Or, are you more excited about Windows 8 and its potential on tablets?
Link to original post:
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/hiner/first-take-on-windows-8-two-things-wrong-and-one-thing-right/8420
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
Unless they can completely rebuild the widows structure for scalability and modularity I don't see it.
There had better be a "classic mode" for WIN8 to have it run like WIN7, or else this will be the death knell for Microsoft. Our user base hates MS products so much that we only upgrade when the old version won't work any more (e.g. we're still WINXP/Office 2003).
Windows 8 will be a more modular OS. This big blocky UI will be for mobile similar to the Compact embedded version in windows 7 just with a UI that is more suited.
that is not ready and not out yet. Why not be patient, and don't be fooled by comments specially coming from Jason...Everyone was negative (and I remember he was too) about Winodws 7 too...but, it has done pretty good so far. So, sit back, relax and leave the job to people who know how to do it best...And please stop the Bitterness against Microsoft...It won't do your health any good.
What is good about making your user interface more cumbersome and less user friendly? Outside of snap there isn't much if anything about the Windows 7 UI to recommend. The strongest impression Windows 7 has made on my customers and myself is that almost every tasks takes more steps to accomplish in Windows 7 than it did in Windows XP. And going by the short five minute video it looks like Windows 8 is going to continue the trend of making things more cumbersome for desktop and laptop users. Tablet users won't be affected because the are going to be using an iPad anyway.
The search boxes in the control panel and the start menu are things I miss a lot when I am on XP. Some of the UI changes were so they could separate privileges and still display certain options. I don't like all the UI changes, but some of them are improvements.
Bill
Bill
wdewey wrote "The search boxes in the control panel and the start menu are things I miss a lot when I am on XP. Some of the UI changes were so they could separate privileges and still display certain options. I don't like all the UI changes, but some of them are improvements."
They do have a search bar on the bottom right of the Windows XP taskbar and you can search also by the search bar in Run. Which finds most things. I have got Windows XP as well as Windows 7, and both are user friendly. But Windows search on Windows 7 finds just about everything.Where as on Windows XP it finds most things but not all.
Windows XP and Windows 7 are both easy to use, but out of the two,Windows 7 is the most user friendly. Although both of them are.
But the problem is that it seems they plan to make Windows 8 completely different from the Windows we know and recognise. And I don't like what they are planing as it will mean that people like me will have great difficulty in using the operating system. Andrea Borman.
They do have a search bar on the bottom right of the Windows XP taskbar and you can search also by the search bar in Run. Which finds most things. I have got Windows XP as well as Windows 7, and both are user friendly. But Windows search on Windows 7 finds just about everything.Where as on Windows XP it finds most things but not all.
Windows XP and Windows 7 are both easy to use, but out of the two,Windows 7 is the most user friendly. Although both of them are.
But the problem is that it seems they plan to make Windows 8 completely different from the Windows we know and recognise. And I don't like what they are planing as it will mean that people like me will have great difficulty in using the operating system. Andrea Borman.
Why bother when your "user based hates MS products so much"???... I sense a little bit of resentment here!!!!!
or would they feel the same way about any OS that doesn't do what they expect it to do even when it did exactly what they instructed it to do?
That happens all the time. How often have people said this to you? "My document didn't print on my printer." And how often is it that the default printer is something else? Then you end up with 20 copies spitting out of the other default printer because if it didn't print out the first time, repeat the same action 20 times and expect a different result.
It did exactly what they instructed it to do but not what they expected it to do.
And that's the OS' fault. And that's why they hate it. Go figure.
That happens all the time. How often have people said this to you? "My document didn't print on my printer." And how often is it that the default printer is something else? Then you end up with 20 copies spitting out of the other default printer because if it didn't print out the first time, repeat the same action 20 times and expect a different result.
It did exactly what they instructed it to do but not what they expected it to do.
And that's the OS' fault. And that's why they hate it. Go figure.
My comment wasn't about my feelings or worries. I was simply saying that I'm not sure one of your two points is correct and that there will be that flexibility to run either the new UI or a more familiar Windows 7ish style UI. So my feelings are irrelevant to the topic.
Microsoft just does not seem to know how to build a good operating system ... maybe if they mess it up badly enough, Apple, Snow Leopard, Linux, and their offspring may finally get the acceptance they deserve. The iPad's success is largely due to Apple's innovative design talents (both hardware and software). I can't remember ever saying that about Microsoft, even though I use Windows as my main platform every day.
I have a ipad2 and it is not a success as far as i am concerned unless you are a no brainer and want to play games all day long!
One browser--Safari --lacking any tools and to clear history you go back to the main menu, Mail doesn't let you select all and delete, you go through it step by step and some of the mail hosts do not show the sent items, etc.
Music is good but since I have a ipod, what do I care.
So to sum it up , if you are going to do any serious work, do not purchase a ipad!
One browser--Safari --lacking any tools and to clear history you go back to the main menu, Mail doesn't let you select all and delete, you go through it step by step and some of the mail hosts do not show the sent items, etc.
Music is good but since I have a ipod, what do I care.
So to sum it up , if you are going to do any serious work, do not purchase a ipad!
It is a sad day when a company as large as Microsoft keeps releasing O/S's that are ALWAYS worse than the previous. Why is that? Do they not listen to anything anyones says??
In a corporate world, we need an o/s that is solid and dependable. Not an o/s that is full of fluff and widgets and pretty colours.
Eg: Our company is XP and will always be XP.
Why?
