back to article Microsoft partners seriously underwhelmed by Windows 8.1

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer promised a flood of touch-enabled devices to fill the market as he previewed Windows 8.1, but is the technology channel raring to snap them up? Not really, it seems. Redmond's very own bald eagle last night said the "rapid release" upgrade - which comes with a revolutionary Start button - will blend …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

  1. The BigYin

    A suggestion to all those OEMs

    Lots of people would like those ARM units. Strip them of the OS, add some extra keys to the correct UEFI database (or just disable secure boot). Flog them naked.

    You won't get all your cash back, but you will stem your losses and you never know, you might just stimulate the wider IT market as they will not be free to innovate.

    1. The BigYin

      Re: A suggestion to all those OEMs

      ARG!

      [Y]ou might just stimulate the wider IT market as they will [now] be free to innovate.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: A suggestion to all those OEMs

      And while they're at it, if they would be so kind and publish the technical documentation for the hardware too.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Windows

    How long before...

    We'll get the lame rhetoric again: "Our partners don't understand our vision and great leadership!"?

    A better question: How long before Ballmer will finally realize that the time of dictation is truly behind them?

    1. Mr Spock

      Re: How long before...

      Or, how long before Ballmer understands the meaning of the word 'partner'. (Hint: it's not synonymous with 'victim'.)

  3. Tom 35

    will blend "desktop and modern computing experiences"

    Will it blend? Ha Ha, maybe

    We don't want a "modern computing experience" we want a desktop computing experience. We don't like "not-metro", and all the app crap that comes with it. Stop trying to be Apple. I don't what a 3" phone interface on my computer (and I'm not much interested in that phone for that mater).

    "Modern" is not a name, it's a description that doesn't fit. It beats "the new iPad" on the stupid scale for a product name.

    Give us an option to turn it off (all of it, not another lame pretend fix), if it's so great no one will turn it off right?

    Maybe your partners can hit you with a clue-by-four, your not listing to us despite what you say.

    Some of the stuff they add in 8.1 might be of use some day, but adding a start button to replace one of the invisible spots and pretending that's all everyone wanted is just pissing people off.

    1. Nigel 11

      Re: will blend "desktop and modern computing experiences"

      Actually Apple gets desktop computing right - the UI on an iMac has nothing much wrong with it. So Microsoft obviously wasn't aping Apple, when it decided that the world really wanted a mobile phone interface on a 1920x1080 monitor (or two, or four).

      1. Manu T

        Re: will blend "desktop and modern computing experiences"

        "Actually Apple gets desktop computing right - the UI on an iMac has nothing much wrong with it. "

        Are you insane? Apple removed all the professional stuff from OSX to make it into a candy-OS. You NEVER have a choice in UI Apple chooses for you. You NEVER have a choice of apps. Apple dictates whether you get a new webbrowser or not! Fuck Apple! They are as worse as microsoft.

        The only OS I had ever fun with is RISC OS.

        1. Jess

          Re: will blend "desktop and modern computing experiences"

          I agree, I prefer Leopard to to Mountain Lion, fortunately that is what my G5 runs.

          I definitely prefer RISC OS though, and I'm hoping all the Pi related development of it will bring it back to where it can be my main OS again. (The biggest issue for me is the lack of a jabber client.)

  4. Rich 2 Silver badge
    Devil

    The OEMs sort-of deserve it

    I don't have a lot of sympathy with the PC OEMs. They have, for literally decades, leached off the Windows thing. None of them have made any effort to build anything other than a "Windows" box, with maybe a couiple of exceptions but even these were very much half-heated. They have all sucked-up to MS, and have been more than happy to pass-on the WIndows tax to consumers. I'm not going to get upset for them now that their golden egg seems to be cracking.

    As for paying 100 quid for the OS, I notice that Apple only charge £14 for an upgrade to the latest version of OS-X! Which one do YOU prefer?

