Oprah Winfrey too late to save Microsoft's Windows 8 Early signs are showing that hopes for the overnight success of Microsoft's Windows 8 are unrealistic, although the tech giant appears to have bet the farm on the brand new operating system with the shiny new interface. Microsoft blogger Paul Thurrott has quoted one unnamed company source as saying early sales of Windows 8 PCs …
No different to all corporate PC sales. My employer (80,000 employees) buys Thinkpads that came with Vista, then Win 7 installed, and will shortly come with Win 8. And our IT department then wipe them and put on XP.
MS will have claimed every one of the sales as being of the latest OS, but (as with all things Microsoft) wishing things so doesn't make them true.
"MS will have claimed every one of the sales as being of the latest OS"
Yes and they will be right.
Unless that is MS have started to give the O/S away for free.
No?
Didn't think so.
It's a sale 'cos they got paid for it.
Whether it stays on the machine is irrelevant.
I don't suppose MS minds anyone buying an O/S from them twice.
My wife has just got a new laptop with windows 8 installed and we just don't see what the issue is with the new interface, you can get to the traditional desktop in seconds and the metro part isn't difficult to use.
Yes, some of the settings have been hidden away but the vast majority of people just want a computer to work and have no reason to poke around in the OS. I had more of an issue when Microsoft changed the look of Office with 2007, that took ages to get used to.
I've installed it on my windows 7 PC and it is definitely running faster and at £24.99 for an upgrade is a bargain, the upgrade doesn't even check for genuineness of the existing operating system.
"you can get to the traditional desktop in seconds"
You can get to the traditional desktop by a single press of the Windows key on the keyboard. And back again. In a very small fraction of a second...
I like Win8 too, BTW. I also like the fact I've been able to upgrade several XP machines to Win 8 Pro 32-bit or 64-bit for less than €30 each before Microsoft stops supporting XP.
I wonder how many online upgrade sales Microsoft has had? It's not all about new PCs and tablets, surely - but to read articles like this you'd think that was the sole measure of the success or otherwise of the OS. Anyone going through the upgrade procedure from Windows 7 (or other) is likely to be immediately impressed with the simple matter of what feels like a major hardware upgrade - for me it was worth it for that alone to begin with.
Each to their own - but we now have 6 of our 8 PCs on Windows 8 and everything's running very smoothly. (Of the others, one's a netbook with a screen resolution too low for Metro last time I checked, the other is the wife's laptop, and I'm not going anywhere near that!)
Windows 8 = Windows 7 + vastly improved GUI for the majority of users.
(somewhat sorry if this upsets all you techies, but as one myself, I prefer to also be a realist (I also don't miss the start button, didn't use it much anyway))
I guess people have other things to spend their money on at the moment (food, rent etc). I hear sales of most things are disappointing and below expectations.
Last week I went to a friend's house to install a new router and to re-build a home network consisting of multiple PCs, an Xbox, an FTP Server, two NAS boxes and a few other bits and pieces. One laptop had Windows 8 on it. I was not impressed. I couldn't make head or tail of the cartoon interface and when I made that go away (with some wierd mouse swipe to the upper right corner of the screen) I found a desktop with no START button!!!! Getting into the Control Panel, tweaking Network Settings, trying to view other devices on the Network.... all turned from something easy to do into something that was really hard. I admit I was fumbling my way around, running searches to find the utilities and wizards I needed. I got there in the end but I for one won't be buying, nor will I be recommending it to all the people who acll on me for unofficial technical support!
Yes it is really hard even if you know what you are looking for, using your network settings as an example
Ignore your mouse, look at your keyboard and press N, now press E, then T followed by W
Oh look, all the relevant sections containing the word network are there for me to pick from, how dare microsoft make finding things so difficult.
What you mean is you couldn't be arsed to find out anything at all about something you hadn't seen before and because you couldn't work it out it is a problem with the software. If you know what you are looking for Windows 8 makes it very easy to find.
well said, the search is very good...
and as for the metro start? well, how about have some of your applications stuck to the task bar, some accessed from a context menu and the rest hidden in folders, accessed from the file explorer... OSX relies on spotlight more than win8 relies on search...
Yes, Win8 is so much more complex than other solutions!!
I have only had a quick go on it and hated it. Probably because I am a lazy ass who slouches back and expects to do everything using a mouse click. Leaning forward to the keyboard to (Alt-F4) close a running application, is a right pain.
Not having a touch screen, I couldn't believe the amount of double key stroke shortcuts it requires. God knows how any disabled users will get on with it. Next time I use one I might actually have a look at the Accessibility options.
