cut because of this.

 

A great example is multiple desktops. This has been something that power users have been asking for for over a decade now. OSX has it, Linux has it, even OS/2 Warp has it. But Windows doesn't. The reason for this is because every time we try and add it to the desktop, we run user tests; and every time we find that the casual users - a much larger part of our demographic than Apple's or Linux's - get confused by it. So the proposal gets cut and power users suffer.

 

Our hands were bound, and our users were annoyed with their rented jackets. So what did we do? We separated the users into two groups. Casual and Power. We made two separate playgrounds for them. All the casual users would have their own new and shiny place to look at pictures of cats - Metro. The power users would then have free reign over their native domain - the desktop.

 

So why make Metro the default? And why was there no way to boot to desktop in Windows 8.0?

 

The short answer is because casual users don't go exploring. If we made desktop the default as it has always been, and included a nice little start menu that felt like home, the casual users would never have migrated to their land of milk and honey. They would still occupy the desktop just as they always had, and we would have been stuck in square one. So we forced it upon them. We drove them to it with goads in their sides. In 8.1, we softened the points on the goads by giving users an option to boot directly to desktop.

 

Now that the casual users are aware of their new pasture, we can start tailoring. It will be a while before the power users start seeing the benefits of this (that's why I said they'd benefit in the long run). Right now we still have a lot of work to do on making Metro seem tasty for those casual users, and that's going to divert our attention for a while. But once it's purring along smoothly, we'll start making the desktop more advanced. We'll add things that we couldn't before. Things will be faster, more advanced, and craftier than they have in the past - and that's why Metro is good for power users.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 16, 2014, 02:46:54 PM

 

UX designer for Microsoft here.

 

I want to talk about why we chose Metro as the default instead of the desktop, and why this is good in the long run - especially for power users.

...but not in the way you might think.

 

At this point you're probably expecting me to say that it's designed for keyboard execution, or some thing about improved time trials for launching programs, or some other way of me trying to convince you that Metro is actually useful. I've talked about those in the past extensively on reddit, but for this discussion let's throw that all out the window. For this discussion, assume that Metro is s*** for power users (even if you don't believe it to be).

 

Now that we're on common ground, let's dive into the rabbit hole. Metro is a content consumption space. It is designed for casual users who only want to check facebook, view some photos, and maybe post a selfie to instagram. It's designed for your computer illiterate little sister, for grandpas who don't know how to use that computer dofangle thingy, and for mom who just wants to look up apple pie recipes. It's simple, clear, and does one thing (and only one thing) relatively easily. That is what Metro is. It is the antithesis of a power user. A power user is a content creator. They have multiple things open on multiple monitors - sometimes with multiple virtual machines with their own nested levels of complexity.

 

"But wait," you're thinking, "You said Metro is good for power users, yet now you're saying it's the worst for them, what gives?"

 

Before Windows 8 and Metro came along, power users and casual users - the content creators and the content consumers - had to share the same space. It was like a rented tuxedo coat - something that somewhat fit a wide variety of people. It wasn't tailored, because any aggressive tailoring would make it fit one person great, but would have others pulling at the buttons. Whatever feature we wanted to add into Windows, it had to be something that was simple enough for casual users to not get confused with, but also not dumbed down enough to be useless to power users. Many, MANY features got cut because of this.

 

A great example is multiple desktops. This has been something that power users have been asking for for over a decade now. OSX has it, Linux has it, even OS/2 Warp has it. But Windows doesn't. The reason for this is because every time we try and add it to the desktop, we run user tests; and every time we find that the casual users - a much larger part of our demographic than Apple's or Linux's - get confused by it. So the proposal gets cut and power users suffer.

 

Our hands were bound, and our users were annoyed with their rented jackets. So what did we do? We separated the users into two groups. Casual and Power. We made two separate playgrounds for them. All the casual users would have their own new and shiny place to look at pictures of cats - Metro. The power users would then have free reign over their native domain - the desktop.

 

So why make Metro the default? And why was there no way to boot to desktop in Windows 8.0?

 

The short answer is because casual users don't go exploring. If we made desktop the default as it has always been, and included a nice little start menu that felt like home, the casual users would never have migrated to their land of milk and honey. They would still occupy the desktop just as they always had, and we would have been stuck in square one. So we forced it upon them. We drove them to it with goads in their sides. In 8.1, we softened the points on the goads by giving users an option to boot directly to desktop.

 

Now that the casual users are aware of their new pasture, we can start tailoring. It will be a while before the power users start seeing the benefits of this (that's why I said they'd benefit in the long run). Right now we still have a lot of work to do on making Metro seem tasty for those casual users, and that's going to divert our attention for a while. But once it's purring along smoothly, we'll start making the desktop more advanced. We'll add things that we couldn't before. Things will be faster, more advanced, and craftier than they have in the past - and that's why Metro is good for power users.

So your advice is "wait and see" which is classic Microsoft advice.  People are tired of this game.  The world is moving on - Grandma's happier with her iPad and the power users like Unix of one stripe or another.  The office worker switched to OpenOffice because that silly ribbon was completely unnecessary and confused her.  The engineer's specialized hardware doesn't have a driver for anything newer than XP.  While Windows 8 continues to be the default OS on new computers, and will of course show some progress there, the most popular option on a new Dell is not more RAM or storage, it's the downgrade (really an upgrade) from Windows 8 to Windows 7.

We all know the real reason for Metro anyway.  MS sees Apple selling billions of software a quarter from the App Store, and thought (in classic MS form) "we should rip this idea off."  The problem is that many Windows users are trapped into the platform by their legacy software.  You can't just stop supporting Win32 without weaning these people off their Win32 apps, so you shove this crap called Metro into their faces.  It is meant to get them used not to Metro, which as you admit, is irrelevant and will be constantly changed around anyway, but used to the idea that they will now be in a MS store ecosystem.

You won't believe me when I tell you that the day you get rid of legacy support and force all users to get all their software from the MS store, is the day that Windows will take an arrow to the knee, but it's true.

Look at OS X.  It has a bunch of very happy users (and more each year) and the UI has barely changed in over 10 years.  People know how to use it and Apple is not going to do anything drastic to piss them off.  Now look at Windows 8 and tell me why in the hell the UI decisions were made without regard to the experience that users have built up over the decades.  Hot corners, stuff popping out at you, and hell even just shutting down the machine is a Herculean effort.

No, people are not content to just wait and see if it gets better.  We have stuff to do, and we will all find platforms that let us do it better than Windows 8.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: NN4RH on June 16, 2014, 02:52:39 PM
Quote
Also with new OS (8x) the GUI opens new possibilities in programing.

And new possibilities for security problems, no doubt.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 16, 2014, 02:59:29 PM
Quote
Also with new OS (8x) the GUI opens new possibilities in programing.

And new possibilities for security problems, no doubt.

With each revision MS raises security bar. The secure boot option that is starting with 8 is not exactly for reason some think. The main reason is to prevent a hijack boot of system which also effects dual boot.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 16, 2014, 04:55:36 PM
Quote
Also with new OS (8x) the GUI opens new possibilities in programing.

And new possibilities for security problems, no doubt.

With each revision MS raises security bar. The secure boot option that is starting with 8 is not exactly for reason some think. The main reason is to prevent a hijack boot of system which also effects dual boot.

It seems more likely that "secure boot" is there to eventually prevent people from using alternate OS's.

In any event, there have been LOADS of critical vulnerabilities in Win 8 since it came out.  It does not appear that MS has shown us a legitimate concern for security yet.

I also think that your assertion that Metro offers new programming possibilities is questionable at best.  I'm sure that you can tell me exactly how, though.  While you are at it, please describe what, exactly, one can accomplish in Windows 8 that one could not do with XP.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on June 16, 2014, 05:31:06 PM
RE: KE7TMA and his 'explanation'

Windows 8 forced the metro interface on us, period.  We weren't given a choice--and it's only because of the outcry that Win 8.1 came out so fast.

It's irrelevant now anyway, Microsoft shot themselves in the foot, other operating systems are gaining users--and those users are happier now that Windows (to them) is history.  Watch out for those other OSes, because if Microsoft doesn't give the people what they want with Windows 9, they'll go the same way Kodak and Polaroid went--almost into oblivion.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KF6QEX on June 16, 2014, 06:15:47 PM
Quote
I also think that your assertion that Metro offers new programming possibilities is questionable at best.  I'm sure that you can tell me exactly how, though.  While you are at it, please describe what, exactly, one can accomplish in Windows 8 that one could not do with XP.

Haven't you been paying attention?
Windows XP allowed sloppy code. (Somehow it's the OS's responsibillity to keep the programmer in check. Some people expect the compiler to do that.)

Whatta matta wit you?



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 16, 2014, 06:21:27 PM
So your advice is "wait and see" which is classic Microsoft advice.  People are tired of this game.  The world is moving on - Grandma's happier with her iPad and the power users like Unix of one stripe or another.  The office worker switched to OpenOffice because that silly ribbon was completely unnecessary and confused her.  The engineer's specialized hardware doesn't have a driver for anything newer than XP.  While Windows 8 continues to be the default OS on new computers, and will of course show some progress there, the most popular option on a new Dell is not more RAM or storage, it's the downgrade (really an upgrade) from Windows 8 to Windows 7.

We all know the real reason for Metro anyway.  MS sees Apple selling billions of software a quarter from the App Store, and thought (in classic MS form) "we should rip this idea off."  The problem is that many Windows users are trapped into the platform by their legacy software.  You can't just stop supporting Win32 without weaning these people off their Win32 apps, so you shove this crap called Metro into their faces.  It is meant to get them used not to Metro, which as you admit, is irrelevant and will be constantly changed around anyway, but used to the idea that they will now be in a MS store ecosystem.

You won't believe me when I tell you that the day you get rid of legacy support and force all users to get all their software from the MS store, is the day that Windows will take an arrow to the knee, but it's true.

Look at OS X.  It has a bunch of very happy users (and more each year) and the UI has barely changed in over 10 years.  People know how to use it and Apple is not going to do anything drastic to piss them off.  Now look at Windows 8 and tell me why in the hell the UI decisions were made without regard to the experience that users have built up over the decades.  Hot corners, stuff popping out at you, and hell even just shutting down the machine is a Herculean effort.

No, people are not content to just wait and see if it gets better.  We have stuff to do, and we will all find platforms that let us do it better than Windows 8.

Office workers have not switched to OpenOffice . . that might happen in a few places but not many.