    1. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: The OEMs sort-of deserve it

      I think you're being a little simplistic and harsh on the OEM's.

      The deal from the outset has been MS produce the OS and someone else produces the hardware for it to run on; this division of labour and relationship seems to have worked very well for 30 years. It is also the model used by open source - which seems to have largely adopted the "Windows" box hardware platform as it's primary platform.

      Over most of those 30 years the main emphasis has been on performance, which has been a competition between the software guys creating more sophisticated and useful programs and the hardware guys creating ever more performant hardware capable of running it plus some.

      For many OEM's the constant hardware update and the emphasis on performance meant that production runs tended to be short and 'non-essential' stuff being left out - hence why we've had so many beige boxes over the years and black was considered an innovation!

      I would be interested to know what other "box" you think the OEM's should of been building, given that the desktop market has been very brutal to non "Windows" boxes, with Apple only surviving due to the deal with Microsoft in 1997. Also no other major OS vendor seemed to be prepared to let third-parties build their boxes - which would rule out OEM versions of Apple, DEC, Sun, SGE and other workstations. Yes attempts were made by some to ship Linux boxes and we saw the speed with which MS acted. Todate the only successful none "Windows" boxes seem to be Apple's and those based on Android, but then Android boxes have't really targeted the PC market.

      1. Nigel 11

        Re: The OEMs sort-of deserve it

        I would be interested to know what other "box" you think the OEM's should of been building

        That's easy. On the desktop, an iMac-alike that runs Windows and Linux, priced at the usual industry margin rather than Apple's huge mark-ups. (Dell are actually selling something like this - for the first time in ages I was somewhat impressed by a bit of Dell hardware). On the lap-top, what we have but with higher-resolution screens (again, much like Apple hardware). 1360x768 isn't enough pixels on twelve-inch screens, let alone 17-inchers.

        Just don't import Apple's hardware (un)reliability!

        I also believe there should have been a lot of mileage in a Tablet with a passive docking station (stand plus bluetooth keyboard and mouse), where the interface switched from touch-optimised to desktop-optimised when you "docked" it. That's what Windows 8 might have been: competition for the iPad when un-docked, Windows 7 desktop when docked. That it isn't is Microsoft's fault.

      2. Robert E A Harvey

        Re: The OEMs sort-of deserve it

        >I would be interested to know what other "box" you think the OEM's should

        >of been building,

        They could have - and still could - offer exactly the same box with a working Linux installation. Nothing stopped them doing that.

        Except bullying by Microsoft

        1. Grikath

          Re: The OEMs sort-of deserve it

          Bullying from MS may have had something to do with it with the big OEMs, but I've been working for a smaller OEM in the late 90's-00's in the Netherlands, and we *desperately* wanted to offer Linux configurations alongside our usual MS line of installs. (Some of which was caused by the absolute horror that was the original Vista release, so at that point in time the linux versions had a fighting chance..)

          Guess what: It was next to impossible to set up a commercial-viable system. You'd either run into driver issues, hardware incompatibility issues, stability issues, crashed desktops, and other minor unconveniences, which would have taken up most of the time of our tech dept in finding hardware that *was* supported/stable, or would have swamped our customer support. So we ended up needing to build machines with either legacy parts, or more expensive bits and bobs, or simply accept that roughly half of the boxes would be returned because they would fail customer expectation (you plug it in, boot it up, and get to work..). Finding productivity/entertainment programs to go with the box proved to be an equal pain in the arse, since there was nothing open source out there that was remotely comparable to the quality and stability that MS customers were used to.

          And really, we've tried, but the reaction from the Linux "society" at that time ranged from lukewarm to outright hostile, and the one thing that struck me at the time was that the "scene" overall had its' head up its' arse because they simply refused to acknowledge that they would need to match actual production criteria to make a Linux/open source ecosystem viable for anything other than bespoke limited production runs.

