Early look at Windows 8 baffles consumers...

[Quiver318]

The subject line was the headline of a news article I just read. I wish Microsoft well and much success, but I have strong doubts that Windows 8 is going to be well received. I have been wrong before about things that seemed silly (Facebook), so I guess the world might just love it. I just know I don't care much for it. It's release is just days away. I would like to say for the record, "Bleh."

I don't know about you, but I have my sights set on Windows 9...

Q

[dilettante]

Found the article.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/p...umers/1646077/

"It was very difficult to get used to," he said. "I have an 8-year-old and a 10-year-old, and they never got used to it. They were like, 'We're just going to use Mom's computer.'"

Windows 8: The dotNet of computer user experiences.

[dilettante]

Yes for another $120 you too can add a keyboard so crappy they sell another one (more $$) that you can really type on.

Video removed. Guess somebody didn't care for it.

[baja_yu]

Kinda shows you where technology is going when an opinion of an 8-year-old is relevant.

[moonman239]

*cough*Get a Mac*cough*

[jmcilhinney]

I've been using Windows 8 on my desktop machine for a few weeks now. I have to say that the new Metro-style interface doesn't really provide any great benefit on a non-touch-screen system, although there are still some useful features in Windows 8, e.g. Hyper-V. When I turn on my desktop I simply click the Desktop tile and things are basically as they were when using Windows 7. The only thing missing is the Start menu, but that's not an issue anyway. If you want to search for an app shortcut that you don't have on the desktop then you simply hit the Windows key and start typing a name, just as before.

I can see how the tiled interface would be beneficial on a tablet though, and I fully intend to get at least one Windows 8 tablet, probably two (one RT and one Pro) at some stage. While I can't speak for what other people may find or have found, it took a little getting used to the new Start screen because it is so unlike any previous Windows interface, but once I got used to the small number of gestures required to operate it, it was quite simple.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I don't expect to move over anytime soon, largely because I don't expect any users to move over anytime soon. There are things that don't sound so good to me, but I think that the theory is a good one. Whether or not it will really work in practice remains to be seen.

[dilettante]

The core Windows team has made some good improvements to help performance, boot time, etc. and there are indeed a number of new features I think many people would appreciate. It's just sad the whole Metro debacle may have spoiled everything - but only time will tell. People can get used to a lot when they don't have alternatives.

I'm just as sad that Windows Home Server 2011 is the end of that product line. It's a heck of a nice server OS for home or small business use, being basically a low-end version of Server 2008 R2 with some extras for media streaming and similar consumer features. But the mis-steps the "decision makers" at Microsoft made on WHS 2011 also made it unpopular with users of the previous version. Perhaps the slow adoption led to its demise.

Still, hard to beat a Server edition of Windows that is as low as $45 in OEM SKUs.

[jmcilhinney]

I'm just as sad that Windows Home Server 2011 is the end of that product line. It's a heck of a nice server OS for home or small business use, being basically a low-end version of Server 2008 R2 with some extras for media streaming and similar consumer features. But the mis-steps the "decision makers" at Microsoft made on WHS 2011 also made it unpopular with users of the previous version. Perhaps the slow adoption led to its demise.

Still, hard to beat a Server edition of Windows that is as low as $45 in OEM SKUs.

Have you checked out Windows Server 2012 Essentials and Foundation editions? Not the same a WHS but the closest things in the new lineup I think. Essentials is $425 so maybe a bit pricey for the home in many cases and Foundation is OEM only, so may not be available on hardware suitable for use in many homes. I've got Server 2012 running at home and it does seem simpler to work with than 2008 R2. It actually has a Windows 8 style Start screen too, which seems like it would be odd on a server but it does work.

[dilettante]

I ran a Server 2012 trial for a lttle while, but I haven't found any compelling advantages that would make me try to get customers to pay the premium price.

WSH 2011 is still available so cheap that I've focused on that for building servers, primarily for use in climate telemetry applications. Most of the newer Intel Atom boards will run 64-bit just fine as long as you don't need video driver support. Since these run headless the stock VGA driver is adequate and doesn't seem to limit RDP sessions in any way - and those are only used for administration anyway.

The Atom boards are good in terms of running fanless and having low power requirements, especially when using SSD instead of HD. SSD is pretty cheap now if you don't need a lot of it. They have also shocked me in terms of having decent performance. Not bad for systems that run off 12 volt solar-charged batteries.


We're actually looking at moving to Android now though. This cuts the OS cost to nothing, and there are tons of low power fanless Android options - people seem to think it only runs on phones and tablets. The downside is the need to rewrite existing software in Android Java and C of course, but it looks like it would open the market for us. Hardware costs and power consumption would be slashed to half or less even disregarding the price of Windows.