Metro didn't go away in 8.1. . . It gave you the option of booting to the desktop first rather than the start screen. And gave you a start button that takes you to the tiled start screen. So minor changes is all. Metro is still there.

You mention OSX with the UI changing? While a lot of the point/click UI options don't change much. Apple is much more aggressive about weeding out old hardware and NOT supporting old hardware with new operating system releases. I have a 2010 Mac and while still supported in the new OS, i wouldn't be surprised when it's no longer supported in a new OS release. You just don't hear about users whining. Apple users are much more accepting of new operating system releases. More OSX users are on the current release as a percentage than Windows users.  



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 16, 2014, 06:54:10 PM
Office workers have not switched to OpenOffice . . that might happen in a few places but not many.

I do not see this changing either.  Open Office has lost steam.

Metro didn't go away in 8.1. . . It gave you the option of booting to the desktop first rather than the start screen. And gave you a start button that takes you to the tiled start screen. So minor changes is all. Metro is still there.

And Metro is not going away...

You mention OSX with the UI changing? While a lot of the point/click UI options don't change much. Apple is much more aggressive about weeding out old hardware and NOT supporting old hardware with new operating system releases. I have a 2010 Mac and while still supported in the new OS, i wouldn't be surprised when it's no longer supported in a new OS release. You just don't hear about users whining. Apple users are much more accepting of new operating system releases. More OSX users are on the current release as a percentage than Windows users.  

Apple always had better Koolaid than MS for snookering users. 


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 17, 2014, 01:43:51 PM
Quote
Of course not, you can't do anything with 8 that you couldn't do with XP.

there is a lot of software that used to run on XP, - that won't run under win_8.
- M$O 2003 is just one, & there are others, as XP had a simply huge software list.

I guess we should go back to MS DOS?  As I have said before XP supported sloppy 16/32bit code and 8 does not. As far as MS Office 2003, the reason it does not run is it is blocked because it is not secure and stopped getting updates long ago. Myself I like moving forward and not clinging to outdated software and hardware.

There is nothing inherently sloppy about 16 or 32 bit code.  Why would you make such an obviously untrue statement, especially here where people will know better than to believe you?

Feel free to buy the newest garbage from MS if it makes you feel important, but many of us have better things to do.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: G8YMW on June 17, 2014, 03:20:00 PM
Microsoft were warned about Metro in the early betas of Windows 8 but chose not to listen and are paying the price now.
Apple couldn't run an integrated interface for tablets and desktops.
Canocial have been knocked off the top spot  for Linux doing the same thing with Unity

Microsoft have NOT improved security apart from dumbing the O/S down with this Playskool interface
The security was left to third parties however most of the security issues are down to Java which is platform independent and ActiveX which is Internet explorer

For more information go to www.msfn.org,
General Discussion
Windows 8 Deeper Impressions

My xyl has had a Windows 8 laptop hybrid for two months now, she is still on about ripping Windows 8 out and loading Win 7 and Linux instead (She has used Windows from 3.11, using all versions thereafter apart from Vista which she passed on. Before PCs she was pretty hot with a BBC B)


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 17, 2014, 04:14:43 PM

There is nothing inherently sloppy about 16 or 32 bit code.  Why would you make such an obviously untrue statement, especially here where people will know better than to believe you?



Well 16 bit code is long dead. I died with Win9x. As far as sloppy code, the reason some old program do not run on 7 or 8 is because the code is indeed sloppy and not written properly. I have a Email client that was written 11 years ago that still works with even 8.1 because it was written properly.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 17, 2014, 04:37:06 PM

There is nothing inherently sloppy about 16 or 32 bit code.  Why would you make such an obviously untrue statement, especially here where people will know better than to believe you?



Well 16 bit code is long dead. I died with Win9x. As far as sloppy code, the reason some old program do not run on 7 or 8 is because the code is indeed sloppy and not written properly. I have a Email client that was written 11 years ago that still works with even 8.1 because it was written properly.

It has nothing to do with sloppy coding and everything to do with MS's arbitrary decisions.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 17, 2014, 04:43:20 PM
It has nothing to do with sloppy coding and everything to do with MS's arbitrary decisions.

A decision not to support proper code huh.  It is not MS job to support poor code compiling. It is a security risk too.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 17, 2014, 08:28:20 PM
It has nothing to do with sloppy coding and everything to do with MS's arbitrary decisions.

A decision not to support proper code huh.  It is not MS job to support poor code compiling. It is a security risk too.

There's nothing inherently bad with Win32.  Poor coding is possible in any language (if it's Turing complete).


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 18, 2014, 04:07:44 AM
It has nothing to do with sloppy coding and everything to do with MS's arbitrary decisions.

A decision not to support proper code huh.  It is not MS job to support poor code compiling. It is a security risk too.

There's nothing inherently bad with Win32.  Poor coding is possible in any language (if it's Turing complete).

I agree it is just that XP was more tolerant of sloppy code and supported old 16 bit code too.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 18, 2014, 01:20:42 PM
It has nothing to do with sloppy coding and everything to do with MS's arbitrary decisions.

A decision not to support proper code huh.  It is not MS job to support poor code compiling. It is a security risk too.

There's nothing inherently bad with Win32.  Poor coding is possible in any language (if it's Turing complete).

I agree it is just that XP was more tolerant of sloppy code and supported old 16 bit code too.

I'm a lot younger which ensures that I will get the last word, barring unforeseen accidents.  We can do this as long as you like.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 18, 2014, 01:31:12 PM
It has nothing to do with sloppy coding and everything to do with MS's arbitrary decisions.

A decision not to support proper code huh.  It is not MS job to support poor code compiling. It is a security risk too.

There's nothing inherently bad with Win32.  Poor coding is possible in any language (if it's Turing complete).

I agree it is just that XP was more tolerant of sloppy code and supported old 16 bit code too.

I'm a lot younger which ensures that I will get the last word, barring unforeseen accidents.  We can do this as long as you like.

Yes I know you are young because you have history problems.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KE7TMA on June 18, 2014, 01:52:44 PM
It has nothing to do with sloppy coding and everything to do with MS's arbitrary decisions.

A decision not to support proper code huh.  It is not MS job to support poor code compiling. It is a security risk too.

There's nothing inherently bad with Win32.  Poor coding is possible in any language (if it's Turing complete).

I agree it is just that XP was more tolerant of sloppy code and supported old 16 bit code too.

I'm a lot younger which ensures that I will get the last word, barring unforeseen accidents.  We can do this as long as you like.

Yes I know you are young because you have history problems.

Would you like to point out any in particular or are you just blowing smoke?  I'd be happy to admit if I was in error, unlike some folks.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: NN4RH on June 18, 2014, 03:48:27 PM
I wonder. Do Microsoft software developers use touch-screen tablets to the write millions of line of code for WIndows 8.x  ? Or do they use real computers - desktops with conventional keyboards?

And wouldn't it be a hoot if MS developers use Linux systems  to do their job?



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 18, 2014, 05:28:05 PM
I wonder. Do Microsoft software developers use touch-screen tablets to the write millions of line of code for WIndows 8.x  ? Or do they use real computers - desktops with conventional keyboards?

And wouldn't it be a hoot if MS developers use Linux systems  to do their job?


A surface tablet with a clip on keyboard and mouse would work too. I really like my RT tablet.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: N4AAB on June 19, 2014, 12:58:27 PM
Some computer manufacturers such as Dell still give you the option of choosing between Win7 or Win8 when you buy a new computer.  Most of the stores that sell new computers will have Win8 as the operating system.  I am sticking with Win7 for the foreseeable future.

Pay a new system price for a OS that is loosing full support in 7 months is kinda stupid. After 7 months their will be no updates or enhancements to Win 7 period. It will only have extended security fix updates and nothing more. I do not think many understand this.

Probably MS is keeping the price on Win 7 artificially high as they want everyone to go to Win 8.

I have a Vista home premium desktop, and a Win 8.1 laptop. My desktop can be upgraded to Win 7, for the same price as upgrading it to Win 8.

I don't have a touch screen, not paying for one either.

MS is going for the 'shove a new OS out the door' business model. We have become unpaid beta testers. We don't even get a free copy of the latesr Windows OS.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: NN4RH on June 20, 2014, 03:18:58 AM

A surface tablet with a clip on keyboard and mouse would work too. I really like my RT tablet.


Yeah. That's pretty impressive. Microsoft finally figured out how to make an iPad.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: G8YMW on June 20, 2014, 04:28:19 AM
And it's only an RT as in overpriced Android, not a true Windows machine and cannot run x86 programs


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 20, 2014, 08:57:52 AM

A surface tablet with a clip on keyboard and mouse would work too. I really like my RT tablet.


Yeah. That's pretty impressive. Microsoft finally figured out how to make an iPad.

Not at all. Show me split screen on a IPad, show me true multitasking on IPad,  show me USB and Mini HDMI support on IPad, show me micro SD slot to expand memory. Show me a OS that looks same on tablet and laptop. Apple has none of this and lacks many other things too. The IPad was a curiosity and only option at first but once compitition heated up IPad sales have been falling and still are. When Apple has to compete with completion they always loose long term because they lack vision to change. They are finally bringing out a bigger screen for IPhone but still has sucky OS.




Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: G8YMW on June 21, 2014, 02:52:49 PM
Quote
Not at all. Show me split screen on a IPad, show me true multitasking on IPad,  show me USB and Mini HDMI support on IPad, show me micro SD slot to expand memory. Show me a OS that looks same on tablet and laptop. Apple has none of this and lacks many other things too. The IPad was a curiosity and only option at first but once compitition heated up IPad sales have been falling and still are. When Apple has to compete with completion they always loose long term because they lack vision to change. They are finally bringing out a bigger screen for IPhone but still has sucky OS.

Android has USB, Android has mini HDMI, Android has micro SD.
Why should you have the same GUI on a laptop as a tablet? No reason at all.
Why have the Metro interface when you could just as easily use the desktop GUI for touch (Just enlarge the icons, Win7 has an option for touch in it's control panel)
M0LUY's touch speech aid runs on XP so Microsoft have been trying and failing with touch for several years ( Remember Windows CE?)
As the designer of Metro said Windows 8 is a CONSUMER OS not a USER OS.
The thing I don't like is the Apple "Walled Garden" business model Microsoft have come out with.

