I for one
Cannot think of one reason why a business would want to migrate to Windows 8 - unless they really needed to waste money.
Microsoft has staked a lot on Windows 8 being the key to its future, but preliminary numbers from analyst house Forrester suggest that business isn't too keen on the new OS. The firm's 2009 survey data for Windows 7 shows that at this point in its sales cycle, 49 per cent of firms expected to upgrade to that then-new operating …
Cannot think of one reason why a business would want to migrate to Windows 8 - unless they really needed to waste money.
There are a couple of things nicely done in Windows 8, (i.e. the Hyper V stuff and being able to logically link multiple drives). The 'other thing - which shall remain nameless' can easily be bypassed and made redundant if you want. 'Manager''s will probably have people under them who know this. 'Manager''s should also be informed that XP is not going to be supported from 2014, (April), and need to actually earn their money by making a decision, (i.e. stay with the trusty, but currently totally mad, MS view of the future, or go some 'other' way). I'm flexible - so don't care.
Wrote :- "The 'other thing - which shall remain nameless' can easily be bypassed and made redundant if you want. 'Manager''s will probably have people under them who know this"
Helpful if you said what "other thing" you are talking about.
As for bypassing things, many companies (like mine) have the desktops and Windows so locked down that you cannot bypass anything, except maybe with serious hacking which would land you in serious trouble.
An obvious reason to migrate to Windows 8 would be that they havnt started migrating to Windows 7 yet. Windows 8 has lots of new enterprise functionality, is simpler to learn and use and will have a lower TCO.
Seeing as it was only recently released and business are naturally cautious - it's hardly surprising that the plans to migrate are lower for Windows 8....
Maybe you don't have a reason, but I can think of some:
Windows To Go - this can be a very useful tool in theory (in theory as I've not yet tried this)
Hyper-V - can be useful for all kinds of sysadmin/developer scenarios, and actually for Sales bods too demoing systems.
Any purpose where performance matters - Windows 8 is miles faster at all kinds of tasks.
I could go on.
The reality is that there's a lot of noise about the UI changes, but underneath that are lots of very good reasons - if your particular scenario demands it. But that's no different to before - some people think XP is good enough. I don't agree. However to say "you can't think of one reason" means you've not thought about it for more than er, one second.
"is simpler to learn and use "
I suggest you read Trevor's rant and see how many upvotes he has and indeed reflect on your dismal balance of down/upvotes
Tech blog readers are not the entire userbase of enterprise computing systems....
Getting people to click on the lower right corner when they need to do something is surprisingly painless. It's the same muscle behavior from 17 years of Windows, just invisible now, so it actually makes sense.
"I suggest you read Trevor's rant and see how many upvotes he has and indeed reflect on your dismal balance of down/upvotes"
I can provide you numerous examples where factually correct posts has been repeatedly downvoted and where factually incorrect or plain ignorant posts have been massively upvoted. The criteria for the voting? Whether it makes Microsoft sound good or not. Seriously - I have seen someone post basic and wrong information about Windows, things that can easily be checked, and get lots of upvotes. I've replied with posts that are sometimes nothing more than a factual correction, and the downvotes come flooding in.
Logically, does that suggest that the upvoting and downvoting here reflect accuracy or that it actually reflects allegiance to an OS? Your appeal to Group Think argument is not supportable and by numerous examples, can be shown to be not supportable.
"actually reflects allegiance to an OS?"
So that's 86 for anything other than Windows v 0 for Windows using your argument.
Somehow I can't believe that the huge number of upvotes for Trevor's post reflect the ratio of Linux supporters/Windows supporters - I'd guess it rather reflects the opinions of disgruntled Windows users/admins !
"I have seen someone post basic and wrong information about Windows, things that can easily be checked, and get lots of upvotes. I've replied with posts that are sometimes nothing more than a factual correction, and the downvotes come flooding in."