Despite version-churn Google has created a much more stable platform to develop on than using raw Linux, which we ruled out early after a few test runs. There is also a large pool of seasoned developers to farm work out to, though it is tough in a way because that market is flooded with hacks you have to weed out. Everybody who made a Poker or Tetris game on Android thinks he's a great developer - not.

[JuggaloBrotha]

I don't expect to move over anytime soon, largely because I don't expect any users to move over anytime soon. There are things that don't sound so good to me, but I think that the theory is a good one. Whether or not it will really work in practice remains to be seen.

I fully plan to wait for SP1 to be released before even considering setting up a Win8 machine at home, even one just to play with.
Unless there's drastic improvements in Win8 compared to Win7, I honestly don't see a need to jump to the new OS, especially when it means I have to learn a lot of new things just to use the UI.

[baja_yu]

I really don't understand all the moaning. Especially from people that actually tried Windows 8. There's really not much to learn here. The Metro UI is just one screen on top of it all with widget styled apps you can customize. It wont take a novice more than a day to learn the new stuff and more than 10 minutes for someone moderately experienced. With one click you are back on the Desktop the same as before where you can proceed to work as usual. Removal of the Start Menu is really not an issue and who needs it anyway when you can launch an app by searching for it. Even on Windows 7 I rarely navigated through all the folders and looked to find what I need, when you can type a few characters and it finds the application for you. And if you miss it that much there are add ons to bring it back. Almost every article I ran across had the same "boo hoo, no Start Menu" context. It's not like they replaced rectangular windows with tetrahedrons that you have to rotate to see the content. There's really not that much revolutionary here. Maybe it Microsoft's fault for presenting it that way.

[Shaggy Hiker]

What I like is the faster boot times. These days, there is little reason why we have to wait several seconds for a system to boot up.

[JuggaloBrotha]

I really don't understand all the moaning. Especially from people that actually tried Windows 8. There's really not much to learn here. The Metro UI is just one screen on top of it all with widget styled apps you can customize. It wont take a novice more than a day to learn the new stuff and more than 10 minutes for someone moderately experienced. With one click you are back on the Desktop the same as before where you can proceed to work as usual. Removal of the Start Menu is really not an issue and who needs it anyway when you can launch an app by searching for it. Even on Windows 7 I rarely navigated through all the folders and looked to find what I need, when you can type a few characters and it finds the application for you. And if you miss it that much there are add ons to bring it back. Almost every article I ran across had the same "boo hoo, no Start Menu" context. It's not like they replaced rectangular windows with tetrahedrons that you have to rotate to see the content. There's really not that much revolutionary here. Maybe it Microsoft's fault for presenting it that way.

I actually use the Start Menu quite a bit for searching for apps, but I also have 19 pinned on the left side, there's no need to make those 19 tiles when a simple list is all you need.

[baja_yu]

I actually use the Start Menu quite a bit for searching for apps, but I also have 19 pinned on the left side, there's no need to make those 19 tiles when a simple list is all you need.

Searching by navigating through the menu or by typing the name? Because you can still do the latter, just press the Windows key and type.

[JuggaloBrotha]

Searching by navigating through the menu or by typing the name? Because you can still do the latter, just press the Windows key and type.

Windows key & click the item needed. Much faster than typing in the program name, plus I tend to mis-type the program name so the search isn't as useful as just having the programs pinned to the menu.
I do use the search for the quick "cmd", "mspaint", "netplwiz" but I could just as easily press winkey + r for those.

[jmcilhinney]

That really is an insignificant niggle JB. If you want quick access to specific applications then put a shortcut on your desktop. If you don't want to have them hidden by open windows then just right-click your Taskbar and enable the Desktop toolbar, which will show you all the shortcuts on your desktop. It's just as quick as the Start menu. You won't get jump lists but if you use them for an application then pin it to the Taskbar.

As a developer, the inclusion of Hyper-V instead of Virtual PC should be enough on its own to encourage you to make the switch. Improved startup times are indeed a bonus too. I too have to say that, given the desktop experience on Windows 8, you really don't lose anything moving from Windows 7. I never used the Start menu all that much anyway but I did feel a little bit nervous when it was gone at first. I got over that very quickly though.

[baja_yu]

Here's on of them http://www.pcworld.com/product/1250172/start8.html

And some nice tips and tricks: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/win8-tip...view-1778.html

[baja_yu]

There's one small problem I just noticed. To explain, you now have the Metro UI and the Desktop, and some applications support both and have metro and regular versions, like IE and Chrome. Depending on from where you launch it, it opens the respective version. But I just noticed that it only works like that for the default browser. If Chrome is not default, it will always launch the desktop version even if I launch it from metro. Same thing happens with IE if I set Chrome as default. I can no longer launch the Metro version of IE.