For me I will not have a laptop. I'm using a desktop which gives me far more desk space than a laptop (Just a LCD monitor on top, the midi tower below)
When I'm at our caravan I use an Android pad


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 21, 2014, 03:17:06 PM
Android has USB, Android has mini HDMI, Android has micro SD.

This is true but Apple which many drink the Appleaid for has none of these. Also 8 on tablet has great native printer support. Best of any of them

Why should you have the same GUI on a laptop as a tablet? No reason at all.
Why have the Metro interface when you could just as easily use the desktop GUI for touch (Just enlarge the icons, Win7 has an option for touch in it's control panel)
M0LUY's touch speech aid runs on XP so Microsoft have been trying and failing with touch for several years ( Remember Windows CE?)

They failed because they tried to use a modified mouse GUI and all baggage with it. Had 7 been like 8, Apple would not got a early foothold and product would be mature now. As far as Desktop like tablet it is excellent and transparent. No need to use 2 or 3 different OSes to cover bases.

As the designer of Metro said Windows 8 is a CONSUMER OS not a USER OS.
The thing I don't like is the Apple "Walled Garden" business model Microsoft have come out with.

No not walled like Apple. Full 8 runs all old apps and new ones that 7 will not unlike Apple that everything has to come thru their gate. Win RT is more restricted but most apps for it are free.

For me I will not have a laptop. I'm using a desktop which gives me far more desk space than a laptop (Just a LCD monitor on top, the midi tower below)
When I'm at our caravan I use an Android pad

Desktop is dying. You can put a tera byte drive in a laptop just as easy as a desktop these days too. As far as far more room a laptop takes up little more than a keyboard and is portable too if need be. In on room here I drive a 1600 x 900 21 inch flat panel monitor with a 10 inch netbook hooked to a wireless keyboard and mouse. I can grab netbook when I travel and have records and software for the road.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on June 22, 2014, 01:16:45 PM
Seems like Microsoft is paying attention.  Their execs--in some news reports--are admitting that even though Win 8.1 upgrade is a stable, efficient operating system, that still what a flop Win8/8.1/8.1 upgrade was and is.  According to that report, Win 9 is going to have two separate systems that can and will be set-up to exchange any and all data.  One system will run on traditional computers/laptops and the other on tablets/smartphones.

Let's see if that is indeed the case--or if Microsoft will now blow its legs off instead of just shooting itself in the foot by continuing the major mistake that is the Win 8 family in Win 9.

Oh, and BTW, other reports are that Win 9 is going to come out much sooner than it was scheduled to and that it will look like Win 7--not Win 8.

Added--Info link:  http://mashable.com/2014/04/05/microsoft-windows-8-retreat/


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W4KYR on June 22, 2014, 02:19:40 PM
Seems like Microsoft is paying attention.  Their execs--in some news reports--are admitting that even though Win 8.1 upgrade is a stable, efficient operating system, that still what a flop Win8/8.1/8.1 upgrade was and is.  According to that report, Win 9 is going to have two separate systems that can and will be set-up to exchange any and all data.  One system will run on traditional computers/laptops and the other on tablets/smartphones.

Let's see if that is indeed the case--or if Microsoft will now blow its legs off instead of just shooting itself in the foot by continuing the major mistake that is the Win 8 family in Win 9.

Oh, and BTW, other reports are that Win 9 is going to come out much sooner than it was scheduled to and that it will look like Win 7--not Win 8.

Added--Info link:  http://mashable.com/2014/04/05/microsoft-windows-8-retreat/


"Microsoft showed off the future of Windows this week at its 2014 Build developer conference, and it looks pretty retro. In fact, it looks a lot like Windows 7."

(That alone speaks volumes.)


"In other words, it's exactly how Windows used to work."


(Amen!)


"It's tantamount to an admission from Microsoft that the approach it took with Windows 8 was a mistake"


(It is always a good thing to admit mistakes and not trying to bury it with press releases and through astroturfers. I commend Microsoft for that.)



"Windows, as a desktop interface, will be more or less back to normal (tablets will remain Modern-first)."



"Did it have to be this way? Why didn't Microsoft just launch Modern/Metro as a tablet-only OS, and leave the desktop well enough alone? "  

(I have been asking the same questions...and apparently it seems...so have others.)



Thanks for link, it made for interesting reading and validated what I have been saying all along. I like this particular honest comment....



"There were many signs that Windows 8 was going to have user experience problems before it hit alpha and beta. Internal employees and external beta testers massive protests were completely ignored by upper management."

.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KA5PIU on June 22, 2014, 02:24:45 PM
Hello.

Not only will Windows 9 come in 2 flavors, but they both ship together!
One will be an Android like module and the other a, x86 platform.
RT was a failure, and 8 was a failure.
Now, Microsoft wants to "pair" a laptop or desktop with a mobile device, not just sync, but a true paring.
So, straight from Microsoft, Windows 8 is a failure


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on June 22, 2014, 03:18:37 PM
Here are a few more interesting reads.  The general consensus is that even Microsoft wants to put their latest 'Vista debacle' OS--the Windows 8 family--behind them.
______________________
Microsoft is currently in the process of developing two new iterations of Windows, one as an update for the already available Windows 8.1 Update and another as a whole new release. Windows 8.1 Update 2 is set to launch in August/September of this year, and Windows 9 is said to be launching next year in 2015.

http://www.winbeta.org/news/more-tidbits-windows-81-update-2-and-windows-9-information-leaks
_______________________
These are just two of a set of interesting articles concerning Windows--

Windows 9 coming in 2015, will try its hardest to distance itself from the Windows 8 train wreck

and

The Start menu will return in new Desktop-optimized version of Windows 8.2

...According to Foley’s sources, Threshold will see Windows 8.2 (or Windows 9 perhaps) split into three SKUs (stock-keeping units): a Modern/Metro SKU, a traditional desktop PC SKU, and a traditional enterprise SKU. The Metro version would be focused on the Metro interface, WinRT apps, and the mobile/touchscreen experience. The traditional desktop PC version would be a lot like Windows 7, but with Windows 8′s low-level tweaks. The traditional enterprise version would be Desktop-oriented (but still have a Metro interface), and have support for group policies and other business-oriented bits....

http://www.extremetech.com/tag/windows-9

Also on this page is an article concerning Windows Phone and Android, and articles concerning the direction Microsoft may be moving--including a discussion of whether a Windows subscription edition is coming, and likewise a Windows Cloud edition.

Seems as though the resident guru here on this forum has egg on his face right now--because the future is starting to look like the past!


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: G8YMW on June 26, 2014, 11:20:42 AM
Actually Windows 9 is supposed to be coming in 3 flavours, Touch, Desktop and Enterprise.
The Chinese Government has banned Windows 8 from it's machines (That alone speaks volumes)

Quote
   

A couple of tidbits stand out:

 

Quote

    Windows 8.1 Update 2 is almost finished according to WZOR, and that Microsoft are currently discussing the ways in which they could offer it to existing users. Update 2 will require new license keys, and will offer it to Windows 8.0 users for a small fee. The update will be free for Windows 8.1 Update 1 users of course. The alternative method for Windows 8.0 users would be to update to Windows 8.1 for free, and then to Update 1 and then to Update 2.

 

If there is a way for a Windows 8.0 user to get to 8.1 Update 2 without having to open a Microsoft account (PayPal comes to mind as an alternative), this might be a plus in the eys of those of us who have successfully avoided getting dragged into the MSFT web all these years.

 

 

Quote

    Now onto Windows 9, Microsoft is currently in the process of developing Windows 9 alongside Update 2. Windows 9 was originally rumored to launch in Spring 2015, but due to the Chinese government's recent choice to ban Windows 8 from government production machines, Microsoft has entered what WZOR is calling "panic mode" which pretty much means the Windows team are a little worried about the fate of Windows 9.

     

    What does this mean? Well, it's possible that this choice by the Chinese government has affected the original release date of Windows 9.

     

    This choice by the Chinese government may also be the reason Microsoft has postponed the return of the Start Menu. The Start Menu was originally set to arrive with Update 2, but then was pulled for unknown reasons. Microsoft could be saving it for Windows 9 to make it more appealing for the Chinese government, and for marketing reasons too.

 

Not sure how the Chinese government's decision not to buy Windows 8 could affect Win9 so much that it would put Microsoft into "panic" mode. I can see them wanting to move up the release date, but why would this affect its "fate"? Anyone have an insight into this... or at least willing to speculate?  ;)

 

 

Windows 9 is in trouble, Microsoft to make drastic changes to its plans?

 

Some more info from the same blogger. China's anti-Win8 decree

Quote

    has knocked Microsoft off their feet, and they are currently considering changing their plans regarding Windows 9. So far, the rumors claim that the ban has already put the original release date of Windows 9 in jeopardy, and Microsoft could be planning to make even more drastic changes to one of its SKU's.

     

    Mary Jo Foley has proclaimed that Microsoft will release Windows 9 in three different variants, a normal traditional SKU, a touch based SKU and an Enterprise Edition SKU. We don't know much about the first two SKU's, but rumors are claiming that the Enterprise Edition of Windows 9 will be the one that is hit with Microsoft's drastic decision making the most.

     

    According to WZOR, Windows 9 Enterprise Edition could potentially see the removal of cloud-based integration within the operating system, along with the ability to completely disable the Modern UI 2.0.

[emphasis added]

 

If WZOR is right, then China may have done a favor to Windows users all over the world!

 


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 26, 2014, 07:12:29 PM

The Chinese Government has banned Windows 8 from it's machines (That alone speaks volumes)

Quote
   
It speaks far more of politics than anything else.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KA5PIU on June 27, 2014, 10:53:31 PM
Hello.

No. the Chinese government has banned Windows 8 outright.
There are some internal functions that they decided against.
So, an export unit must get its Windows 8 installed outside of China.
But, this is the country that found out Rupert Murdock was trying to enter China, and taped the doors on the private jet closed.
They fueled it and told them to leave.
http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2008-04-11/how-rupert-murdoch-got-it-wrong-in-chinabusinessweek-business-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice
China is, after all, a Communist country.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KI6LZ on June 27, 2014, 10:57:14 PM
Think reading years ago that Russia banned all window products on government computers, only Linux based OSs.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KA5PIU on June 27, 2014, 11:12:20 PM
Hello.