I think the point is this: From Win 95 to Win 7, if you had used one, you could use any version of Windows. My Mother-in-Law happily found Solitare within 50 seconds of using Win 7 for the first time. That is now almost impossible with TIFKAM.
What M$ should have done is give us the choice at install - TIFKAM or the "Classic" desktop. Win 8 is faster than 7, but the alien environment will put a lot of people off. Look at Server 2012 - what the hell is a touch screen interface doing on a Server OS (or indeed a desktop)? Unless, you are after running Exchange 2010 (oops, sorry - not officially supported by Server 2012) or SQL on a tablet?
What where you thinking M$?
The average user will spend a minute and a half to five minutes, tops, gaining their first impression of Win8... and typically on a friend's machine that is already logged in. No manuals... no tutorials.
The problem here is not that things have changed, but that they appear to have changed in a way that is un-intuitive for the average user without aid. You can yell about that and blame the user all you want, but there is no changing human nature.
They will expend shockingly little effort to adapt when there is no significant benefit for adapting, and if it's mostly the same otherwise they'll stay in their comfy old chair (in this case Win7) instead of moving across the room to the new one. That's assuming there is a choice... if forced you can be sure to expect howling and gnashing of teeth that it requires more than a <ridiculously low level of effort> to adapt.
Not saying it's right or wrong... just that it is.
So switching from clicking Start -> Control Panel to Windows key + q -> Control Panel was too difficult?
Oh of course, the new OS you didn't bother to find anything out about was at fault here, not the "tech" person who went with "it's different, therefore it's bad/wrong".
How do you cope if they use Linux server with command line input only!!
To get to the desktop form the Metro interface, you click on the large (double width) button, which has the desktop wallpaper as its background. The button is labeled "Desktop", by default, IIRC, it's in the bottom left of the tile array when you first start/logon.
To get to the control panel, you locate the button labeled "Control Panel", or you could go to the desktop and right click-properties (or is it personalise) on the desktop, you can then browse up and down the control panel hierarchy.
If you really want the control panel you could have it as a desktop icon, or in my computer, which can also be on the desktop.
The interface is different, it doesn't mean it's better or worse per se. Change is not a bad word, I realise that lots of people are now thinking that this is change for the sake of change and doesn't need to be done, but they said that about Win 95's interface. Now a lot of people are going to be saying that Win 95 was different, but that wasn't the case at the time. I think that once all the dust has settled, people will come to like the new interface, particularly casual computer users or office workers. For the techies, there is also the far improved command line as well.
"To get to the desktop form the Metro interface, you click on the large (double width) button, which has the desktop wallpaper as its background. The button is labeled "Desktop", by default, IIRC, it's in the bottom left of the tile array when you first start/logon."
Or press the Windows key on your keyboard...
The downvoters are being unfair. Your reaction to 8 is similar to my first encounters with Macs. The difference is that 8 is called Windows -- it's not a different product from a rival company.
The thing that has sold Microsoft products to the corporates is backwards compatibility -- and that includes staff not being bewildered by the latest iteration of Windows.
Yes it is quicker even on hardware that MS later decided to block.
Sadly the stupid kiddie blocks never appeared to have any useful function at all (I do not want to know the weather the other side of the world and ONLY the other side of the world) and the blank screen of the desktop had room to host the short cuts to things that I did use.
Without the play pit 'start thing that is no longer Metro' it would have been an interesting punt even though it played badly with some network hardware (BSODs anyone?) the speed might just have been something to welcome but after several weeks of effort I opted for the easy life with 7. But £25 for the OS software and god only knows how much to replace every printer and scanner interface device, sorry I'll pass.
Perhaps it is an age thing and I am just too old to want those kiddie blocks stuffing up my machines and disabling functions and equipment that I need.
"I do not want to know the weather the other side of the world and ONLY the other side of the world"
So you never considered setting the location on the weather app?
Sounds a bit like rejecting an otherwise nice new car because you could only find a map of Australia in it, rather than an A-Z of London...
Windows 8 is pretty good. I use it on a tablet, I use it on my desktop. I like it. But I'm just amazed by how much ill-informed hate there is for Windows 8 and the rush to slag it off in articles that often show a lack of experience. Then there's all the hate in the comments too. It's crazy.
Never mind.
These are the ppl who'll post how excellent it was, once the next version of Windows is out. Some call themselves "techies" or "nerds" . . but can't even distinguish between a GUI and an OS.
NEW RULE . . as Bill Maher would have put it::
If you can't write assembly code and don't build your own boxes, you're NOT a technical user.