I've dared to criticise the shortcomings of WP7 when And/Or was ranting about how great and fresh it was, and I got the record of downvotes for any post I ever made here (strangely that post is no longer visible in my history, maybe it is too old). I have a Lumia 800 and all I posted was factual, but still I got over 40 downvotes.
I can give a lot of other anecdotes of downvotes being given just because one has dared to criticise Microsoft's offering "du jour", just as you can rant on how you were unfairly downvoted for posting something positive about windows. So please stop with that tactic. Maybe people are downvoting you the same way they downvote RICHTO or Bob - just because they see your name and don't even go to the trouble of reading what you post.
Forrester just reprints the usual OS N is preferred to OS N+1 that has been issued since the year dot.
Then every scandal sheet can reprint it as though anyone is going to be shocked.
Any idiot could have predicted these numbers. Seems some journos are letting their bias affect their brains.
Windows 7 followed the unsuccesful Vista so there was lots of interest in upgrading.
Windows 8 follows the successful 7 so there is a lot less interest.
That doesn't make Windows 8 unsuccessful or anything else. What will be more interesting is the business uptake of Windows Server 2012. That will be a much better indicator of business adaption in the short term.
Consumer adoption of Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 is much more important to Microsoft at this stage to stop the bleeding to Apple and Google. Given Apple's recent missteps and Google getting into anti-trust and entanglements and both having big patent issues Microsoft's window of opportunity lloks better now than in the recent past.
Do you do a lot of predictions for MS operating systems success??? ...
Microsoft really should have made Windows 8 BUSINESS a business OS not a frikkin Tomy "Play to Learn" toy. Then taken that pile of crap Tomy interfarce and slapped it onto the phone/tablet/slate!
Microsoft window of opportunity ? That would happen only if people decided to throw away their precious hard earned money into bad Microsoft Win8 Metro/ModernUI smartphones,tablets crap products.
And seriously... business uptake of Windows Server 2012 ? What ?
Would any business really want to waste their employees time dealing with the atrocious childish Metro/ModernUI tiles ?
Microsoft wants to turn every business into a kindergarten with the whole Metro/ModernUI childish tiles pathetic thing.
But that doesn't mean that businesses will want to do that.
Having put Metro/ModernUI unusable childish tiles on Windows Server 2012 just shows how much on drugs employess and managers are at Microsoft nowadays.
Haven't you heard? The recommended way to run Windows Server 2012 is without the GUI. They're trying to make a proper server OS, in the manner of UNIX-like systems, where the GUI shell is an option that runs on top of the core OS.
True, which is also why I think Server 2012 has much potential.
However; all the remote administrative tools are currently only available for / on Windows 8 and haven't been ported to previous platforms yet (at the very least to Windows 7). Which is IMO another fail; and also the reason why, at the time of writing, server 2012 administration is completely tied in with the dinkey toy interface.
Not very appealing IMO.
When Windows XP came out, many businesses were still in the process of migrating to Windows 2000, and the uptake of Windows XP was much smaller than for its predecessor.
If this shows one thing then that businesses are more or less running behind current developments in technology.
"Microsoft really should have made Windows 8 BUSINESS a business OS not a frikkin Tomy "Play to Learn" toy. Then taken that pile of crap Tomy interfarce and slapped it onto the phone/tablet/slate!"
Really, even a money could get along with Windows 8 just fine! A MONKEY!
Geez, if handling a few large icons is that difficult for you then this says more about you than it does about Windows 8 and what-has-been-'Metro'.
Every day we have to learn new things, and we have to adapt and change what we have learned before because it is no longer appropriate. This is not only true for most professions but a simple fact of life.
It is beyond me how someone with at least half a brain could believe that this doesn't apply to computers.
The GUI it's an option,uh?
Linux or BSD and any Unix servers do have GUIs too. The fact that you can run long script on shells means nothing. And it's not that businesses using Linux, BSD, Unix servers don't use GUIs to do the job.
It might look nice and smart to do everything on the shell but it's not always the best way to do things at all.
And having a pathetic childish unusable Metro/ModernUI thing instead just means that the only UI option sucks and can't be used.