Russia wanted to see the source code.
Micro$oft said no.
I disagree with Micro$oft on most things, but this one I can agree with.
Russia Allows both Unix and Linux.
France is the same way, they banned Micro$oft.
Prior to 2000, getting the details on how the OS worked was easy.
But, Micro$oft has this product key system in place, and it was easily cracked in 2000.
So, Micro$oft  made an informed decision.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: VK6IS on June 27, 2014, 11:15:42 PM
they did, but back then, win_xp was in widespread use.
& win_7 is now on the rise. ..

http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-os-RU-monthly-201305-201405

 


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KI6LZ on June 27, 2014, 11:23:08 PM
Should have said within Government.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: HAMMYGUY on June 28, 2014, 01:45:53 PM
So now those of us who purchased Win 8 laptops or desktops will be stuck with this dog of an OS.  Unless we happen to want to toss a couple of hundred bucks Microsoft's way for their "new and improved" retro Windows 9.    Kinda reminds me of the Windows ME fiasco.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 28, 2014, 02:11:31 PM
So now those of us who purchased Win 8 laptops or desktops will be stuck with this dog of an OS.  Unless we happen to want to toss a couple of hundred bucks Microsoft's way for their "new and improved" retro Windows 9.    Kinda reminds me of the Windows ME fiasco.


If you are waiting for retro Windoze you are in for a surprise because they are not going to move backwards. Metro is here to stay with tweaks


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W4KYR on June 28, 2014, 02:26:29 PM
If you are waiting for retro Windoze you are in for a surprise because they are not going to move backwards. Metro is here to stay with tweaks

That is not what it says here....

"Seems like Microsoft is paying attention.  Their execs--in some news reports--are admitting that even though Win 8.1 upgrade is a stable, efficient operating system, that still what a flop Win8/8.1/8.1 upgrade was and is.  According to that report, Win 9 is going to have two separate systems that can and will be set-up to exchange any and all data.  One system will run on traditional computers/laptops and the other on tablets/smartphones.

Let's see if that is indeed the case--or if Microsoft will now blow its legs off instead of just shooting itself in the foot by continuing the major mistake that is the Win 8 family in Win 9.

Oh, and BTW, other reports are that Win 9 is going to come out much sooner than it was scheduled to and that it will look like Win 7--not Win 8."

Added--Info link:  http://mashable.com/2014/04/05/microsoft-windows-8-retreat/


Also---------------------------

"These are just two of a set of interesting articles concerning Windows--

Windows 9 coming in 2015, will try its hardest to distance itself from the Windows 8 train wreck

and

The Start menu will return
in new Desktop-optimized version of Windows 8.2

...According to Foley’s sources, Threshold will see Windows 8.2 (or Windows 9 perhaps) split into three SKUs (stock-keeping units): a Modern/Metro SKU, a traditional desktop PC SKU, and a traditional enterprise SKU. The Metro version would be focused on the Metro interface, WinRT apps, and the mobile/touchscreen experience. The traditional desktop PC version would be a lot like Windows 7, but with Windows 8′s low-level tweaks. The traditional enterprise version would be Desktop-oriented (but still have a Metro interface), and have support for group policies and other business-oriented bits...."

http://www.extremetech.com/tag/windows-9

.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 28, 2014, 02:43:08 PM
I do not miss start menu at all. Do to understand all the fuss. I guess a lot of users are technically challenged.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KA5PIU on June 28, 2014, 03:03:35 PM
I do not miss start menu at all. Do to understand all the fuss. I guess a lot of users are technically challenged.

Hello.

Windows was introduced for the technically challenged, that was the entire point.
DOS was good enough for some.
But, for the computer to go mainstream and move into everyone's home, it had to become easy to use.
This adding features for the sake of adding features has to stop.
The era of adding features that are actually useful is has pretty much ended for Micro$oft.
XP with Works was pretty much it for most users who will never need any more.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 28, 2014, 04:59:00 PM
I do not miss start menu at all. Do to understand all the fuss. I guess a lot of users are technically challenged.

Hello.

Windows was introduced for the technically challenged, that was the entire point.
DOS was good enough for some.
But, for the computer to go mainstream and move into everyone's home, it had to become easy to use.
This adding features for the sake of adding features has to stop.
The era of adding features that are actually useful is has pretty much ended for Micro$oft.
XP with Works was pretty much it for most users who will never need any more.



The API support has changed and allows visual effects no possible with older versions. Incan use this tablet or my 8x laptops and everything is shared between them transparently and when I add a new machine all network, printer and wireless setting are transferred too. You can stay in past not me. Those that claim 8 adds nothing never learned how to use it.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KF6QEX on June 28, 2014, 05:27:32 PM
Visual effects are the single most important feature of any OS (Yep I typed it with a straight face and everything)
Thank my old machine you can not see one right now



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K3DCW on June 28, 2014, 06:18:48 PM
[ Those that claim 8 adds nothing never learned how to use it.

John,

We don't always agree, but I agree with you here.  People hate Windows 8 solely because it is different and requires them to learn a new way of doing things; or at least that's what they think.  I use Windows 8 pretty much the same way I used Windows 7 and XP before that and have had no issues. 

I still prefer my Mac, but that's another thread!

73

Dave
K3DCW


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 29, 2014, 06:39:39 AM
[ Those that claim 8 adds nothing never learned how to use it.

John,

We don't always agree, but I agree with you here.  People hate Windows 8 solely because it is different and requires them to learn a new way of doing things; or at least that's what they think.  I use Windows 8 pretty much the same way I used Windows 7 and XP before that and have had no issues. 

I still prefer my Mac, but that's another thread!

73

Dave
K3DCW

I have been around and worked with Macs for years and one of my daughters has a Mac book and a Ipad and Iphone. Other has Iphone and a Win 8 PC and Win tablet. It is because of my familiarity with Apple products I would never own them myself because I have lived with them somewhat and know their limitations. Apple, once ahead of curve in smart phone and tablet is falling behind fast because it is not evolving with times. Apple made same mistake 20 years ago.  MS recently learned hard way and not changing sooner really hurt them in tablet and smart phone world. MS has no future if it holds tight to past.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on June 29, 2014, 08:37:13 AM
...People hate Windows 8 solely because it is different and requires them to learn a new way of doing things; or at least that's what they think.  I use Windows 8 pretty much the same way I used Windows 7 and XP before that and have had no issues. 

Hate is probably stretching it a bit--I think dislike is far closer to the point.  Those Windows users who want the ability to adjust and tailor the OS (to the extent they're able to) simply find the learning curve very high, and the ability of system control curtailed severely unless the user knows exactly how to find the setting that they want to adjust--something not easily done since those setting were, for all intents and purposes, hidden.

In short, it's not the casual use of the system that people find objectionable, it's the lack of control to have the system look and behave the way they want it to that is.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on June 29, 2014, 08:40:35 AM
The REAL point of the matter is that Microsoft had, in manner of speaking, cut it's own throat years ago with how they originally set up their flagship OS.  DOS and Windows 3.1 weren't too hard at all to master--but that was before Microsoft had their visions that the computer could do ANYTHING that ANYBODY wanted it to--in the future.  Then along came Windows 95, the first of the changes--no, make that the only MAJOR change to come in the Windows series--until Windows 8.  

Even the incorporation of the basics of the better and more stable business version of Windows--Windows NT--into Windows XP didn't substantially change the way Windows did things since the Win 95 version.  That version WAS easier to use AND not too hard to master, since there were no major changes to the way the os was used!  Windows XP was welcomed with open arms by the majority of computer users, and remains about the best, most used version of the Windows OS series to this day.  That was the real clincher--Microsoft refused to change the basics of that system even when NT was incorporated into it.  AAMOF, they said that this was going to be their standard from that day forward.  Windows 95 had featured a way to simplify how windows was used, a basic way that remained substantially unchanged right through Windows 7!  

Then came the day that the then head of Microsoft envisioned something new, bright and (at least he thought) EASIER than the way the long accepted flagship OS ran.  What came out of that was Windows 8, and although it was, in principle, easier to use, it took away too much of what users had gotten used to: actual control of their computer.  Yes, the user could get back limited control of their machine, but only if they 'learned' how the new OS was built and how to navigate it to get things done--things that Microsoft had purposefully hidden in their bid to make this new Windows--in their mind--easier to use.

That was what proved to be a drastic mistake.  That is what produced the so called "train wreck" that Windows 8 was and is.  Microsoft itself saw that--hindsight is 20-20, after all--and is going to backpedal and give the people back what they want in Windows 9--control of their computer again.  A return to their long ago self proclaimed standard.  Back to a proven successful OS look and useability, even if they are also going to keep the newer interface as an option too.  

I don't think that anybody expects the new OS to be exactly the same as Windows 7 and its predecessors, but at least Microsoft is going back to the Windows principles that people knew and accepted since Windows 95 instead of trying to re-invent the wheel.  And to think that all of this could have been avoided if they would have given people the simple choice of whether or not to install the metro interface or stick with the classic interface that they're returning to in Windows 8.2.    

The Microsoft shill on this thread still won't believe that and keeps touting Windows 8, and from the headlines and stories coming out about Windows and Windows 9, I think he is going to get a cold dose of reality when 9 does come out with a choice of either user interface with it.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: G8YMW on June 29, 2014, 09:14:28 AM
The trouble was, besides the points K1CJS raised, was that Microsoft didn't listen to the beta testers. They warned Microsoft what would happen
The result was an O/S that flunked worse than Vista
Win8 is an example of what would happen if you abuse your monopoly position

After 18 month Win8 (and its daughters) has reached 13.73%.
The much hated Vista reached 16.87%
Win7  got to 33.22% in the same time

It's not the market, as the success of Win7 proves so it must be the products

Another thing is that Vista was released at a nondescript time of the year. Win8 was released in October, prime for Christmas.
Someone on MSFN.org said that Sinofsky said he has the single mindedness of Steve Jobs,  pity he doesn't have the ability to pick what people would want unlike Jobs

As for phones and touch, Microsoft, despite many, many years of trying just cannot produce anything that the public wants


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W4KYR on June 29, 2014, 10:46:11 AM
This stuff reminds me of the "Andre's Free laptop" saga first bought to light by some contributors to the old "Microsoft Watch" column run by Joe Wilcox some several years ago.

There was someone named Andre going around on all the forums and blog sites praising Vista and how it was a "loved OS" and "feature rich" . Andre would allegedly condemn Linux users and especially Linux itself. (This was when people were saying that Vista is worse than Windows ME they are going to start installing Linux instead of using Vista).