There's also a problem with metro version of Chrome. When I download an installer for a classic application, then click on the .exe to launch it, seemingly nothing happens. When I switched to desktop I saw several (number of times I clicked) UAC prompts minimized and flashing in the task bar. For some reason Chrome doesn't switch to Desktop when launching an application.

[techgnome]

That really is an insignificant niggle JB. If you want quick access to specific applications then put a shortcut on your desktop. If you don't want to have them hidden by open windows then just right-click your Taskbar and enable the Desktop toolbar, which will show you all the shortcuts on your desktop. It's just as quick as the Start menu. You won't get jump lists but if you use them for an application then pin it to the Taskbar.

That works for the 10 apps I use on a regular basis... I've got those pinned... it's the ones I use often enough to pin to the start menu, but not often enough to pin to task bar.... and I'm just OCD enough to want a nearly clean desktop... I do scatter a few things on it, but rarely do they make it to the 2-month mark as I regularly keep it clear.

I think the thing people have a problem is that hte Metro interface is the default interface... even when it doesn't make sense... for instance, in my case it doesn't make sense... I'll never use the Metro interface on my laptop... if it could give me the option to default into desktop mode, and jsut give me an "App" button ...

and it looks like there is a way to default into Desktop mode....
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2012/03/si...-in-windows-8/

And there's all kinds of alternatives to the start button... (same article) ... I remember thinking I'd get StarDock, as that's something I use now...


so....

I guess I've run out of things to b!tch about...

so...

I'm good.

-tg

[SJWhiteley]

...
so....

I guess I've run out of things to b!tch about...

so...

I'm good.

-tg

Yeah, my Windows 7 has worn out, too. Upgrading will really polish off those bits. Does it come with a 'new car smell' scratch and sniff? :P

[SJWhiteley]

Seriously, though, It doesn't surprise me that a lot of consumers feel this way, but then 'a lot' doesn't mean 'everyone'.

Most users - in my estimation - aren't looking for a 'windows experience', and are looking for a computer to do 'stuff': Microsoft have hedged their bets that the average consumers stuff is nicely accessible from the Metro/Start screen. I believe, much to my chagrin, that Microsoft are correct. Additionally, most users aren't 'dumb' (well, not *that* dumb, anyway) but when it comes to computer operating systems, are largely ignorant ("What's the difference between a Mountain Lion and a Window? About $1200. Wait a minute, is the window closed? What if the mountain lion jumps through the window?"). When it breaks, the accepted understanding as spread by the computer geeks, is that they don't know how to work it: this reinforces the notion in users that 'i r dum' and will never understand this computer stuff. Net result, is that they accept a steep learning curve and accept the notion that they can't do certain tasks readily because they don't have an, almost mystical, technical knowledge.

In other words, when you are used to seven beatings a day, then only five beatings a day is sheer joy (My opinion is that MS have upped the beatings, but, meh...)

The pudding is going to be whether the computer manufacturers actually install Windows 8 or take the option to downgrade to Windows 7 on new PCs.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Wow, that's a lot of almost metaphorical rambling, yet I both understood it all and agree with it all. At least one of us is insane. I sure hope it isn't me.....but how would I know?

I don't intend to run out and buy 8, but that's only because I have no particular reason to. In general, I think that the approach is more right than wrong. We are headed to a mobile/tablet/phone/laptop driven society. The biggest issues will be instant on and work anywhere (as long as your definition of 'work' is pretty liberal). Windows 8 does appear to move in the right direction on both counts. Now what I want is a tablet that runs VS. Ideally, I'd like that in a water resistant package costing sub $500. While that may seem unrealistic at the moment, it's hard to argue that we aren't headed in that direction (except for the water resistant part).

[SJWhiteley]

Wow, that's a lot of almost metaphorical rambling, ...

I tried to keep it short.

[baja_yu]

Now what I want is a tablet that runs VS. Ideally, I'd like that in a water resistant package costing sub $500. While that may seem unrealistic at the moment, it's hard to argue that we aren't headed in that direction (except for the water resistant part).

You should have that with the upcoming Surface Pro, but double the price.

[baja_yu]

Seriously, though, It doesn't surprise me that a lot of consumers feel this way, but then 'a lot' doesn't mean 'everyone'.