          We ended up solving the problem by buying up a wad of WinXP licenses and ignoring Vista altogether for the consumer boxes. By the time Red Hat came out, the issue was moot again, because most consumers and companies looking to upgrade had already bought their boxes and "back in the saddle" on the windows platform, and the Linux "movement had lost another round, simply by missing an opportunity to pounce when the crack in the armour was there.

          MS may "bully", but there's an inbuilt elitism in the Linux community that is just as bad, and has caused quite a few "Ballmeresque" episodes over the years.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: The OEMs sort-of deserve it

          "They could have - and still could - offer exactly the same box with a working Linux installation. Nothing stopped them doing that."

          We DO!

          "Except bullying by Microsoft"

          ...or fucking users who "need" MS Office and aren't content with an alternative Office suite!

          You're talking shit out of your arse!

    2. Rogue Jedi

      Re: The OEMs sort-of deserve it

      I agree with most of what you are saying.

      In last paragraph were yeo mentinon that apple charges £15 for an OS upgrade, Apple does not sell the OS to put on other hardware, they make it to go on hardware they sell, you must have Apple hardware to take advantage of the £15upgrade. no OEM can put OSX or iOS on their hardware

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The OEMs sort-of deserve it

      Can't disagree. They failed to innovate. In the NT/2000/XP good years this wasn't a problem, but when failed releases arrived it was punishing. With Vista, they played their part in the sticker conspiracy, knowing that it wasn't ready for the masses.... I have absolutely no sympathy for them....

    4. 080
      Linux

      Re: The OEMs sort-of deserve it

      And Mint charges bugger all.

    5. AidanCheddar
      Meh

      Re: The OEMs sort-of deserve it

      You do realize OEMs are bound by a contract and must pay a fee to even install Windows? if their contract says Windows 8 tablets, they do Windows 8 tablets. You're assuming they have greater say on the matter.

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The OEMs sort-of deserve it

      "I don't have a lot of sympathy with the PC OEMs. They have, for literally decades, leached off the Windows thing"

      WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU, MORON!

      I used to sell RISC OS machines before those bloody Americans destroyed that market (and my source of income). I loved those machines. Fun, fast and of incredible build quality. I therefore had no choice then to direct my efforts to the only platform available. At least with PC's I could build the machines that adhered to my quality of standards.

      "None of them have made any effort to build anything other than a "Windows" box,"

      Yes WE HAVE. A professional PC builder builds far better PC's then HP, Dell and others. Most of us build PC's ourselves. We are NOT just "box-shifters"! How did e.g. Alienware started before being bought by Dell?

      "They have all sucked-up to MS, and have been more than happy to pass-on the WIndows tax to consumers."

      No we didn't! You obviously have no idea of how it all came to this. In fact YOU have yourself to blame for this!

      "I'm not going to get upset for them now that their golden egg seems to be cracking."

      What golden egg? You consider a Windows PC a "golden Egg"? Fool! I'd rather go back to sell RISC OS machines then this crap. But fucking users like YOU who didn't bought them because "it had no Office" or "you have no games" or any other lame excuse to grab a cheap PC and download pirated games and apps. You caused this all upon yourself.

      For me, I couldn't care less whether that build-to-order PC ran Linux, Windows or even OSX. I'd still have work "supporting" users.

      "As for paying 100 quid for the OS, I notice that Apple only charge £14 for an upgrade to the latest version of OS-X! Which one do YOU prefer?"

      Oh Please. You can't run OSX on a non-Apple PC so the price is calculated in the Apple HW (which is considerably more expensive). Not to mention just a few "choosen" may sell them and their apps. So much for "free market".

      You fuckers should stop buying PC's from chainstores. And help the small PC shop around the corner whom builds his own PC's. With the components that the client wants. Instead of crappy chinese build shit sold by a US-company with a chain of stores in the UK.

      Should have bought Risc PC's back then, then you wouldn't be in this mess!

  5. 1Rafayal

    The problem isnt that Windows 8/8.1 isnt doing anything to revitalise the PC market.