Anyway, there were allegations that Andre got a free laptop from Microsoft worth allegedly $6000. And Andre who allegedly lives in Costa Rica according to the article where the daily per capita is under $4000 per year. So the implications were that allegedly Andre got a free laptop from Microsoft as a gift in exchange for astroturfing for Vista and Microsoft.

 http://openbytes.wordpress.com/2009/02/01/closing-report-case-01-andre-da-costa/

 Joe's Microsoft Watch is no longer on the 'net. Too bad it made for good drama at the time.

.

.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on June 29, 2014, 01:08:34 PM
...As for phones and touch, Microsoft, despite many, many years of trying just cannot produce anything that the public wants

The problem is that Microsoft, with their years of success, should be content with the products that are proven--and build off of that.  Instead, what Microsoft did was to try to reinvent almost everything to do with their computer OSes, whether or not they were desktop, laptop, or the newer computer products.

In other words, instead of being content with their share and improving their share, they want to take everyone else's share too.  That probably comes from the fact that Microsoft practically 'owned' the computer OS market for so long (yes, I know, there were other players, but they were and are small potatos) and now it wants to 'own' the opening IT system/product OSes too--but it isn't going to happen.  Apple and Android have the lion share of those and Microsoft isn't going to get anywhere near what they want.

Large fixed PC systems, which include desktop and laptop systems, however, aren't going to disappear overnight.  Their numbers may go down, but again, not so far as some may think.  As long as Microsoft stands by their proven OS and keeps on improving it, they're going to have a market far into the future, even if they do incorporate newer features into the OS such as the cloud and remote data storage, so that the new platforms can access the data held on desktop and laptop systems.  They're going to hasve to learn to play in the community sandbox instead of owning their own and only letting their select friends in.

But, as has been seen, they try to reinvent their computer OS as a "one size fits all" OS they're going to have nothing but trouble.  What they're doing now (yes, by reports) is splitting their OS into three distinct versions--interchangeable OSes that can be run on any platform depending on the platform, should have been done from the beginning of the Windows 8 planning.  Microsoft (more their now gone chief) made a major mistake with W8, a mistake they're now trying to correct with their new OS versions, chiefly Windows 9--a system that's being released earlier than it should have been.

Microsoft has got to realize that they limited use of their sandbox too much, and as a result the other computer players opened a community sandbox--and that new sandbox has become the one that everyone wants to play in with the newer technology, not Microsoft's old sandbox and it's proprietary toys.    


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: G8YMW on June 29, 2014, 03:13:09 PM
I had to laugh when I saw this

Quote
I still am waiting for Fisher Price or Playskool to sue M$ for theft of their intellectual property.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 29, 2014, 03:27:00 PM
I have been around and worked with Macs for years and one of my daughters has a Mac book and a Ipad and Iphone. Other has Iphone and a Win 8 PC and Win tablet. It is because of my familiarity with Apple products I would never own them myself because I have lived with them somewhat and know their limitations. Apple, once ahead of curve in smart phone and tablet is falling behind fast because it is not evolving with times. Apple made same mistake 20 years ago.  MS recently learned hard way and not changing sooner really hurt them in tablet and smart phone world. MS has no future if it holds tight to past.

Apple is still ahead in tablets and phones. Not sure what planet you are on . . . The only way Android is leading in any number category is the fact that it takes a lot of different companies making android products to add up to what Apple is doing.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 29, 2014, 07:52:58 PM
I have been around and worked with Macs for years and one of my daughters has a Mac book and a Ipad and Iphone. Other has Iphone and a Win 8 PC and Win tablet. It is because of my familiarity with Apple products I would never own them myself because I have lived with them somewhat and know their limitations. Apple, once ahead of curve in smart phone and tablet is falling behind fast because it is not evolving with times. Apple made same mistake 20 years ago.  MS recently learned hard way and not changing sooner really hurt them in tablet and smart phone world. MS has no future if it holds tight to past.

Apple is still ahead in tablets and phones. Not sure what planet you are on . . . The only way Android is leading in any number category is the fact that it takes a lot of different companies making android products to add up to what Apple is doing.

Question is what planet are you from? Android is Android no matter who makes it same as a Windows PC or Tablet. Apple lost lead in tablet last year and is loosing more ground daily. On a global scale they are way behind Android on phones too. The competition among PC makers and Android hardware makers has awoken a sleeping giant that will crush apple. Apples keep it all in house and do it my way and lack of things like USB and Micro SD support on tablet and phones is killing it. That and a OS that has changed little in 4 years except for some window dressing. Apple had a good ride but is running out of gas fast.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 29, 2014, 08:18:00 PM
Question is what planet are you from? Android is Android no matter who makes it same as a Windows PC or Tablet. Apple lost lead in tablet last year and is loosing more ground daily. On a global scale they are way behind Android on phones too. The competition among PC makers and Android hardware makers has awoken a sleeping giant that will crush apple. Apples keep it all in house and do it my way and lack of things like USB and Micro SD support on tablet and phones is killing it. That and a OS that has changed little in 4 years except for some window dressing. Apple had a good ride but is running out of gas fast.

I actually use an Android phone . . . just for disclosure. . .

USB and Micro SD slots in phones are almost never used by people. Yea a few people use them but of all the people I know that I have talked about their android phone, no one uses the Micro SD slots. USB port is for charging. I never use it to get something on the phone. Dropbox is easier. Same with my iPad.  SD cards are NOT compelling features on phones or tablets.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KK4GGL on June 29, 2014, 08:34:19 PM
I have been around and worked with Macs for years and one of my daughters has a Mac book and a Ipad and Iphone. Other has Iphone and a Win 8 PC and Win tablet. It is because of my familiarity with Apple products I would never own them myself because I have lived with them somewhat and know their limitations. Apple, once ahead of curve in smart phone and tablet is falling behind fast because it is not evolving with times. Apple made same mistake 20 years ago.  MS recently learned hard way and not changing sooner really hurt them in tablet and smart phone world. MS has no future if it holds tight to past.

Apple is still ahead in tablets and phones. Not sure what planet you are on . . . The only way Android is leading in any number category is the fact that it takes a lot of different companies making android products to add up to what Apple is doing.

Question is what planet are you from? Android is Android no matter who makes it same as a Windows PC or Tablet.

So, you are saying vendors using Android on their devices are not customizing the OS? Really? Have you even looked at different Android devices?

Apple lost lead in tablet last year and is loosing more ground daily. On a global scale they are way behind Android on phones too. The competition among PC makers and Android hardware makers has awoken a sleeping giant that will crush apple.

Which explains why most apps are still coming out for iOS first.

Apples keep it all in house and do it my way and lack of things like USB and Micro SD support on tablet and phones is killing it. That and a OS that has changed little in 4 years except for some window dressing. Apple had a good ride but is running out of gas fast.

Your saying so doesn't make it so.

And yes, I do own and use Android phones and an Android tablet.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 30, 2014, 04:57:16 AM
So, you are saying vendors using Android on their devices are not customizing the OS? Really? Have you even looked at different Android devices?

They have a few different tweaks on surface but core is same and since 4.1x app compatibility has not been a problem.

Which explains why most apps are still coming out for iOS first.

Apps that come out first on Apple are because APPLE PAYS them to develop it duh...  Android has best selection of free apps by far.

Your saying so doesn't make it so.

Not of question of me saying it. The market has spoken and Apple is losing ground fast. Why do you think after years of claiming that consumer want a tiny phone and screen that they are racing to get a 4.7 and 5.5 inch model on market this fall. Gonna take more than this though IOS is no longer the darling child. 

And yes, I do own and use Android phones and an Android tablet.

Most do in one form or other.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 30, 2014, 08:04:38 AM

Apps that come out first on Apple are because APPLE PAYS them to develop it duh...  Android has best selection of free apps by far. 

App come out first on Apple because the developers can actually make money selling apps in Apple's eco-system.  Like Hams, Android users are generally "cheaper" at spending money on apps. Google it, you'll find supporting articles.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 30, 2014, 08:34:57 AM

Apps that come out first on Apple are because APPLE PAYS them to develop it duh...  Android has best selection of free apps by far. 

App come out first on Apple because the developers can actually make money selling apps in Apple's eco-system.  Like Hams, Android users are generally "cheaper" at spending money on apps. Google it, you'll find supporting articles.

It all has to do with Apple koolaid. Apps are no better and they cost more because Apple takes a piece of price. If you want to be one of the herd and follow the rest off cliff stay with apple.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on June 30, 2014, 08:38:26 AM

Apps that come out first on Apple are because APPLE PAYS them to develop it duh...  Android has best selection of free apps by far. 

App come out first on Apple because the developers can actually make money selling apps in Apple's eco-system.  Like Hams, Android users are generally "cheaper" at spending money on apps. Google it, you'll find supporting articles.

It all has to do with Apple koolaid. Apps are no better and they cost more because Apple takes a piece of price. If you want to be one of the herd and follow the rest off cliff stay with apple.

It's $$$'s . . App developers like to make money. It's pretty simple. They make more money developing for Apple's products than they do Android simple because they sell more apps. You think google doesn't take their cut of app sales in their Android Play store?


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: G8YMW on June 30, 2014, 08:59:27 AM
Quote
It all has to do with Apple koolaid. Apps are no better and they cost more because Apple takes a piece of price. If you want to be one of the herd and follow the rest off cliff stay with apple.

And Microsoft doesn't?


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 30, 2014, 09:01:47 AM
Quote
It all has to do with Apple koolaid. Apps are no better and they cost more because Apple takes a piece of price. If you want to be one of the herd and follow the rest off cliff stay with apple.

And Microsoft doesn't?

Not like Apple because a lot of legacy apps for Win 8.1 require no store to load them unlike Apple the EVERYTHING has to come thru Apple so they can get a piece of it.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on June 30, 2014, 09:05:13 AM
It's $$$'s . . App developers like to make money. It's pretty simple. They make more money developing for Apple's products than they do Android simple because they sell more apps. You think google doesn't take their cut of app sales in their Android Play store?

Yes it is about $$$ and that is why users are leaving Apple platform and market share is dropping because there are better and cheaper solutions on other platforms. BTW you never did tell me were the dual window/app feature is on IOS that exists on WIN tablet and Andriod tablet. Oh that because it cannot duh....


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on June 30, 2014, 01:53:38 PM
...because a lot of legacy apps for Win 8.1 require no store to load them unlike Apple the EVERYTHING has to come thru Apple so they can get a piece of it.

A lot of legacy apps won't even run on Win 8 or 8.1.  Some wouldn't even run on 7!