Most users - in my estimation - aren't looking for a 'windows experience', and are looking for a computer to do 'stuff': Microsoft have hedged their bets that the average consumers stuff is nicely accessible from the Metro/Start screen. I believe, much to my chagrin, that Microsoft are correct. Additionally, most users aren't 'dumb' (well, not *that* dumb, anyway) but when it comes to computer operating systems, are largely ignorant ("What's the difference between a Mountain Lion and a Window? About $1200. Wait a minute, is the window closed? What if the mountain lion jumps through the window?"). When it breaks, the accepted understanding as spread by the computer geeks, is that they don't know how to work it: this reinforces the notion in users that 'i r dum' and will never understand this computer stuff. Net result, is that they accept a steep learning curve and accept the notion that they can't do certain tasks readily because they don't have an, almost mystical, technical knowledge.

In other words, when you are used to seven beatings a day, then only five beatings a day is sheer joy (My opinion is that MS have upped the beatings, but, meh...)

The pudding is going to be whether the computer manufacturers actually install Windows 8 or take the option to downgrade to Windows 7 on new PCs.

I agree completely. And I think that's why Windows 8 is a great step in the right direction. There's no reason why things like browsing, weather, email, instant messenger, music and video playback should be complicated, to most of users. Metro will work great for that, and be much more intuitive and a lot simpler. For those of us with the mystical technical knowledge, there's still a desktop like always. So they kill two birds with one stone. And by making the UI the same as mobile devices, they get a third bird for requiring virtually no adjustment when moving between a phone, a tablet and a computer. Something with wich the supreme leader of closed eco systems, Apple, can't boast.

Btw, what's that on your avatar? It always looked like a spaceship to me. I have a feeling it's going to something diametrically different like Shaggy's avatar that turned out to be a vase of fish rather than a pineapple.

[Shaggy Hiker]

My main system at home, which I put together myself, has a motherboard that came with this goofy little mini-OS pre-installed. Pre-boot, a screen pops up that allows you to do some VERY basic stuff (a basic web browser, basic e-mail client, and some other things). That OS launches almost instantly. I never use it, but the idea is obvious: RAM and SDRAM is dirt cheap, so a fast boot OS that retains and restores state is an obvious direction to move in. Windows 8 moves that way, and that feature is the one that I find most interesting at the moment.

[techgnome]

"Now what I want is a tablet that runs VS." -- I've heard people saying that... honestly, I can't imagine why... OK, maybe I can in your case... but I don't think that's really a typical request (and let's admit it, you're not exactly typical yourself) ... If I could get VS to run on a tablet, then I'd want SSMS, then I'd want to attach a monitor, keyboard, mouse... I might as well just stick with the laptop at that point. When I'm disconnected and only using the one screen on my laptop, I get a nervous twitch, I'm so used to dual monitors & it being large that to use a tablet for development, just wouldn't work for me --- I have enough trouble posting badly spelt posts to FB with my fat fingers, I don't need to be doing that during development too.

-tg

[jmcilhinney]

I'm certainly considering the Microsoft Surface with Windows 8 Pro as a possibility, or some other tablet that supports multiple configurations. It will be nice to be able to carry a tablet that can flex some muscle if required. Heavier and more expensive, yes, but that's not a big deal. I intend to get an RT tablet too, for those times where I really want to carry something as light as possible. Bases? They're covered.

[SJWhiteley]

I agree completely. And I think that's why Windows 8 is a great step in the right direction. There's no reason why things like browsing, weather, email, instant messenger, music and video playback should be complicated, to most of users. Metro will work great for that, and be much more intuitive and a lot simpler. For those of us with the mystical technical knowledge, there's still a desktop like always. So they kill two birds with one stone. And by making the UI the same as mobile devices, they get a third bird for requiring virtually no adjustment when moving between a phone, a tablet and a computer. Something with wich the supreme leader of closed eco systems, Apple, can't boast.

Btw, what's that on your avatar? It always looked like a spaceship to me. I have a feeling it's going to something diametrically different like Shaggy's avatar that turned out to be a vase of fish rather than a pineapple.

I don't think having the same 'environment' between devices is all that much of a bonus in reality, but it definitely is a huge selling point, and probably something that the consumer market will like. However, if your 'desktop' is unified, like the bookmarking in modern browsers synchronized and unified across devices, then it really makes the transition seamless - the uniform interface is a good human interface pointer that implies cross-device synchronicity.

The Avatar is a 4 high rolling mill stack with two x-ray gauges rendered in pov-ray. The 'real' one is anywhere from 4 to 10 feet high, and is used for rolling steel (and other metals, but I'm in the steel industry, specifically, cold rolling). The ray tracing was done many years ago on an old Pentium processor.