http://www.zdnet.com/windows-threshold-more-on-microsofts-plan-to-win-over-windows-7-users-7000031070/
What is everyone's take on where Microsoft is going with their OS now?
What is everyone's take on where Microsoft is going with their OS now?
Windows 9?
- Thread starter TruvisT
- Start date
I think the outcry over Win 8 is by people who never really gave it a chance or didn't go on to learn how to use the benefits. I wouldn't go back to Win 7 now. Win 8 has a better task manager, a quicker search engine, and a variety of other improvements. While it did have some major changes, that's to be expected with any new major version of an OS.
Honestly, who needs a start menu when you can hit the Windows key, start typing a programs name, hit enter and the program is launched.
Want to open Firefox? Hit windows, type fi, type Enter. Boom! This was possible on older operating systems, but not nearly as good. They also added a bunch of shortcuts. For Linux administrators, we all get used to using the keyboard for most things anyways.
Honestly, who needs a start menu when you can hit the Windows key, start typing a programs name, hit enter and the program is launched.
Want to open Firefox? Hit windows, type fi, type Enter. Boom! This was possible on older operating systems, but not nearly as good. They also added a bunch of shortcuts. For Linux administrators, we all get used to using the keyboard for most things anyways.
QuadraNet.Dustin
Member
Have to agree with you, I personally avoided it for a while. Finally gave in with the Surface Pro 3.
With start8 app, I can't complain
Last edited by a moderator:
THIS! I got very used to the Win 7 type and enter. Very much a Linux feel. However, for a lot of the businesses that had Windows 8, I was stuck giving them startisback or classicshell to keep them happy. I've found Windows 8.1 really quick and nice and have gotten used to it. The only thing I hate are the apps having defaults in opening images ect...
How is the Surface Pro 3? It looks cool but I just can't justify the cost when compared to something like a Yoga Pro 2.Have to agree with you, I personally avoided it for a while. Finally gave in with the Surface Pro 3.
With start8 app, I can't complain
QuadraNet.Dustin
Member
It's awesome, it's my new baby - use it for work/personal, dock both at home and work with it.
Aldryic C'boas
The Pony
Am I just better skilled in pattern recognition than most?
- '95, sucked ass. '97, fixed the 95 issues, was 'alright'
- ME, sucked ass. XP, fixed the ME issues, was 'alright'
- Vista, sucked ass. W7, fixed the Vista issues, was 'alright'
- W8, ...what the hell. W9? Likely very similar, with improvements from listening to W8 critique.
You left out the best Windows platform: 2K which was actually what was released after ME. Windows 2000 was the platform for XP too, XP just updated some things and added themes. ME was a quick release for people worried about Y2K from what I remember (lol).
Honestly, I feel the same about Vista. Vista was a big change from XP, it had some bugs at the beginning, once they were fixed, it was an alright operating system. The differences between the updated Vista and Windows 7 were minimal. I ran Vista without any issues for a year before I got the free upgrade to 7.
Aldryic C'boas
The Pony
Eh, I figured I missed a couple generations there to be honest. I dropped Windows in favour of Linux (primarily, Debian) back in the mid 90s, and never looked back. I'm forced to use it at Coke, but I'm currently working on a way around that as well.
mikho
Not to be taken seriously, ever!
All OS versions you say "sucked ass" were all released with major changes compared to the the previous version:
95 VS 3.11 - multiple GUI changes.
You did forget the NT part in the history as well.
MS first 32-bit OS and the fact that Windows XP was actually a NT successor with Windows 95/98/ME GUI.
Vista was the first Windows OS with User Account Control, running as a non-priviledged user and when needed sudo as root.
Also the first version where MS decided that all hardware calls should go via the OS, no one was allowed to talk to the hardware direct.
One reason that XP is probably the most loved MS OS is the user can do anything the like with it.
From a security point, this OS was also one of the easiest to hack since all applications/services were allowed full access everywhere.
mikho
Not to be taken seriously, ever!
When Vista was a "hot topic" I noticed a huge difference in performance if you installed it with or without slipstreaming the service packs.
So it did develop alot over the years it was active on the market.
wlanboy
Content Contributer
Good point.
Windows Vista "sucked" because MS changed a lot of APIs.
The non-priv users was one part, the no direct access to hardware the other one.
Windows 7 did not "suck" because the drivers and the software developers adopted their stuff to the new principles MS provided with Vista.