    It is more like no desktop OS is able to light a fire under PC sales.

    Personally, I think people have moved on from the box on a desk in favour of tablets/phablets

    1. Wade Burchette

      Incorrect.

      Windows 7 computers are selling well. I help someone buy a HP Windows 7 laptop. She bought it over the phone. The HP salesman said over the phone that because demand was so high for this Windows 7 model, it would be 2 weeks before the laptop could ship.

      If the OEM would get some balls and put Windows 7 back on the shelf, I guarantee you they will go quickly. People want new computers; people don't want Windows 8.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Incorrect.

        Before Windows 8 even came on the scene PC shipments were declining quite heavily

        http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2011/06/20/gartner_cuts_uk_pc_forecast/

        1. Manu T

          "Before Windows 8 even came on the scene PC shipments were declining quite heavily"

          PC sales are NORMALIZING back to normal consumer levels of 1 (one) PC per household. Instead of the exaggerated 4-PC household of yesteryear.

    2. Paul Shirley

      Microsoft know the PC market is in terminal decline, it's why they think it's OK to fuck over the Windows desktop and power users with a dumbed down legacy mode and completely dumb preferred UI. Its the desperate marketing driven need to enter a growing tablet+mobile market overriding all other concerns.

      Microsoft is failing because they're shiny new consumer pandering OS isn't good enough to compete. They're damaging the existing PC product but gaining no benefit in the new target markets. When will Ballmer stop digging? Only when he's 6ft down in a wooden box is my bet.

      1. Nigel 11
        WTF?

        @Paul Shirley - desktop in terminal decline?!

        Terminal? Hardly.

        What's happening is that the desktop market is both saturated (in the West) and mature. People who need desktops (for business and for serious hobbies) have them already. Why buy a new one? 1. Because the old one has broken down. 2. Is there a two? Windows 8 is a new reason NOT to buy a new one if the old one still works. Ignoring that, desktop sales will go from one every 3-5 years to one every 6-10 years: down to 40% of the boom-time sales, then flat for the forseeable future. That's still a huge market.

        The winners from Microsoft's incompetence will be Apple and (maybe) Linux. Also I can't see Windows 8 making much of a dent in iPad and Android tablet sales.

        The tablet market will soon enough be mature and saturated. I suspect Tablets aren't replacing desktops, except for home data consumers who only ever had a desktop because it was all they could get at the time. Tablets are mostly supplementing desktops.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Stop this ridiculous anti-propaganda!

      "Davies told The Channel: "An OS launch no longer creates a wave of new purchases. Windows 8.1 may staunch the wound, correct past mistakes but it will not wipe out the impact of the economy or the fact that people want tablets and smartphones.""

      This Davies character is a retard!

      "The problems, according to the venerable analyst, can be traced back to the Surface "bombshell" that shocked Microsoft's OEM pals, who in turn didn't make enough touch devices."

      No it ISN'T!!!

      First of all. The market is NORMALIZING!

      The people with interest in PC's bought the machines they want. The last 10 years computers have been enforced and pushed upon people by everything and everybody. From schools to banks and civil service and governmental agencies. Some of these people with no interest in computers realized that all they actually need is a machine with a webbrowser. And today we have these small machines with just that.

      IMHO the market is NOT in decline. It's just normalizing upto normal levels. Desktop machines will not completely dissapear. Households will just have 1 PC and a lot of different (connected) computing devices instead of the 4 Windows PC-household of years gone by.

      So stop all that theatrical drama for god's sake!

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Even with Microsoft completely failing in the execution of Windows 8 I do feel they are sharing an unfair proportion of the blame for the slump in the PC market.

    The general consensus is that people didn't want what Windows 8 turned out to be but there is no consensus on what Windows 8 should have been that would have got the customers upgrading from Windows 7.