You're not quite understanding the GUI-less recommendation on Server 2012. From your post, you are obviously under the impression that the alternative is a big shell interface in which you type scripts or commands and hit return. What you'd actually more likely do, were you an enterprise customer that was managing many Server 2012 instances, is turn off the GUI on all of them so that they used less resources, and manage them using the remote server administration tools which you'd run as a management tool covering some or all of those instances on your own PC, not running on the server instances. Of course you can open a shell on those servers as well, but your impression that a GUI-less server is a screen full of text, is wrong.
As to "pathetic childish unusable UI", what is it you've been unable to do on Server 2012's GUI that were able to do on previous versions of the Server?
I think what you are saying is:-
Win 8. Windows for Monkeys.
"I think what you are saying is:- Win 8. Windows for Monkeys."
No, I think their original typo of "moneys" was more accurate. Windows for moneys. (And lots of them with the recent price hikes).
Just to mention - Windows Server has been able to run without a GUI since Server 2008....
"Windows Server has been able to run without a GUI since Server 2008..."
My servers have been able to run without Windows for 12+ years !
One word, multi-tasking.
It doesn't do it well, oh it can run lots of apps at once, but accessing them once they're running is not as easy as it could, should, or used to be.
So, one of the main functions that a business would want to use, has been crippled, on purpose. How can anyone NOT think it was designed by a child for children. I give MS a month before they release a "patch" that returns the original desktop back to users if they want it, along with the start button and tray.
Real people at "work" can have up to 20 apps open at a time, and to those people, Win 8 is a joke, a cruel joke, but a joke non-the-less. I bet my teenager and her grandma would like it though.
Go ahead and test us MS, watch how long the tech world can put off upgrading, hell we might even be able to use this to push Linux on company or two.
"We'd love to start pushing Win 8 onto the office computers boss, but see the driver hooks a function by patching the system call table, so it's not safe to unload it unless another thread's about to jump in there and do its stuff, and you don't want to end up in the middle of invalid memory!"
"One word, multi-tasking. It doesn't do it well, oh it can run lots of apps at once, but accessing them once they're running is not as easy as it could, should, or used to be."
Are you talking about WIndows 8? Because it still has the Desktop usable in the same way as before. It just has a Start Screen instead of a Start Menu. Which isn't really a factor in how many programs you can juggle. Nothing obliges you to use the MUI apps as you can still run the same software you ran on Windows 7. So the rest of your argument that follows from this misconception immediately doesn't apply.
Back in the XP days, there was a long time sticking to the operating system, and people got used to having some continuity for a while. There wasn't an upgrade to XP for quite some time. It took YEARS to get Vista in the pipeline, and users didn't want to budge from an nicely working XP ecosystem, which was humming along for many years. After a while, XP got a little tired, and the reviews for W7 were "ok" and with new hardware having it "built in" people came to accept it, slowly, but they accepted it. Now comes along W8, just two years after W7, and the populus just doesn't want to go through an upgrade cycle right now. They just got through migrating everything to W7 and there is no business reason to take the next leap into the unknown so quickly.
So, it is all a matter of timing. The lifetime of XP made users accustomed to a longer upgrade cycle, and with the recession, things just aren't looking that good. Keep the old kit and let it hum for a while. No need to upgrade just for the sake of upgrading, I can still do word processing the way I used to. Why bother. There is no real incentive.
Of course, when the next version of Office will only run on W8, everyone will yell and scream that the new file formats don't work on the old version of Office, but if you got tied products, and the government doesn't object, make their kit obsolete and worry not.
Windows 9 anyone?
Its three years since W7 released, not two, although a lot of W7 upgrades have happened in the last year with many more still underway so another version upgrade holds little appeal for majority of businesses short term. But yeah, obviously XP etc. got people used to a slower upgrade cycle. Its also true maturity in PC hardware means the earler every three year PC hardware upgrade rule of thumb has stretched and kit is kept for much longer nowadays, at elast in businesses I have dealings with.