So new stuff of Vista was:
- Aero
- Default programms
- Search panel on start menu
- Icons with 256 × 256 pixels
- Column headers on all Explorer views
- Windows flip (Alt+Tab)
- JPG+PNG wallpapers without active desktop
- Disc cleanup
- Dialog boxes also display their status on the taskbar
- Windows search
- Windows sidebar
- Backup and Restore Center
- Windows Contacts - no more WAB
- Snipping Tool
- User Account Control
- Kernel Patch Protection
- BitLocker Drive Encryption
- Mandatory Integrity Control
- Windows Color System (WCS) for color management
- Hybrid Sleep option
- Fine-grained power configuration
- Windows Mobile Device Center
- Sync Center
- Easy use of Wlan and Bluetooth
- Network Center
Aldryic C'boas
The Pony
I'm fully aware of the major changes. They were pretty much why those versions "sucked ass". Like I said, pattern recognition. Microsoft has a 'great idea', releases it with minimal polish. Most folks don't like it. Couple years after, they release a 'fixed' version that is typically well received. And yes, I know I left out NT. I said as much before you posted, freely admitting that I hadn't really used Windows since 95
clownjugglar
New Member
Since no one actually replied to OP that I saw in my brief skim... I will. This is from the POV as a desktop user who does CAD work on large monitors.
I think Windows 9 will be accepted. I think the new hybrid start menu that i've seen floating around will bring in desktop users while still allowing Modern UI apps to be discovered and easily accessible without having to interrupt workflows by bringing in the full screen start menu.
I think this will also help ease the shock some users have when moving from 7 -> 9:
Now back to the Windows 8 arguements
Honestly, 8.1+ didn't bother me that much. Booting to desktop, being able to pin Modern UI apps to the task bar, and the other desktop friendly tweaks (right click the start button!) made for a much better workflow. It also was annoying when you wanted to shutdown your PC prior to 8.1. Not hard, just annoying that the graphical way was buried. I think ctrl-alt-delete still worked, but I barely used 8 prior to the 8.1 update.
Talking about hitting the Windows Key and just typing... that might be fine for people like us, but even I sometimes have to stop and remember the name of the program I want to run. I end up just adding it to the desktop task bar or the full screen start menu. I found it easier sometimes to just hit Windows Key + click 1 icon than Windows Key + typing. Usually not the case, but sometimes. That, or pinning to task bar so it's just one click away.
But now we get into my parents, who can use a computer to start a browser, use facebook, some word processing. They are trained to find the icon they want and click it. They don't know the name of every program installed, mostly just the icon that represents 'the internet' or 'to type a letter'. Plenty of people trained to click icons and not have to worry about what the program is called. They struggled with the Windows Key. "Why can't we just point and click?", "What if we don't know what to type?".
Perhaps they should learn these things. But they don't care to learn them. They just want to get on Facebook or e-mail. Don't get me started with trying to teach them the new way to shutdown the PC (pre-8.1+). Even after 8.1, mom still likes to fight to bring up the charms bar click several times to get to shutdown. I have to remind her there are easier ways now.
These are just my personal experiences. I can easily adapt and it doesn't bother me. I do still however run Windows 7, and will do so for sometime. I also run Arch Linux on several other boxes, so fixing things and change isn't that hard to me.
I think Windows 9 will be accepted. I think the new hybrid start menu that i've seen floating around will bring in desktop users while still allowing Modern UI apps to be discovered and easily accessible without having to interrupt workflows by bringing in the full screen start menu.
I think this will also help ease the shock some users have when moving from 7 -> 9:
I kind of like the look of the screen posted here (if it's real): http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-threshold-the-modern-ui-takes-a-backseat-for-desktop-users
Now back to the Windows 8 arguements
Honestly, 8.1+ didn't bother me that much. Booting to desktop, being able to pin Modern UI apps to the task bar, and the other desktop friendly tweaks (right click the start button!) made for a much better workflow. It also was annoying when you wanted to shutdown your PC prior to 8.1. Not hard, just annoying that the graphical way was buried. I think ctrl-alt-delete still worked, but I barely used 8 prior to the 8.1 update.