    Comments that say Microsoft should've allowed OEMs to install Windows 7 miss the point of the article and the blame heaped on Windows 8. OEMs were selling products with Windows 7 and they were seeing sales declining year on year and the expectation was that a new Windows OS would reverse that trend.

    The simple fact is that there is nothing Microsoft could have done to reverse the trend. Windows 7 was the existing Windows template taken to its furthest refinement. Yes you could tweak it but there wouldn't be any new features that would make it worthy of an upgrade, it would just be Windows 7.1.

    The simple fact is that the OEMs stick their head on the sand and pretended the market wasn't changing. Apple and Google knew the market was changing because they were the ones leading that change. Asus and Samsung saw the market was changing and diversified their portfolio and put backing behind tablets, AiOs, convertibles, docking stations, etc. Even Microsoft saw that the market was changing, that big box desktops favouring an OS monopoly was losing relevance and market dominance, hence a push to have its products work across multiple form factors and platforms.

    It wasn't Windows 7 that was causing a decline in PC sales and it wouldn't be Windows XYZ that would have caused an increase in PC sales. OEMs didn't move with the market, didn't innovate or bring fresh ideas and its them and them alone that should be shouldering the blame for ever decreasing sales.

    1. Grikath

      You're right in the fact that no version of windows ( or linux for that matter) could have revitalised the consumer PC market. The shift towards phones/tablets is as clear and logical as the shift from PC poxes to laptops in the household. It's simply a matter of technology progressing, decent wireless access at home, and no real need to be tethered to one place to check your emails/get your daily dose of T&A/play $game.

      There's no doubt MS knows this, and it's one of the reasons they pushed out win8. They *need* an OS that can cope with the new technology, and getting it to work over a wide range of devices must have been a serious headache. So win8 was a given, not as win7.1, but as a full version change.

      They dropped the ball(mer) however with Metro. Full well knowing there would be an upgrade cycle in the corporate sector they could have gone:

      "Look guys, we know you've been eyeing Win7 for your upgrade, but look at this Win8. Supports all the new stuff you like while more or less staying the same, so things will be where people expect it to be. But wait for it!! It also supports the new mobile touch devices through a dedicated UI that kicks in as soon as it's installed on [devicex]! Isn't that neat?!"

      Which is basically what man and dog has been telling them, and which they chose to ignore. For reasons which have preciously little to do with actual technology, but with "aesthetics" and Opinions. Which obviously from Win8.1 still has not been resolved.

  7. Miek
    Linux

    'But he warned, "It is a consumer-focused product and so far consumers haven't liked it. Businesses are buying Win8 machines but downgrading it to Windows 7," he said.' -- Lenovo are also shipping Windows 8 laptops with Windows 7 pre-installed (Win 8 is supplied as a DVD installer) . Oddly, Lenovo have recreated the Metrosexual interface for Windows 7, which we quickly removed.

  8. Tikimon
    FAIL

    Companies drunk on their own Kool-Aid

    Two main problems as I see it, which pervades ALL business these days. They don't try to build good products to fill needs and wait for the world the beat down their door. They dream up a Business Strategy they believe will make them rich, and develop products to fit their "vision." When the public reject that vision, they blame everyone but themselves for the stunning lack of uptake.

    Second, the assumption that everything must be "refreshed", even if it's working fine. I wish I could go back in time and terminate whomever came up with this asinine strategy! No better example can be found than Win 8. After the Vista debacle they won most folks back with Win 7... then threw it all out the door! Combo of their myopic, uninformed "vision" and radically changing a product that was working fine.

    I also blame databases, and business' crippling reliance on them. The "essay-answer" customer service feedback that might be useful is reduced to a few tick marks in database rows, stripping away any sense of what's working or what people think about it. "Rate your experience from 1-5" tells you NOTHING. So they know nothing useful about what we want, liked, or didn't like.

  9. peterrat

    Our household moved from desktops to laptops around 3 yrs ago, Win7. I have just recently replaced my (and wife's ) laptops that came with Win8, I was sceptical at first (until I was shown Win/D ) but after I loaded it with my usual applications and do Win/D after startup (for desktop mode) I use it just as I did with Win7.

