back to article More than half of Windows 8 users just treat it like Windows 7

For all Microsoft's hype about The Interface Formerly Known As Metro (TIFKAM), more than half of all Windows 8 users ignore the new Start Screen and treat the OS as if it were Windows 7, according to a study by PC management firm Soluto. Soluto chart tracking Windows Store app use How many Windows 8 users launch a Windows …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

      1. John Tserkezis

        "No OS should ever require 3rd party programs in order for it to become useable."

        You must be very easily pleased.

        I've replaced the built-in windows copy routine, because it's a little bit buggy, and doesn't offer features I need.

        I've replaced the delete routines - strictly not needed, but the extra reporting is nice.

        I've replaced windows explorer, because, well, it doesn't come close the to productivity levels I have now.

        I've replaced the built-in browser, because it was Internet Exploror, do I need any more reason than that?

        I've replaced the "built-in" email client - which they force you to download - because mine is better.

        I've replaced Media Player. Because I can.

        I've installed my own security manager. Not that hard to get better than BitLocker.

        I've replaced my command prompt. Batch scripts feature heavily here, and beating DOS isn't hard.

        I've replaced the bulit-in CD/DVD burner. Mainly because I want to get work done the way *I* want to.

        -- And that's just replacing the built-in utilities - wanna get me started on actual add-on productivity software?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      No it doesn't

      True, Classic Shell makes Windows 8 useable, but consider this analogy that doesn't involve software of any kind.

      You buy a new car.

      It is a tad faster than your old one, corners very slightly better and returns a slightly better fuel consumption.

      Would you then expect the dashboard and controls to be so awful that you would willingly go down to your local Classic Shelby motor mart to have the gear shift taken down from the roof and reinstalled on the prop tunnel, the square steering knob replaced with a round wheel and the dashboard you had to rotate to view one dial at at time, replaced with a couple of convetional instruments.

      Would you find that accceptable?

      What would you think of people suggesting that you were just being a bit of a traditionalist in your reaction to a new and exciting way to drive a car?

      I submit you would be asking the manufacturer to put the gear shift on the prop tunnel, make the steering wheel round and have the instruments in view at all times.

      That, friends, is the real-world analogy of the excerable wonder of Win 8. A product only loved by those managerial staff who should be leaving on the "B" Ark and the kind of prople who use the word "Leverage" as a verb.

      1. Don Jefe

        Re: No it doesn't

        No. But I expect the gas pedal to be in the same place.

      2. Shades
        Coat

        Re: No it doesn't

        "to have the gear shift taken down from the roof and reinstalled on the prop tunnel, the square steering knob replaced with a round wheel and the dashboard you had to rotate to view one dial at at time, replaced with a couple of convetional instruments.

        Sounds more like an old school Citroen!

      3. steward
        Headmaster

        Re: No it doesn't

        An AC writes: "the kind of prople who use the word "Leverage" as a verb."

        You mean the kind of "prople" who write the Oxford English Dictionary? The OED has both noun and verb forms for "leverage".

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: No it doesn't

          > You mean the kind of "prople" who write the Oxford English Dictionary? The OED has both noun and verb forms for "leverage".

          "Leverage" is a fairly recent addition from our American cousins, inexplicable because there is a perfect word that already exists for the purpose, that being "lever".

          You lever something with a lever. You don't need to leverage it.

          Why not go the whole hog and leveragitate it?

    2. Daniel B.
      Facepalm

      Real Solutions

      The solution is not to use Classic Shell or Start8. It is to not buy Windows 8. At. All.

      Vendor broke it, vendor should fix it. I wouldn't buy a car with the gearbox mounted on the roof, neither should I pay to fix something as stupid as that.

      1. Nigel 11
        Devil

        Re: Real Solutions

        The solution is not to use Classic Shell or Start8. It is to not buy Windows 8. At. All.

        The problem with that as a corporate user is that we have downgrade rights, and that the hardware sold with Windows 7 costs MORE than the same hardware with Windows 8. And since we always blow away whatever crapware a PC ships with by re-installing our customized image, we're "buying" Windows 8 if MS cares to view it that way.

        However, I'm sure that they can count activations and work out the truth of the above. If they want to. MS has (maybe had) an "Emperor's new clothes" problem.

    3. yossarianuk

      Linux makes sense.

      Yes windows 8 proves that Linux makes perfect sense. The file manager in KDE and Mint beat the shit out of any version of Windows.