Talking about hitting the Windows Key and just typing... that might be fine for people like us, but even I sometimes have to stop and remember the name of the program I want to run. I end up just adding it to the desktop task bar or the full screen start menu. I found it easier sometimes to just hit Windows Key + click 1 icon than Windows Key + typing. Usually not the case, but sometimes. That, or pinning to task bar so it's just one click away.
But now we get into my parents, who can use a computer to start a browser, use facebook, some word processing. They are trained to find the icon they want and click it. They don't know the name of every program installed, mostly just the icon that represents 'the internet' or 'to type a letter'. Plenty of people trained to click icons and not have to worry about what the program is called. They struggled with the Windows Key. "Why can't we just point and click?", "What if we don't know what to type?".
Perhaps they should learn these things. But they don't care to learn them. They just want to get on Facebook or e-mail. Don't get me started with trying to teach them the new way to shutdown the PC (pre-8.1+). Even after 8.1, mom still likes to fight to bring up the charms bar click several times to get to shutdown. I have to remind her there are easier ways now.
These are just my personal experiences. I can easily adapt and it doesn't bother me. I do still however run Windows 7, and will do so for sometime. I also run Arch Linux on several other boxes, so fixing things and change isn't that hard to me.
My perception of Win 8 is...hell no.
Win 8 seems to really want to be "one big screen for your app". Who the hell works that way? I have 8 windows open as I type this - VM VPN'd in to work, web browser, a couple file folders, ssh, itunes, etc. I know you can still run traditional apps but the whole Metro/Modern/whatever idea that I would ever want any app to be full screen is so stupid and backwards and 1990 that I don't want Windows 8, even though I have about 10 MSDN licenses for it.
Yes, I know you can work multi-window but the idea that I would ever want to be non-multi-window or somehow land in such a config is just completely absurd. I grant I haven't spent much time playing with it.
The core Windows UI hasn't changed much since Windows 95 because it works just fine. Start menu (not just a button) in the lower left. Quick launch and task bar on the bottom. Tray on the right. Windows. That NeoWin article shows pretty much Win 7/Win 95, which I'd be fine with.
Maybe on a tablet. But who buys Microsoft tablets? I've already got a few hundred bucks' worth of iOS apps and anyone who writes a new mobile app will write it for iOS and Android first, Surface maybe. Microsoft missed the boat on tablets and phone - welcome to 1985, MSFT. Why don't you just go stand in the corner with your touch laptops...
MSFT is completely adrift in the consumer space - though they continue to rock on at the business level. Funny thing is that Windows Server is going in the opposite direction (more command line) which is good. Not that I have a desire to run it :lol:
Win 8 seems to really want to be "one big screen for your app". Who the hell works that way? I have 8 windows open as I type this - VM VPN'd in to work, web browser, a couple file folders, ssh, itunes, etc. I know you can still run traditional apps but the whole Metro/Modern/whatever idea that I would ever want any app to be full screen is so stupid and backwards and 1990 that I don't want Windows 8, even though I have about 10 MSDN licenses for it.
Yes, I know you can work multi-window but the idea that I would ever want to be non-multi-window or somehow land in such a config is just completely absurd. I grant I haven't spent much time playing with it.
The core Windows UI hasn't changed much since Windows 95 because it works just fine. Start menu (not just a button) in the lower left. Quick launch and task bar on the bottom. Tray on the right. Windows. That NeoWin article shows pretty much Win 7/Win 95, which I'd be fine with.
Maybe on a tablet. But who buys Microsoft tablets? I've already got a few hundred bucks' worth of iOS apps and anyone who writes a new mobile app will write it for iOS and Android first, Surface maybe. Microsoft missed the boat on tablets and phone - welcome to 1985, MSFT. Why don't you just go stand in the corner with your touch laptops...
MSFT is completely adrift in the consumer space - though they continue to rock on at the business level. Funny thing is that Windows Server is going in the opposite direction (more command line) which is good. Not that I have a desire to run it :lol:
I don't remember '95 sucking ass. After years of Win 3.1, Win 95 was pretty nice.
All I remember of Win 95 is this car racing game I always played.
Oh and the Beige desktop with 256 MB of RAM!!! (And I believe Pentium processors?)
Aldryic C'boas
The Pony
Was it the horrid 3D bumper car thing, with the "rearview mirror"?
I LOVED THE REARVIEW MIRROR IN IT.Was it the horrid 3D bumper car thing, with the "rearview mirror"?
Aldryic C'boas
The Pony