Unlikely IMO Office Next will be W8 or later, more likely I think W7 or later support will be around for years. Version breaking file formats even more unlikely.
the RT layout will just massively confuse most of my customers, compared to Vista (that was more an Driver issues and Poor implementation of superfetch and system restore both Bashing the HDD in i/O) Win8 RT layout been Forced onto users is very stupid move, all they needed to do was an an market app store to windows and Slap windows 8 on the Box (+the improvements they have done to the Win8 that i do like under the hud)
at least apple have got it Right this time
OSX for laptop and desktop
IOS for Phone and Tablets (and some more cut down version OS for ipods)
MS should not be forcing an Touch layout onto desktop and laptops where no one wants it
if you got both at the same time, the only thing that could make you day any worse is switching to Windows 8
There are far worse things. Having to spend any real life time in the presence of one of the 'windoze 8 is fail' type characters being one.
especially the semi-literate ones.
roll out that astroturf
as one currently suffering after being forced to upgrade from an adequate, stable usable corporate Win XP and office 2003 to the abominations known as Office 2007 and much, much worse, Office 2010 (whatever), To Hades with anything M$ after XP and Office 2003. Slow, slow, if it is not freezing while one waits, and waits,. Where the hell are the simple menus, why does it take 8 clicks to do what took 3 even if the required control can be found.
And the laptop has many times the RAM and CPU of the old XP based one.
I refuse to buy anything that is polluted by a company that has abandoned years of research into usability and replaced it with crap apparently suitable for drooling teenagers fouling fondleslabs with fat from fast "food"
As a paperwork generator (used to be called a unix admin) for whom office97 a reasonable piece of software to do paper work my "job" has become nearly impossible to do in a timely manner.
IMNSO, M$ have done more for Ubuntu with their latest offerings than anything the FSF could dream of. The absolute leap and disjoint usage between M$ versions of anything makes moving to whatever OpenOffice is called this month so much easier.
As Win8 takes the pain so much further, my next hardware will have blank hard rives for whatever takes my fancy at the time.
A clarion call to arms !! Bring back the VT220 and Uniplex !! At least it worked with light loads, multiple users on a 386!!
I once had the misfortune of having to use a computer with office 2007 on it. The lack of a menu bar made the application fundamentally unusable . I know the keyboard shortcuts for Print, save, open, find but more obscure ones I do not. It's the same usability issue Google Chrome has, breaking the UI paradigm people are used to is not 'something they'll get used to', it just annoys them and makes them hate the company who did it.
<blockquote>The lack of a menu bar made the application fundamentally unusable </blockquote>
Firstly, it has a menu bar. Secondly, given many millions of people manage fine with it, arguing that you have found it unusable (which I take to mean you cannot use it), makes you sound like you are the one with problems. It took me about a morning to get used to the Ribbon.
"It took me about a morning to get used to the Ribbon."
I am in awe.
I've been using Office 2010 at work for about a year and still have to google where to find commands on a regular basis.
For instance, how to make all the rows of a table the same height but so the table fits within a certain amount of space.
Word 2k, just drag the bottom table border to desired height for whole table, then select whole table and click on 'distribute rows' or something similar. Word 2010 - managed it by trial and error on a sub command available by clicking on a tiny triangle on some part of the ribbon...
Tramp: I have to use windows at work. Win7 is actually OK. Win8 might be fun on an Interactive Whiteboard...
"I am in awe."
Then you're about to be blinded because most of my non-IT friends who use Word are comfortable with the Ribbon, too. More so than they were with all the little menus and sub-menus.
"For instance, how to make all the rows of a table the same height but so the table fits within a certain amount of space. Word 2k, just drag the bottom table border to desired height for whole table, then select whole table and click on 'distribute rows' or something similar. Word 2010 - managed it by trial and error on a sub command available by clicking on a tiny triangle on some part of the ribbon..."
Seems a rather long way around. Just right-click on the table and select "Distribute Rows Evenly" (it's not even in a sub-menu). That works in Office 2010. I can't remember if it's present in previous versions.