      I used 'power' shell once and wept.

  1. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Sandtitz Silver badge
      Windows

      Re: More than half?

      That joke should be put to sleep already.

      There are more Windows 8 users than Linux on desktop users combined. Deal with it.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: More than half?

        so... 6 users?

      2. Daniel B.
        Boffin

        Wrong joke.

        "There are more Windows 8 users than Linux on desktop users combined. Deal with it."

        THIS is the actual joke that should be put to sleep. It's not even funny, given that Android+Linux tablets probably outnumber Win8 installs, including Tablet versions.

        (Not to mention that Linux servers still outnumber Windows Servers as well.)

        1. Sandtitz Silver badge
          Headmaster

          Re: Wrong joke. @Daniel B.

          You should have a Dunce Cap icon - I wrote about Desktops and you're talking about tablets. Apples and Oranges here.

      3. cyborg
        Flame

        Re: More than half?

        > There are more Windows 8 users than Linux on desktop users combined. Deal with it.

        All I know is that when I bought my parents a laptop for Christmas that they knew enough about Windows 8 to mention that they would prefer not to have it. These are not technical people. They have used Ubuntu on an old XP PC I upgraded and dealt with it fine but wanted Windows because that's easier for them (as far as they understand any of this) because that's what other people use. And they knew from a position of not really having the knowledge or experience to really form a view otherwise that Win 8 was not for them.

        Is there anyone out there who isn't paid to do so singing the virtues of Win 8? Or are people just using what comes with their machines because if they had a choice even those with a small amount of knowledge will be avoiding Win 8? You know, like this survey is showing.

        I hardly think market inertia is anything for an MS fanboy to be getting wet about. Win 8 is clearly not winning any friends.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: More than half?

          @cyborg. Your parents are not technical people so HOW did they decide they preferred not to have it. Read something in the Daily Mail? Heard of some negative experience from friends?

          Genuine question.

          1. cyborg
            IT Angle

            Re: More than half?

            @AnoymousCoward

            I never asked them so I really don't know what caused them to be wary of Win8. Never really crossed my mind - first thing I thought was "well I was going to go for Win7 anyway on that assumption but I'm surprised that you'd even be thinking about it." They read The Sun (ugh) so I don't know if there's anything in there that has warned them off and I'm not aware of anyone of their friend's having a Win8 device.

            Maybe those adverts for it really put them off. In which case <insert Eadon caps MS FAIL shouty text>.

            1. jason 7
              Happy

              Re: More than half?

              I think it was the choice of dark purple for all the Metro shots that did it.

              Just not a colour many people would go for.

        2. Dan McIntyre

          Re: More than half?

          "Is there anyone out there who isn't paid to do so singing the virtues of Win 8? Or are people just using what comes with their machines because if they had a choice even those with a small amount of knowledge will be avoiding Win 8?"

          Yup, me. I've been using Win8 since the first preview version on my laptop and main desktop at home and love it. Once the final release version was out I upgraded all our machines at home to it and have had no problems other than my Mrs moaning a bit about not knowing how to use it on her laptop.

          And to address the point about just using what comes with a machine, none of our machines were Win8 machines previously, I made a conscious decision to install it on them all. Our teenage boys love it as they say it is just like their X boxes.

          And as for me, I'm an IT professional of 13 years, as well as a freelance writer on disability and employment issues.

        3. jason 7

          Re: More than half?

          @cyborg

          "All I know is that when I bought my parents a laptop for Christmas that they knew enough about Windows 8 to mention that they would prefer not to have it."

          I have heard the same thing from some of my customers when I offer to put Windows 8 on a new build for them.

          I ask them simply "why?".

          The answer is always "Er well I dunno, I just heard it's not very good?" Hmmm okay.

          I then explain the changes and they are happy to go ahead. Haven't had any issues yet.

        4. The_Regulator

          Yes, I am not paid to praise win 8 yet I continue to collect an excellent number of down votes for attempting to voice my opinion here :)

      4. hplasm
        Gimp

        Re: More than half?

        "There are more Windows 8 users than Linux on desktop users combined...in my bedroom."

        FTFY.

      5. darklordsid
        FAIL

        Re: More than half?

        No longer, since the moment MS mixed up mobile and desktops.

        There are more Linux based (and its Linux kernel based Android mobile counterpart) machines than Windows based machines.

        And I'm not talking of W8 alone.