This post has been deleted by its author
I have Win 8 on my laptop. If you pin apps to the taskbar, it's pretty much like using Win 7, as you rarely go to the start screen. So it's not a big deal.
But this makes the start screen pretty pointless - I don't want jiggling tiles there flashing me news updates when I've gone there looking to launch open office or whatever.
The problem with live tiles is that on a phone your lock/start screen is probably what's visible most of the time. The phone is in your pocket, you pick it up, glance at it to see if any updates, then put it back. Live tiles probably work well there. But on a PC, you're spending your time on the desktop, so that is the only useful place to have live tiles. I said from the start, for Win 8 they should have had 'metro' running as the widget bar, it might be more useful there and could be tucked aside by those who didn't want it. They've messed up badly shoehorning it into the OS in such a major way, and they've doubly messed up by not letting you revert to the 'classic' windows interface.
I've got use to Win 8, it's fast, stable, reliable and has some nice new features but that doesn't make the decision to force this new interface on people any less of a stupid arrogant decision.
From a consumer perspective, Windows, and by extension, Microsoft, have now jumped the shark. Simple as that.
Sure, Microsoft still have the Xbox 360, which is much fun for the kids, but how many people (grown ups) are going to build an ecosystem around a 7 year old games console? Particularly when they already have iDevices and Droids in their pocket, or lying around the living room.
Microsoft have simply moved too late, and massively under-delivered.
Offering a single UI that spans the desktop, tablet and phone was a huge ask, but one they probably shouldn't have attempted as I'm not sure anyone really wants Metro (or whatever its called) on their mouse-driven desktop. Metro is instant alienation of those who are quite happy with their current hardware keyboard and mouse driven PC, and who struggle to get their head around the concept of a largely touch-centric desktop, when their screen doesn't support touch... it's a horrible compromise and one that wasn't worth making. As, indeed, Apple have not attempted, and for very good reason. Unlike Microsoft, Apple eschew compromises whenever possible.
As such, Windows 7 is probably the last Microsoft desktop OS I'll be installing and using at home. Not sure what will replace it, but it certainly won't be Windows 8 or what ever comes after it. Chances are it will be something Unix/Linux based, and maybe (hopefully) I won't even need a desktop in a couple more years, I'll just drop my multi-core ARM (or less likely, but still possibly, Intel) phone into a dock and have at it on a big screen with nice comfortable keyboard and mouse, moving windows around the desktop and basically feeling quite at home...
Consistency was a damn fine idea in theory, but totally beyond the technical reach of a poorly-managed dinosaur corporate like MS.
The people who could have made it work were doubtless culled and rejected from the political tarpit years ago.
A smarter approach might have been a modular OS with proper MVC, so devs could keep the core features separate from the UI, and redesign the latter to suit the platform. But I'm not even sure that was ever possible with Windows, except perhaps with a total rewrite.
Meanwhile Linux has never succeeded on the desktop because with so many distros it's impossible to market it properly. Geek word of mouth doesn't count for much in the consumer market. And MS/Apple have always been stronger at marketing than tech.
But there has to be a basic level of functionality to make a marketable product, and there also has to be an attractive USP.
Win 8 has neither. If the very best and most generous consumer perception of a product is that it's 'not as bad as everyone says' the marketing and reputation are already a disaster.
It's not everyone - it's apple shills in the media, apple fans, and geeks who as you say don't count for much. Sorry, i criticised ms way before our became trendy, but that also means i remember how we have this merry go round with every major ms release. It's painful to look back at the claims of how ms were doomed, years ago.
Meanwhile, the real fear geeks should have is that the future will be nothing but ipads, yet that gets a free pass. And even though i love android, i don't want it on my laptop.
It will be interesting to see what apple do though. For all the moaning ms get for being more touch friendly, even though it still works fine with keyboard and mouse, apple would rather be dominating with ipads. They've been the prime culprit for losing the idea that touch is cool, but where does that leave their mac computers?
And as opposed to building an ecosystem over a 10 year old mp3 player?
Dear god, people, what a bunch of whining!
Yes, some things in Win 8 are different, but once you figure them out, they are, on the whole, better than in Win 7. I'll agree that Metro apps don't work in that ecosystem, but you can change the default app for file types, so you should never have to end up in a Metro app. The start screen is just a prettier version of the start menu.
Also, anyone on this site who is complaining about the lack of a Start button is just making themselves look like a novice. Surely you just hit the Windows key and start typing?
I don't understand what people wanted from Win 8? Did you expect MS to just make a faster version of Win 7? Are there any changes that you would have tolerated, because it doesn't feel like there are.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