    Am I missing something?

    1. JDX Gold badge

      You're missing the desire to find faults and make things hard for yourself so you can complain about it.

    2. Tom 35

      Am I missing something

      Any use at all for Metro?

      Your just using it as Win7 so why would you want to "upgrade"?

      If MS did what people asked and gave you a way to kill Metro would you miss it?

      1. The Lord Gord

        Re: Am I missing something

        Microsoft KNOW people find METRO useless on eh desktop, but they have their head in the sand and a broom so far up their corporate asses that they have no option but to keep their mouth shut and go into complete denial mode.

      2. peterrat

        Re: Am I missing something

        True I don't really use metro (in fact I can't stand it) , most of the "apps" are crap/amateurish. My 3yr old laptop suffered a screen failure so I thought I would use it as an excuse to get an up to date machine (hardware wise).

        The applications that I do use mostly seem to run faster/smoother.

        So, yea, looking forward to 8.1

    3. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: Am I missing something?

      Yes! you are having to manually do a Win/D (I think you mean Win+D keyboard shortcut) after startup; whereas you should be able to configure this setting in the startup switches so that the machine auto boots into desktop mode.

      By using a combination of Classic Menu/Start8 (take your pick) and ModernMix, Desktop mode is the boot default and TIFKAM is now just an a windowed environment on the desktop...

    4. AidanCheddar

      Yeah, not having to hack what you could have already gotten out of Windows 7.

      1. P. Lee

        Its just the next version

        Corporates wouldn't upgrade again if it was the best UI ever - its just too expensive to do that process so soon after W7. It was never going to save the new computer market because it hasn't died, its just matured. MS doesn't want another XP - wildly successful to the point where people don't re-purchase, which is the reason for the "no license transfer between machines" bid. Without Apple's hardware model (which is now tying itself to Flash life-spans) it needs a way to piggyback revenue on someone-else's recurring sales.

        For my money, there are two issues:

        1) the mental context switch between desktop and metro is jarring. I want to run an additional app, but I don't go through a small widget in the corner to get to it, I press a button and all my existing work disappears and is replaced by other stuff, most of which is eye-catchingly moving but not what I want. I'm removed from my current work-flow.

        2) Its obviously designed for touchscreen. Whenever I see it on a desktop, I think, "that that's the wrong interface for this device." Its obviously wrong, even if you can live with it and its functionally usable, the fact that its obviously designed for something else makes it more irritating than it needs to be. Metro should have been an option on the taskbar. A bit of xml config for the desktop would have made it all a bit dynamic and workable.

  10. The Lord Gord

    Best Joke of 2013

    A man walks into a bar with a windows 8 PC.....

    My sides are so sore I needed surgery!!!

  11. Howard Hanek
    Mushroom

    Windows Omega?

    Mr. Ballmer states that the 'problem' is that there are just not enough fondleslabs. The fondleslab manufacturers whose warehouses are filling up with unsold fondleslabs question whether or not Mr. Ballmer secretly suffered some undiagnosed mental collapse a year or two ago and that there are just not enough similarly diagnosed mental patients in the market for a new fondleslab. I tend to agree with them.

  12. Robert E A Harvey

    8.1, eh?

    i had no idea people thought the problem was to the right of the decimal place.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    FAIL by Micro$oft's famous beach whale Ballmer

    Go back to sniffing crack you bloated basketball

  14. Jess

    If

    If they had given it a simple choice between Metro and a lean windows 2000 style interface, it would have been a winner. It would have worked well on most XP hardware.

    The problem with recent Microsoft OSes is they tend to take one step forwards and two steps back. The only real exceptions were windows NT to 2000 where it was about 3 steps forwards for every one back and Vista to 7 where it was pretty much all forwards, because it was the same thing, just fixed.

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like