        The blow for MS business model was immense, and the best has jet to come...

        1. Shades
          Stop

          Re: More than half?

          "There are more Linux based (and its Linux kernel based Android mobile counterpart)"

          Oh god, this again. In the eyes of "normal" people Android is as much Linux as a Jaguar X-Type is a Ford Mondeo (in an old frock). Hell, from many comments on El Reg many people still don't differentiate Android, as an OS that can be used on a multitude of hardware, and the manufacturer of their current handset upon which it runs (to some people Android = Samsung). To most people Windows is Windows, Android is Android and a Jaguar X-Type is a Jaguar X-Type.

          You're comparing A with B + C.

  2. Woger
    FAIL

    Trivial

    The amount of work for Microsoft to make Windows 8 boot into a desktop or the start screen is trivial and I bet they had a version working before they launched just to see. If they had a boot option on release (and a start menu), people would have raved about Window's 8.

    Big Fail.

    1. The_Regulator

      Is it really a big fail though if your issue with the OS is as trivial as it does not launch in desktop mode?

      1. asdf

        > your issue with the OS is as trivial as it does not launch in desktop mode?

        Depends. For me no as I tend to prefer headless command line only servers for many purposes. For grandma its probably an insta support call.

        1. The_Regulator

          So even grandma cannot be shown to click the desktop icon on the start menu and then start working in legacy mode? I don't know about you but my 90 year old grandma can do this no problem....

      2. Gavin Ayling

        Also, launching into TIFKAM is quicker than loading all the desktop paraphenalia. If you are using a TIFKAM app upon boot then you don't *want* the Desktop's baggage to load up.

        1. darklordsid
          FAIL

          Oh, I guess loading a pathetic single window environment lacking windowing function common since Windows 1.0 is faster than loading a proper desktop manager.

          If it's a so clever idea why not skipping all that useless GUI paraphernalia and directly boot in Power Shell for next version?

          Or maybe for next-next one we can also skip the useless bundle of the command interpreter and load only hardware microcode, that's even faster - so, clearly, it is an huge evolution!

        2. Roland6 Silver badge

          Re: launching into TIFKAM is quicker...

          Haha obviously not used the Store app - it takes for ever to load because of the stupidly large start page that it has to full download before it will display anything, then presenting the content it in a totally stupid a way (infinite horizontal scoll) for browsing.

          As for boot, once the system is up and running both Desktop and TIKFAM are loaded and given that shutdown is hidden away MS don't really intend you to be constantly booting the system...

    2. Tom 35

      Re: Trivial

      "I bet they had a version working before they launched just to see."

      The beta had a registry setting to turn off not-metro. If I remember it was killed in the RC.

    3. jason 7
      FAIL

      Re: Trivial

      Epic Fail for another reason.

      I agree that the effort required to negate all the rage about Windows 8 is trivial and takes all of about 4 minutes to rectify. Yet it seems so many supposedly IT guru types just don't seem to get it.

      "Oh you shouldn't have to modify an OS to use it! FAIL!"

      Right so all you guys just install your OS and leave it at that? You don't do any tweaking or install any third party software at all? I really don't think so.

      If the damn thing was incompatible with 90% of hardware and software, molested your mother or was BSOD'ing all the time I could understand the rage. But just a few minor UI tweaks to make it all better?

      Never in the history of computing has something so pointless been argued over by so many that shouldn't find it an issue in the first place.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Trivial

        Self styled IT guru types. What puzzles me is why we get such a high proportion of comments here from primarily Linux users on Windows usability when desktop Linux has negligible presence in the real world. Desktop, sure Linux is a real force in server space and as part of Android but that's not the point.

      2. The_Regulator

        Totally agree, I have always customized my is in one form or another creating shortcuts, customizing the start menu, deleting unneeded desktop icons etc.

        That's totally my point, customize start how you want it, customize desktop how you want it and your off to the races.

  3. Andus McCoatover
    Windows

    OK. What's wrong with XP?

    <old-Git-mode> (Or, should that be "Jit" ? )

    I'm currently reloading XP on my decrepid old machine, over Linux Mint for various reasons*.

    I don't need 'eye-candy', an "enhanced user experience" - as I've argued before, I wanna browse the web, write job apps, be aware via Gmail when the rejection letters come in, and calculate when, in the next millenia I can afford to take the missus to Bognor. Few need more. </old-Jit-mode>

    * Got over the fallacy that Google Chrome on Linux (Mint-13) has an inbuilt Flash player. It doesnt. Tried all weekend on so many forums to follow advice to getting flash working on any browser. It doesn't. Even the bloke who wrote 'flash-aid' for FF to get it going has withdrawn the add-on from FF's repository.