If for some reason you prefer to use the Ribbon, then the moment you select a table, a contextual panel appears on the Ribbon called "Layout". Under there is an icon an accompanying text saying "Distribute Rows". Note: not "a tiny triangle".
Just to help with the "tiny triangle" problem when trying to distribute rows evenly in a table...
And be glad that your CIO hasn't forced your entire multinational company into Office 365. What a slow, underwhelming pile of crap *that* is.
"The lack of a menu bar made the application fundamentally unusable"
No it didn't. It made it unusable to you, in your deluded opinion, because you clearly point-blank refused to bother learning the - frankly, rather slight - difference in the UI and instead decided to throw your toys out of the pram over Microsoft having the audacity to not stick the same File Menu system for the third decade running.
"It's the same usability issue Google Chrome has, breaking the UI paradigm people are used to is not 'something they'll get used to', it just annoys them and makes them hate the company who did it."
Yet Google Chrome is immensely popular and may people apparently have no issues with the UI whatsoever. Does your assertion that people don't get used to a new UI/annoys them/makes them hate Microsoft have any basis in fact that you neglected to mention or did you just - as I suspect - extrapolate your own failure's to adapt and apply them to the rest of the world with no justification for it whatsoever?
... you're saying that you're either incapable or too lazy to learn something new, and because you're stuck in your old ways you expect the world around you to stand still.
A truly exemplary employee.
The newer versions of Office have customisable menus - and in most cases it is now faster to get to commonly used options. If it isnt for you, then tweak the menus to suit your needs. It isnt hard...
Nice to hear that you refuse to buy any Apple products...
At least as a paperwork generator, you are probably already used to getting RSI in your job if you were a previously a UNIX admin...
Ubuntu? I think even MeGo has more users than that does....Microsoft have actually made a very astute play that touch and gesture will be the future of computing - and I think they might well be right!
Bring back the 20th Century you mean?
Its a lot more useable and enterprise ready than Google Docs is!
no sunshine, no RSI as I use vi where possible for drafting, as it takes much, much less typing to get work done, but then, my docs are meant to inform, not be works of art or worse, management speak. Your response suggests two points; (a) you are young, a serious but treatable condition. (b) you have no idea of how hard it is to get the dear users of the corporate systems, who actually do the coal face grunt work that brings in the revenue, to change their ways. How much productivity is being lost using UIs suitable for other devices than office desktops is anyones guess. No doubt all the newer hires used to poking small things are doing just fine. They just happen to be a minority.
Awesome troll, but: Considering Office 2010 worse than 2007 outs you immediately (sorry, everyone in the world knows that 2010 fixed most of 2007's worst problems), and you talk about 8 clicks to do anything when you claim to be an old school UNIX admin and VT220 user; if you really were, you'd have long since stopped clicking and starting using the text-completion start menu beginning in Vista. I use LibreOffice at home and would never consider its insane menu-driven system to hold a candle to the Ribbon. Hope they fix that soon, and I hope it sticks in your craw.
I don't think you've ever used any of them, or even if you have, this post was pure troll.
Obviously took a backup of my W7 system first.
I spent the first three days staring at my screen wondering how I get rid of the tiles and wondering where my desktop was (had very similar experience with that Ubuntu) - finally I installed classic shell and got my W7 look and feel back.
Overall with classic shell the ordinary user will be fine, W8 does have some useful friendly features, though the Apps are very lacking particularly the mail client - but there again I am used to Outllook with drag and drop for calendar meeting from email. No Facebook client at mo ( yes I need it for work). Twitter not bad. Though much easier using browser when you have a keyboard and mouse.
Still making judgement - but pleased to say it isn't that spawn of Satan called Vista!
Well, that's nice.
It's also proof of Microsoft's abject fail, because they could have shipped the desktop version with a similar UI to Windows 7, but they actively chose not to.
They think tablets are the future and so make an OS that is great on tablets. The traditional desktop has a limited lifespan if you believe sales figures.