And as far as Apple goes, there are plenty of apps both in the Apple store and other sources that WILL run on Apple products--and Apple isn't seeing one red cent from they makers.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: G8YMW on June 30, 2014, 02:08:00 PM
Another posting from msfn.org

Quote
So much for the metrotard vision:

http://www.neowin.ne...r-desktop-users

While it is still a little unclear if the Threshold update for PCs will be called Windows 9 or something else, what is starting to become known is how that OS will deviate from Microsoft's [metro] past. For mouse and keyboard users, Threshold will be the update many have been waiting for as Microsoft continues to move away form the Sinofsky vision of hybrid OS.

Threshold will be a further move away from the Modern UI environment for desktop users. In some builds of Threshold, the Modern UI is disabled by default. You have to manually turn it back on but this is situation dependent, if you wish to access the live tile environment.

If you are on a tablet, the Modern UI is still present and takes precedence over the classic desktop but on traditional PCs, the Modern UI is no longer utilized by default. This is where some of the confusion comes in that we had been hearing about a 'decentralized' use of the Modern UI but this is device-specific; for tablet and hybrid device users, the touch-focused UI is still a focal point. The biggest changes are in store for users of desktop-class systems.


...

We have also been hearing that the UI is 'visually distinct' too, meaning that when you see Threshold, it's easy to tell that it is not Windows 8.1.
http://www.zdnet.com...ers-7000031070/

Users running Threshold on a desktop/laptop will get a SKU, or version, that puts the Windows Desktop (for running Win32/legacy apps) front and center.

The Desktop/laptop SKU of Threshold will include, as previously rumored, the Mini-Start menu — a new version of the traditional Microsoft Start menu, an early concept of which Microsoft showed off at the company's Build developers conference in April. It also will include the ability to run Metro-Style/Windows Store apps in windows on the Desktop. Will it turn off completely the Metro-Style Start screen with its live-tile interface, as Neowin is reporting, and make the tiled Start Menu a toggleable option from the Mini Start menu? I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised.

...
Microsoft is basically "done" with Windows 8.x. Regardless of how usable or functional it is or isn't, it has become Microsoft's Vista 2.0 -- something from which Microsoft needs to distance itself, perception-wise. At this point, Microsoft is going full steam-ahead toward Threshold and will do its best to differentiate that OS release from Windows 8.

Looks like metro is gonzo. On the tablet front, it looks as if they will remove the desktop there completely. Not a big deal honestly, since it's an inadequate form factor for the desktop anyway.

 

I can't believe it: Finally some sanity from Microsoft?! Have they cleared the water in Redmond?

 


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on July 01, 2014, 08:42:52 AM
Quote
It all has to do with Apple koolaid. Apps are no better and they cost more because Apple takes a piece of price. If you want to be one of the herd and follow the rest off cliff stay with apple.

And Microsoft doesn't?

Not like Apple because a lot of legacy apps for Win 8.1 require no store to load them unlike Apple the EVERYTHING has to come thru Apple so they can get a piece of it.

OK That is just dead wrong. You can get apps from non-Apple sources, at least on the Mac for sure.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on July 01, 2014, 08:46:53 AM
It's $$$'s . . App developers like to make money. It's pretty simple. They make more money developing for Apple's products than they do Android simple because they sell more apps. You think google doesn't take their cut of app sales in their Android Play store?

Yes it is about $$$ and that is why users are leaving Apple platform and market share is dropping because there are better and cheaper solutions on other platforms. BTW you never did tell me were the dual window/app feature is on IOS that exists on WIN tablet and Andriod tablet. Oh that because it cannot duh....

People are not leaving Apple. Go look at real market data.

Dual Windows/apps on the screen at one time is a feature to talk about but not many people use. Phone screens are too small for starters.  I could care less about it on my iPad . .  If it was there, I wouldn't use it . . It makes for a nice advertisement but that doesn't make it useful. I can run several apps on my Laptop and do all the time. Lot's of windows open at once, but I only use one at a time. I have to switch to the others to use them. The only thing I put side by side are two Putty sessions so I can read from two terminal screens at the same time. If I need two apps on the screen at the same time, I'll get the laptop out.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on July 01, 2014, 08:59:54 AM
One thing that really gets me.  For years, people have been talking about cell phones that are smaller--right from the time of the so called 'brick'--that infamous first cell phone.  Now, all of a sudden, people have what amounts to belt hung bags that hold their tablet/phones--that are fast approaching the size of that first cell phone.  That is why I don't think this all-in-one phase is going to last long.  People will once again get tired of having to carry around such a big thing in order to be fashionable in a tech sense.

Sorry for going off track, but it ties in in a way.  Win 8 tried to get a single OS together that would run on both--and it bombed.  I still think that people are going to finally settle on a combination--small carry in a pocket phones with computers--either the traditional laptop or the tablet for on the go tied together with bluetooth, and a home/office computer system that either the carry along computer or the phone could interface to.

And I think that is where Microsoft is headed with their all-in-one, three flavor OS that is probably going to be Windows 9.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 01, 2014, 09:13:03 AM
It's $$$'s . . App developers like to make money. It's pretty simple. They make more money developing for Apple's products than they do Android simple because they sell more apps. You think google doesn't take their cut of app sales in their Android Play store?

Yes it is about $$$ and that is why users are leaving Apple platform and market share is dropping because there are better and cheaper solutions on other platforms. BTW you never did tell me were the dual window/app feature is on IOS that exists on WIN tablet and Andriod tablet. Oh that because it cannot duh....

People are not leaving Apple. Go look at real market data.

Dual Windows/apps on the screen at one time is a feature to talk about but not many people use. Phone screens are too small for starters.  I could care less about it on my iPad . .  If it was there, I wouldn't use it . . It makes for a nice advertisement but that doesn't make it useful. I can run several apps on my Laptop and do all the time. Lot's of windows open at once, but I only use one at a time. I have to switch to the others to use them. The only thing I put side by side are two Putty sessions so I can read from two terminal screens at the same time. If I need two apps on the screen at the same time, I'll get the laptop out.

I have looked at real data have you I think not. Apple is worried big time as they are loosing grip fast. They lost tablet market lead because they did not evolve or lower prices too. There would be 4.7 inch or 5.5 inch iPhone in pipe line if current phone was not loosing grip. For years they preached people wanted a small phone. On slip screen in use it mostly on tablets but on Note 3 too some. Yes Apple iPhone screen is so small and low res that it would not be viable at all. (My split screens on Note 3 are each higher res than full screen on 5s). I can look something up on web while using a stand alone Email client too. But if you drink appleaid you are used to not have features that others support.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: AA4PB on July 01, 2014, 09:54:00 AM
CJS: I completely agree about the phone size. I still use a flip-phone from WalMart. I don't want to carry my computer around in my pocket. Personally, I kind of miss the days when I could go some where and be out of touch for a couple of hours.  ;D


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 01, 2014, 09:57:03 AM
Personally, I kind of miss the days when I could go some where and be out of touch for a couple of hours.  ;D

Still can, leave phone at home.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: AA4PB on July 01, 2014, 10:01:01 AM
Then I get "why didn't you answer the phone?" I've used the excuse "my battery must have run down".


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 01, 2014, 11:03:41 AM
Then I get "why didn't you answer the phone?" I've used the excuse "my battery must have run down".


I simply tell them I left phone home.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: VK6IS on July 01, 2014, 10:03:44 PM
Did Microsoft just admit Windows 8 is its worst operating system ever??.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/windows/24088/did-microsoft-just-admit-windows-8-worst-operating-system-ever?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=t.co

"The change is essentially Microsoft's admission that Windows 8 has been a failure. It's the biggest turnaround that Microsoft has ever made when it comes to operating systems, nearly the equivalent of if the company had reverted back to DOS after the release of Windows.".


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 02, 2014, 04:41:56 AM
Did Microsoft just admit Windows 8 is its worst operating system ever??.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/windows/24088/did-microsoft-just-admit-windows-8-worst-operating-system-ever?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=t.co

"The change is essentially Microsoft's admission that Windows 8 has been a failure. It's the biggest turnaround that Microsoft has ever made when it comes to operating systems, nearly the equivalent of if the company had reverted back to DOS after the release of Windows.".


Not hardly. Nothing wrong with 8 in concept it is just you have a lot of users that are not very literate with them and change has scared them. Problem is if 8 was like 7 it would of buried any chance for windows in tablet and smart phone market. Those bitching about it lack insight to realize that PC is a shrinking market and smart phone and tablet devices are future and in that future 7 style GUI has zero potential.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on July 02, 2014, 05:55:58 AM
Did Microsoft just admit Windows 8 is its worst operating system ever??.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/windows/24088/did-microsoft-just-admit-windows-8-worst-operating-system-ever?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=t.co

"The change is essentially Microsoft's admission that Windows 8 has been a failure. It's the biggest turnaround that Microsoft has ever made when it comes to operating systems, nearly the equivalent of if the company had reverted back to DOS after the release of Windows.".

Agree wholeheartedly with the article.   The major 'goof' was the GUI, but the whole OS was problematic when it came time to make user adjustments.  It was, in effect, forcing the consumer to adapt overnight to a whole new OS, an OS with a GUI essentially unchanged since Windows 95. 

And some people wonder why it bombed!


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KK4GGL on July 02, 2014, 07:13:10 AM
Did Microsoft just admit Windows 8 is its worst operating system ever??.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/windows/24088/did-microsoft-just-admit-windows-8-worst-operating-system-ever?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=t.co

"The change is essentially Microsoft's admission that Windows 8 has been a failure. It's the biggest turnaround that Microsoft has ever made when it comes to operating systems, nearly the equivalent of if the company had reverted back to DOS after the release of Windows.".


Not hardly. Nothing wrong with 8 in concept it is just you have a lot of users that are not very literate with them and change has scared them. Problem is if 8 was like 7 it would of buried any chance for windows in tablet and smart phone market. Those bitching about it lack insight to realize that PC is a shrinking market and smart phone and tablet devices are future and in that future 7 style GUI has zero potential.

So, you are saying that the touch interface is appropriate for every platform. Interesting.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: N0YXB on July 02, 2014, 09:27:49 AM
So the widespread dissatisfaction with Win 8 is the consumer's fault?  Hmmm, maybe the same consumers who didn't like the 'New Coke' back in the '80s?  There are so many that don't like nor want Win 8 that it's not just a illiterate or lazy consumer issue. 