    Windows XP from now on. Libre office. "That'll do, pig!".

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

      Well, I'm a Debian fan, I don't run Windows and I don't run Chrome. I'm not going to suggest you don't use XP though. However I'm curious, can you not install the nonfree plugin and make it work? On Debian I gave up on anything but the nonfree one, because it just works. However, Adobe really needs to allow you to select the audio device, because only having the option of "default" is just annoying (especially if you have a asskwards HDMi setup like me).

    2. asdf

      Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

      More proof why its a good thing Flash is going away (not near fast enough though especially with Adobe quickly dropping support for the legendary malware portal). Still I had no problems with flash working out of the box on my Mint 13 install. Of course I was running the 64 bit version on Cinamon and I actually installed Google Chrome off a deb I downloaded from Google and not Chromium from the repositories. For an older machine it might make more sense and be less hassle to run Xubuntu (or perhaps Mint XFCE haven't tried it though) instead.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

        1. M Gale

          Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

          Meh, horses for courses. Personally I bloody hate OS X's UI, with the unified confuso-menu, and the dock that wants you to think a shortcut to a program and a running program are the same thing. Don't even get me started on those bloody hot corners, and Finder.. god, you actually like that thing?

          As far as the direction KDE's going in, you'll probably find they have the least "radical and exciting" look to them of all the Linux (and other) desktop environments. If you could use KDE3, you can use KDE4. It's just prettier, and with plasma widgets.

          1. asdf

            Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

            Sorry for pulling original post but it was so off topic to be hard to defend but will reply.

            >with the unified confuso-menu

            Agree that is very bush league and very 1991ish you can't hide the thing easily but can be done with some hacks on a per app basis at least.

            > Finder.. god, you actually like that thing?

            No Finder is garbage and pain the ass in general but in Mac OS you end up having to use a file manager a lot less.

            >you'll probably find they have the least "radical and exciting" look to them of all the Linux (and other) desktop environments. If you could use KDE3, you can use KDE4. It's just prettier, and with plasma widgets.

            I have never liked KDE and its bloat ever (did like K3B back in the day when free burner software was rare, almost worth a gig in KDE libraries for it). I tried it again recently because the other major desktops were such a mess and couldn't stand the thing. Cinnamon and MATE were useable at least but for my workflow (homeflow) were just not near as polished and were a bit jarring.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

            "Personally I bloody hate OS X's UI, with the unified confuso-menu,"

            If you assume that menu bars have to be associated with windows, then, yes, OS X's menu bar will be extremely confusing to you. (As in: "what window is this thing for?") But if you can get past that mental limitation and realize that in OS X, menu bars are associated with *applications*, then the menu bar's location and operation make perfect sense and I don't see how it could be designed any other way.

            "and the dock that wants you to think a shortcut to a program and a running program are the same thing."

            And what's wrong with that? When you click on a program, that means you want to use the program. Whether or not it's currently running is irrelevant.

            " Don't even get me started on those bloody hot corners, and Finder.. god, you actually like that thing?"

            The hot corner stuff isn't enabled by default so why complain about it. As for the Finder, what's wrong with it? I can think of a few things I would change but it's a million times better than Explorer on Windows. Don't get me started about Explorer... it takes as long (or longer) to "prepare to copy/delete" files as it does to actually copy/delete them. It doesn't present an easy way to unmount volumes. It takes ages calling 3rd party code to generate previews of files which is usually not useful and sometimes a horrific security hole. Its search features are so slow and confusing as to be pointless. etc.

            1. Daniel B.

              Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

              "Personally I bloody hate OS X's UI, with the unified confuso-menu,"

              Um... in fact, the ever-present menu bar is the original paradigm. That feature has been there since at least System 3, maybe even the first Mac there ever was. And all of those pre-date Windows. Sure, some of the later UI changes aren't nice, but they're still much better than the toy UI rammed into Win8.

            2. hungee
              Happy

              Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

              It is always hilarious when Mac enthusiasts compare the latest versions of Mac OSX to Win XP which was around before Mac OSX in its current form existed. Yes, XP was slow, it was over ten years ago that they made it.

              The reason I use Win8 (while ignoring TIFKAM)? Faster, better, stronger. Awesome usability (some which were present in Mac OSX first admittedly) other features that have no parallel, such as the detail in task manager and file transfer. The unified search which is better than anything else I have seen on any system. The subtraction of shadowed and aero makes the GUI better IMO and uses far less resources.

              Cue downvotes. But for this windows kid I would say, don't believe the hype

            3. M Gale

              Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

              If you assume that menu bars have to be associated with windows, then, yes, OS X's menu bar will be extremely confusing to you. (As in: "what window is this thing for?") But if you can get past that mental limitation and realize that in OS X, menu bars are associated with *applications*, then the menu bar's location and operation make perfect sense and I don't see how it could be designed any other way.

              I'd rather just have a UI that's easy to use. No, I don't mean TIFKAM.

              When you click on a program, that means you want to use the program. Whether or not it's currently running is irrelevant.

              You might have a terabyte of RAM and a ten-SSD stripe array plugged directly into the PCIe bus on a 16x slot, but I don't. Even if I did, I want to know what is running and what is not. At a glance.

              Also, ever clicked the wrong button before? I'm assuming you're human and not a General System Vehicle or other synthetic intelligence that might be a few thousand times more accurate than your average meat-sack.

              The hot corner stuff isn't enabled by default

              Yes it is. Top right corner, zooms everything out and shows all of the windows. Sounds like a handy thing until you keep tripping it by accident.

              And don't get me started on Explorer either.

          3. jason 7

            Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

            Erm I agree with you. I don't use Macs much at all (I had a 512K Mac in the late 80's) and this week I had to install some software on a customers new 13" Macbook. Apparently she "didn't have a clue how to do it!" Well not having a DVD drive and her buying the DVD version didn't help her much.

            Have to say not the most fluid or intuitive 30 minutes or so I've had with a computing device.

            The Macbook just kind of sat there as much to say "okay what you gonna do?"

            I got there in the end but it did seem I had to ask her for her password every 20 seconds (she wouldn't tell me).

            Yes lovely hardware but I think Mac fans might be living on past glories if they think OSX is still the slickest/easiest OS around. It all felt a bit old fashioned to me.

            I'm sure with a serious overhaul it could get back up there.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

              "The Macbook just kind of sat there as much to say "okay what you gonna do?""

              "Yes lovely hardware but I think Mac fans might be living on past glories if they think OSX is still the slickest/easiest OS around. It all felt a bit old fashioned to me."

              Yes, you do need to know a few basic things to operate a Mac, like how to switch to the Finder and bring up a window of drives that you have inserted/connected. Otherwise, yes, it will just "sit there." And it will ask for your password when you are doing something that's a potential security risk. (What questionable software were you using, that it required an installer?)

              Microsoft's design goal with Windows seems to be "make it so an idiot can bang his forehead on the keyboard and get it to do something."

              Apple's approach is a little more nuanced.

    3. Chairo
      Coat

      Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

      Well - once MS pulls the plug sometime early next year, there will be no patches any more for XP. As long as you can live with an unpatched system, that might still be OK. I wonder, however, what will happen to the activation servers. Does anyone know, if they are going offline, as well?

      Btw: I'm running Firefox on Ubuntu "precise pangolin" and Flash is running. (Not running well, or running stable, or anything - we are talking about Flash, anyway).

      Coat - the one with the patches, please!

      1. Andus McCoatover
        Windows

        @Chiaro: Re: OK. What's wrong with XP?

        It's not the activation servers I'm worried about - there's plenty on the internet on how to circumvent that.

        It's the 'fresh install' and stuck with IE6, SP2, and no access to patches upto the time they killed it.

        'wget' to the rescue, before they take them down? maybe, then a nice big fat Pirate Bay-style torrennt will emerge somewhere....(viruses, warts an' all)

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: @Chiaro: OK. What's wrong with XP?

          >>It's the 'fresh install' and stuck with IE6, SP2, and no access to patches upto the time they killed it

          An XP pro restore disc came with this HP laptop, it uses strings from the BIOS to activate.

          Grab the strings with dmidecode. (Linux)

          Make a VirtualBox fake BIOS with a 15 line script. (from the VBox forum)

          Use ninite (Windows) to slipstream SP3 into the .iso

          Voila! I can now run XP pro SP3 on any machine that supports virtualisation.

          I must remember to get the final updates next year and export the VM as a backup.

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like