And even if Win 8 is a perfect platform, if consumers don't like it then the onus is on Microsoft to create an OS that better satisfies consumer preferences.  Betamax was a better standard than VHS, but in the end that did not matter because markets are driven by consumers.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: AA4PB on July 02, 2014, 10:02:22 AM
The customer is always right. If you don't build what the customer wants then somebody else will and you will be out of business. It doesn't matter how big you are.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: N4AAB on July 02, 2014, 11:03:34 AM
The customer is always right. If you don't build what the customer wants then somebody else will and you will be out of business. It doesn't matter how big you are.



MS spends more on marketing than most computer company's entire budget. They have apparently managed to convince millions of people that MS Windows is the only thing in existance, or the rest are worse than Windows OS.

If they hadn't, they would be out of business due to Vista, etc.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 02, 2014, 11:08:53 AM
If a touch screen phone and tablet was not such a big market Apple would not of seen its stock go from 5 bucks to over 700 at times in last 6 years or so. Google has made a fortune too. MS largely ignored that market by clinging to XP style GUI. PC market is shrinking like it or not and MS will fade if it does not transition to new platform.

As far as Vista, it was fine after SP 1. Dell did a lot of damage when they rushed to market with systems that DID NOT have Vista compliant chipsets. HP waited for proper chipsets.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: G8YMW on July 02, 2014, 11:52:35 AM
Quote
If a touch screen phone and tablet was not such a big market Apple would not of seen its stock go from 5 bucks to over 700 at times in last 6 years or so. Google has made a fortune too.

Why couldn't Microsoft sell touch BEFORE Ipad came out? They had the chance, they tried

Quote
MS largely ignored that market by clinging to XP style GUI.

An XP gui would have worked. As I said before all you need to do is alter the icon size. 3 mouse clicks, job done
The Metro interface is a prime example of dumbing down the computer. Its OK for Facebook and Angry Birds nothing else. Certainly not work.
"Apps" are only castrated programs when all said and done

Quote
PC market is shrinking

Wrong! The PC market has levelled and the touch market is reaching saturation. There will always be a demand for PCs as long as businesses use computers.

Quote
As far as Vista, it was fine after SP 1. Dell did a lot of damage when they rushed to market with systems that DID NOT have Vista compliant chipsets. HP waited for proper chipsets.

Another example of Microsoft blaming everyone else but themselves. Hell they even tried to blame the OEMs for Win8's failure at one stage

Quote
I'm glad the world is responding to their "Emperor's New Clothes" scheme in a rational manner.  The sheeple aren't quite as dumb as Microsoft Marketing hopes

A Marketing guy was in charge, after the Engineer excused himself to go chase mosquitos (more power to ya, Bill), so Marketing drove the bus.  Engineers take everything into account.  Marketeers don' listen to nobody.

 


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W4KYR on July 02, 2014, 12:23:41 PM
Quote
MS largely ignored that market by clinging to XP style GUI.

No...Microsoft (in all it's arrogance) largely ignored their customers who liked the XP GUI so much that they did not want to give up XP.

So instead of Microsoft bringing back the preferred traditional XP GUI that customers wanted (and still want).....

They came up with with this mess called Metro without any input from consumers or from their corporate customers. And yet once gain they miss the marketplace by a mile in their typical "take it or leave" arrogant approach. And it ended up biting them in the ass big time.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 02, 2014, 01:54:20 PM
Quote
MS largely ignored that market by clinging to XP style GUI.

No...Microsoft (in all it's arrogance) largely ignored their customers who liked the XP GUI so much that they did not want to give up XP.

So instead of Microsoft bringing back the preferred traditional XP GUI that customers wanted (and still want).....

They came up with with this mess called Metro without any input from consumers or from their corporate customers. And yet once gain they miss the marketplace by a mile in their typical "take it or leave" arrogant approach. And it ended up biting them in the ass big time.

You TOTALLY miss point again. If MS stayed blindly with dated and uninspiring XP style GUI they would be signing their death warrant. Desktop as we knew it is dying and to bet farm on its resurgence is a very bad wager. Metro is future and it will evolve as old mouse GUI did.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: G8YMW on July 02, 2014, 02:16:58 PM
Quote
You TOTALLY miss point again. If MS stayed blindly with dated and uninspiring XP style GUI they would be signing their death warrant. Desktop as we knew it is dying and to bet farm on its resurgence is a very bad wager. Metro is future and it will evolve as old mouse GUI did.

The XP style GUI may be dated and uninspiring but if something is right, why alter it.
Metro is a dead end. You are talking about Metro evolving. it's not. It's turning into a clone of the true windows frame. In other words "De-evolution"
Windows 7 sales figures proved your statement
Quote
If MS stayed blindly with dated and uninspiring XP style GUI they would be signing their death warrant.
to be load of marketeers baloney
Another question why is Win7's figures going up faster than XP's figures going down despite Microsoft's attempts to strangle Win7 out of the retail channel?




Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on July 02, 2014, 02:35:04 PM
Most of the systems on the Dell website have Windows 7 as their offered system.  Windows 8 is an upgrade--that isn't recommended. 

It seems that Dell knows what their customers want, and it isn't Windows 8--or 8.1.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 02, 2014, 03:19:59 PM
Quote
You TOTALLY miss point again. If MS stayed blindly with dated and uninspiring XP style GUI they would be signing their death warrant. Desktop as we knew it is dying and to bet farm on its resurgence is a very bad wager. Metro is future and it will evolve as old mouse GUI did.

The XP style GUI may be dated and uninspiring but if something is right, why alter it.
Metro is a dead end. You are talking about Metro evolving. it's not. It's turning into a clone of the true windows frame. In other words "De-evolution"
Windows 7 sales figures proved your statement
Quote
If MS stayed blindly with dated and uninspiring XP style GUI they would be signing their death warrant.
to be load of marketeers baloney
Another question why is Win7's figures going up faster than XP's figures going down despite Microsoft's attempts to strangle Win7 out of the retail channel?

Again desktop is a dying market and no future in basing you business model on it for development. There will always be cry babies to change no escaping it. As far a strangling 7 out of market it is kinda stupid to buy 7 because a new generation of software being written only runs on 8x and future versions. You lock yourself out of a lot of new and coming software clinging to past. Bet you want 8 track tapes back too.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: N0YXB on July 02, 2014, 08:17:09 PM
8 tracks, no.  Neil Young's Pono format looks promising though.  Windows 8 will be eclipsed by something that consumers actually want, in my opinion.

And CJS is right.  I have been doing some PC shopping and most outlets that I have browsed offer Windows 7 as an option to Windows 8.  Consumer demand will decide the outcome, not koolaid drinking "experts".  As a parallel, Betamax was a better format than VHS, but that did not matter in the end.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 03, 2014, 03:45:17 AM
8 tracks, no.  Neil Young's Pono format looks promising though.  Windows 8 will be eclipsed by something that consumers actually want, in my opinion.

And CJS is right.  I have been doing some PC shopping and most outlets that I have browsed offer Windows 7 as an option to Windows 8.  Consumer demand will decide the outcome, not koolaid drinking "experts".  As a parallel, Betamax was a better format than VHS, but that did not matter in the end.

No koolaid here. I remember die hard DOS fans in early Windoze days. I myself at first rejected the Win 8 concept when it first rolled out but like it now. You can use it on a tablet or laptop and it works same.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KK4GGL on July 03, 2014, 02:05:10 PM
No koolaid here. I remember die hard DOS fans in early Windoze days. I myself at first rejected the Win 8 concept when it first rolled out but like it now. You can use it on a tablet or laptop and it works same.

Really? It works the same on a keyboard/mouse based platform as a touch based platform?
... and you don't see the problem?
Sheesh.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 03, 2014, 03:47:21 PM
No koolaid here. I remember die hard DOS fans in early Windoze days. I myself at first rejected the Win 8 concept when it first rolled out but like it now. You can use it on a tablet or laptop and it works same.

Really? It works the same on a keyboard/mouse based platform as a touch based platform?
... and you don't see the problem?
Sheesh.

Not at all. Both support keyboard and mouse if you want and share data transparently. Why do you want two totally different OSes for laptop and tablet???  MS tried with win CE in past and crashed and burned. I can tell you have not used both together. Great marriage.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KK4GGL on July 03, 2014, 04:38:39 PM
No koolaid here. I remember die hard DOS fans in early Windoze days. I myself at first rejected the Win 8 concept when it first rolled out but like it now. You can use it on a tablet or laptop and it works same.

Really? It works the same on a keyboard/mouse based platform as a touch based platform?
... and you don't see the problem?
Sheesh.

Not at all. Both support keyboard and mouse if you want and share data transparently. Why do you want two totally different OSes for laptop and tablet???  MS tried with win CE in past and crashed and burned. I can tell you have not used both together. Great marriage.

They are two different platforms that require two different interfaces.  As I said, I have, and use a tablet. It has a dockable keyboard. A touch interface does not lend itself to keyboard/mouse input. It lends itself to touch input. They are different. If you knew as much as you try to make everyone believe, you'd understand this. You might want to look into Human Interface Guidelines.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 03, 2014, 06:42:45 PM
No koolaid here. I remember die hard DOS fans in early Windoze days. I myself at first rejected the Win 8 concept when it first rolled out but like it now. You can use it on a tablet or laptop and it works same.

Really? It works the same on a keyboard/mouse based platform as a touch based platform?
... and you don't see the problem?
Sheesh.

Not at all. Both support keyboard and mouse if you want and share data transparently. Why do you want two totally different OSes for laptop and tablet???  MS tried with win CE in past and crashed and burned. I can tell you have not used both together. Great marriage.

They are two different platforms that require two different interfaces.  As I said, I have, and use a tablet. It has a dockable keyboard. A touch interface does not lend itself to keyboard/mouse input. It lends itself to touch input. They are different. If you knew as much as you try to make everyone believe, you'd understand this. You might want to look into Human Interface Guidelines.

Far more than you think... Again one OS support an the type of interface you prefer to use. If I use a wireless keyboard and mouse with tablet it is a laptop minus a DVD drive. Again one OS adapts to both needs but you seem to have trouble with concept and feel the you need two different OSes when one can live in both worlds. BTW I also use a touch pen with tablet.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KK4GGL on July 03, 2014, 09:20:30 PM
No koolaid here. I remember die hard DOS fans in early Windoze days. I myself at first rejected the Win 8 concept when it first rolled out but like it now. You can use it on a tablet or laptop and it works same.

Really? It works the same on a keyboard/mouse based platform as a touch based platform?
... and you don't see the problem?
Sheesh.

Not at all. Both support keyboard and mouse if you want and share data transparently. Why do you want two totally different OSes for laptop and tablet???  MS tried with win CE in past and crashed and burned. I can tell you have not used both together. Great marriage.

They are two different platforms that require two different interfaces.  As I said, I have, and use a tablet. It has a dockable keyboard. A touch interface does not lend itself to keyboard/mouse input. It lends itself to touch input. They are different. If you knew as much as you try to make everyone believe, you'd understand this. You might want to look into Human Interface Guidelines.

Far more than you think... Again one OS support an the type of interface you prefer to use. If I use a wireless keyboard and mouse with tablet it is a laptop minus a DVD drive. Again one OS adapts to both needs but you seem to have trouble with concept and feel the you need two different OSes when one can live in both worlds. BTW I also use a touch pen with tablet.

You need to learn to read. I have not said 2 operating systems. And, BTW, just because you can use a keyboard on a tablet does not mean the tablet it is then using a keyboad/mouse interface since you would be using a mouse, pad or touch to select the same icons, with the display looking essentially the same. Buy a clue.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 04, 2014, 06:30:07 AM
No koolaid here. I remember die hard DOS fans in early Windoze days. I myself at first rejected the Win 8 concept when it first rolled out but like it now. You can use it on a tablet or laptop and it works same.

Really? It works the same on a keyboard/mouse based platform as a touch based platform?
... and you don't see the problem?
Sheesh.

Not at all. Both support keyboard and mouse if you want and share data transparently. Why do you want two totally different OSes for laptop and tablet???  MS tried with win CE in past and crashed and burned. I can tell you have not used both together. Great marriage.

They are two different platforms that require two different interfaces.  As I said, I have, and use a tablet. It has a dockable keyboard. A touch interface does not lend itself to keyboard/mouse input. It lends itself to touch input. They are different. If you knew as much as you try to make everyone believe, you'd understand this. You might want to look into Human Interface Guidelines.

Far more than you think... Again one OS support an the type of interface you prefer to use. If I use a wireless keyboard and mouse with tablet it is a laptop minus a DVD drive. Again one OS adapts to both needs but you seem to have trouble with concept and feel the you need two different OSes when one can live in both worlds. BTW I also use a touch pen with tablet.

You need to learn to read. I have not said 2 operating systems. And, BTW, just because you can use a keyboard on a tablet does not mean the tablet it is then using a keyboad/mouse interface since you would be using a mouse, pad or touch to select the same icons, with the display looking essentially the same. Buy a clue.

This is why MS developed Metro interface for 8 so it can adapt to both worlds. Win 8x is not perfect but it is a big first step in changing the way we interact with a computer be it tablet or laptop form.

You sound like a Apple user in badly need of clues.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on July 04, 2014, 06:43:49 AM
And that is why Win 8 blew it so badly--it presented only ONE interface for all platforms.  According to all reports, Microsoft recognized that and they intend to rectify that situation with Windows 9, (?) an OS with three separate interfaces--that work together on one OS.

No matter what you say, 'GGL, 'JX is going to twist it into his version of the kool-aid.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: KK4GGL on July 04, 2014, 10:16:10 AM
This is why MS developed Metro interface for 8 so it can adapt to both worlds. Win 8x is not perfect but it is a big first step in changing the way we interact with a computer be it tablet or laptop form.

Let us know when it actually works


You sound like a Apple user in badly need of clues.

I left OS X for Linux distributions many years ago, and I have used Windows through Vista as well as the DOS machines. I've also used Apple //s, TRS 80s of various kinds, and even a TI99a.

I don't have any Macs at the moment, but I do have my Apple IIgs.

I am not sure if you need to buy some clues, or some honesty. Ah, well.

You sound like the garden variety Microsoft shill, and I keep letting myself getting sucked in to your shillery. Too bad on me.

Have fun.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 04, 2014, 03:14:16 PM
This is why MS developed Metro interface for 8 so it can adapt to both worlds. Win 8x is not perfect but it is a big first step in changing the way we interact with a computer be it tablet or laptop form.

Let us know when it actually works


You sound like a Apple user in badly need of clues.

I left OS X for Linux distributions many years ago, and I have used Windows through Vista as well as the DOS machines. I've also used Apple //s, TRS 80s of various kinds, and even a TI99a.

I don't have any Macs at the moment, but I do have my Apple IIgs.

I am not sure if you need to buy some clues, or some honesty. Ah, well.

You sound like the garden variety Microsoft shill, and I keep letting myself getting sucked in to your shillery. Too bad on me.

Have fun.

Metro works pretty good here on tablet. I have little doubt it will improve with time. I use tablets a lot, more than laptops. To me Win 7 and older is a dead end because there is no path forward as it will not run next generation Windows software.

I still have a TI 99 some where. I had a Atari 1040 ST too. Never had a comadore. On linux, I doubt it will ever reach critical mass as it lacks a universal GUI and has too many flavors. Learn one Windoze version on a PC and it is same on every PC with same version. Not so with linux . played with a lot of apples over years and even had a Newton once but tired of them as they are too limited.

I notice when you really do not have a solid point you try to discredit me to change focus. Kinda like politics were you offer BS and no solutions.

BTW this message is being posted via 4G on a Droid tablet. Again no desktop iron.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on July 06, 2014, 04:41:34 PM
And that is why Win 8 blew it so badly--it presented only ONE interface for all platforms.  According to all reports, Microsoft recognized that and they intend to rectify that situation with Windows 9, (?) an OS with three separate interfaces--that work together on one OS.

No matter what you say, 'GGL, 'JX is going to twist it into his version of the kool-aid.

Seriously? Win 8 only ONE interface. You obviously have not used Win 8 or 8.1. There are two interfaces. Metro and the standard Win desktop interface.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 06, 2014, 05:27:51 PM
Seriously? Win 8 only ONE interface. You obviously have not used Win 8 or 8.1. There are two interfaces. Metro and the standard Win desktop interface.


Yes indeed. Those (like CJS) that have never properly used Win 8x fully on both platforms are the first ones to bash it. They always seem to attack things they do not understand.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K1CJS on July 06, 2014, 06:08:02 PM
Seriously? Win 8 only ONE interface. You obviously have not used Win 8 or 8.1. There are two interfaces. Metro and the standard Win desktop interface.

When it's set up, the only interface is the metro interface.  You have to tweak it and play with it to get rid of metro.

There again, whether metro or not, you still have a difficult time getting win 8 to do what you want it to.  Almost all the adjustments are predetermined and you have a devil of a time changing them--and getting them to stay the way you want them to--unlike previous windows versions.

Added--No matter what is said by the Microsoft shill here, desktop and laptop computers aren't going to go away.  They'll be around for many, many years--and Microsoft is finally recognizing that by the response to Win 8.  Win 9, by reports, is going to be more like Win 7 than Win 8, and will have the ability to personalize fully restored, unlike Win 8, where it was truncated.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5UNX on July 06, 2014, 06:30:54 PM
Seriously? Win 8 only ONE interface. You obviously have not used Win 8 or 8.1. There are two interfaces. Metro and the standard Win desktop interface.

When it's set up, the only interface is the metro interface.  You have to tweak it and play with it to get rid of metro.

There again, whether metro or not, you still have a difficult time getting win 8 to do what you want it to.  Almost all the adjustments are predetermined and you have a devil of a time changing them--and getting them to stay the way you want them to--unlike previous windows versions.

Added--No matter what is said by the Microsoft shill here, desktop and laptop computers aren't going to go away.  They'll be around for many, many years--and Microsoft is finally recognizing that by the response to Win 8.  Win 9, by reports, is going to be more like Win 7 than Win 8, and will have the ability to personalize fully restored, unlike Win 8, where it was truncated.

Again, You clearly have not used Win 8 or 8.1 as your statement "the only interface is the metro interface" is just wrong.

I am not a Win fan like W8JX. I am forced to use it at work. I use a Mac with OSX for my personal machine. I am not defending Windows 8 or 8.1, just tired of reading totally false statements about it . .  I am running Win 8.1 on my work laptop and have been running 8 or 8.1 for over 6 months now. My laptop looks like a normal Windows desktop, task bar at the bottom etc. No Metro interface. It runs normal MS Office and other regular Windows apps. I am also able to custom things like I could with Win 7. My settings stay put and nothing goes back to a pre-set.



Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: K5TED on July 06, 2014, 07:11:16 PM
Win 8 is fine. The real problem is self-appointed experts skilled mostly in parroting the usual Apple forum/'Nix Nerd prattle in a failed attempt to peddle their ignorant blatherskite as truth.


Title: RE: Why is Win 8 bad?
Post by: W8JX on July 06, 2014, 07:12:08 PM
Seriously? Win 8 only ONE interface. You obviously have not used Win 8 or 8.1. There are two interfaces. Metro and the standard Win desktop interface.

When it's set up, the only interface is the metro interface.  You have to tweak it and play with it to get rid of metro.

There again, whether metro or not, you still have a difficult time getting win 8 to do what you want it to.  Almost all the adjustments are predetermined and you have a devil of a time changing them--and getting them to stay the way you want them to--unlike previous windows versions.

Added--No matter what is said by the Microsoft shill here, desktop and laptop computers aren't going to go away.  They'll be around for many, many years--and Microsoft is finally recognizing that by the response to Win 8.  Win 9, by reports, is going to be more like Win 7 than Win 8, and will have the ability to personalize fully restored, unlike Win 8, where it was truncated.

Again, You clearly have not used Win 8 or 8.1 as your statement "the only interface is the metro interface" is just wrong.

I am not a Win fan like W8JX. I am forced to use it at work. I use a Mac with OSX for my personal machine. I am not defending Windows 8 or 8.1, just tired of reading totally false statements about it . .  I am running Win 8.1 on my work laptop and have been running 8 or 8.1 for over 6 months now. My laptop looks like a normal Windows desktop, task bar at the bottom etc. No Metro interface. It runs normal MS Office and other regular Windows apps. I am also able to custom things like I could with Win 7. My settings stay put and nothing goes back to a pre-set.


Yes it is clear that CJS is clueless here. You can use or bypass Metro anytime you chose and customize your 8 desktop. I use 8x because it works for me and like support for tablet and laptop. The more I use 8 the further I pull away from 7. One of my daughters is a Mac user and other Windoze. I use Droid on phone and one tablet too.