1) We have tried using Win7 for a few of our users....each has complained that it is now taken much longer to finish the same tasks
2) I setup a machine in order to capture serial data, along with a watchdog circuit to track any dropped data, or when the connection is lost.
Win XP works perfect.
Win7 drops thousands of peices of data in mere seconds. (therefore is is unusable)
I even srtipped out and turned off all programs/services that were not required.
It seems to me the typical way for Microsoft to build features into an O/S is to buy some other company that has the function they want, and patch it into windows, with hooks and dll files, and do it very badly.
What other O/S can you do a nice fresh install, leave it running and never touch it, and it will blow up all by itself.??? (in 6Mo or less) Now that is stability...god help us.
All the while Microsoft ALLOWS some programs to access Windows System Critical Files. What other O/S gets BSOD because you changed some small setting.
In a nut shell......Windows does not play well with others.....and In my humble opinion it NEVER will.
Microsoft has been extremly good at one thing. Keeping us MCSE employedd full time to keep the peice of sh__ running.
In a corporate world, we need an o/s that is solid and dependable. Not an o/s that is full of fluff and widgets and pretty colours.
Eg: Our company is XP and will always be XP.
Why?
1) We have tried using Win7 for a few of our users....each has complained that it is now taken much longer to finish the same tasks
2) I setup a machine in order to capture serial data, along with a watchdog circuit to track any dropped data, or when the connection is lost.
Win XP works perfect.
Win7 drops thousands of peices of data in mere seconds. (therefore is is unusable)
I even srtipped out and turned off all programs/services that were not required.
It seems to me the typical way for Microsoft to build features into an O/S is to buy some other company that has the function they want, and patch it into windows, with hooks and dll files, and do it very badly.
What other O/S can you do a nice fresh install, leave it running and never touch it, and it will blow up all by itself.??? (in 6Mo or less) Now that is stability...god help us.
All the while Microsoft ALLOWS some programs to access Windows System Critical Files. What other O/S gets BSOD because you changed some small setting.
In a nut shell......Windows does not play well with others.....and In my humble opinion it NEVER will.
Microsoft has been extremly good at one thing. Keeping us MCSE employedd full time to keep the peice of sh__ running.
Going by your reasoning, why did you ever leave Win 98? We're pushing out Win 7 machines right now and I can't say that I've experienced any of the issues that you refer to. And our users are very pleased with the new OS, the speed of the boot up (though of course, these are also new computers), and the stability. I've even loaded Win 7 on some 4 or 5 year old computers and it ran better than Win XP.
Microsoft doesn't understand general purpose computing. The web browser is like going back to MSDOS with one application running and doing everything in the same address space. This provides virus and malware software a great opportunity to exploit everything completely.
When you look at the history of windows, when XP came out, computer scientists thought, wow, Microsoft finally understands that protected processes, file permissions and security. Throughout the '80s, on USENET, MSDOS users and Microsoft employees would say over and over, "We don't need protected mode processors nor file permissions". You Unix software people need to learn how to right software correctly so that there are no bad memory references trashing my computer.
Guess what? The Virus world had a heyday with that mentality. So, we got XP, and everything seemed good. Then, Microsoft thought, hey, let's make everything integrated again with Vista. Let's put in checks though and warn the user every time something "bad" is about to happen so that applications can't harm user data. Let's also protect all the system files with something that can automatically repair problems for the user so that their machine will never be non-bootable and will not have viruses leaching into system executables and DLLs.
Well, they completely futzed all of that up, and Vista, and the fact that they exported customer support to a 3rd party that knew nothing about how Vista actually worked, created a nightmare.
Suddenly now, we have all of these things like Defender, Security Essentials, the much unpublicized Windows Home Server for backups so that you can recover from something that actually was working before SFC blew it all away etc.
You can tell there is great disconnect between the teams inside Microsoft, you can tell that there was a high level strangle hold on keeping Microsoft from solving users problems (maybe it was Bill Gates, since his departure seems to coincide with some changes).
At any rate, Windows-7, seems to solve the case of VD inside of Microsoft (Vista Debacle), But, they are charging for it, instead of giving it away as a free or even dirt cheap upgrade.
Why can't they give it away? Because their market is plummeting as enterprises are choosing Linux for core servers, and desktop sales have sailed off into the dumps.
They are now in a position of scrambling to get something right. If they fail now, another 40% of their customer base will disappear within the next 2 years.
For the consumer, choosing an iPad for web browsing and email is much more value than choosing a desktop that you can't take with you, or a laptop that you have to lug around.
It will be interesting to see what happens. Microsoft is in a tough spot because of their lack of focus on the consumer. They've tried to make the corporate marketplace the value proposition, and just relied on peoples familiarity with windows at work as the drive to have windows at home.
But, the availability of real vertical market applications and a sandboxed, virus free world on mobile devices has a very attractive pull for most people.
When you look at the history of windows, when XP came out, computer scientists thought, wow, Microsoft finally understands that protected processes, file permissions and security. Throughout the '80s, on USENET, MSDOS users and Microsoft employees would say over and over, "We don't need protected mode processors nor file permissions". You Unix software people need to learn how to right software correctly so that there are no bad memory references trashing my computer.
Guess what? The Virus world had a heyday with that mentality. So, we got XP, and everything seemed good. Then, Microsoft thought, hey, let's make everything integrated again with Vista. Let's put in checks though and warn the user every time something "bad" is about to happen so that applications can't harm user data. Let's also protect all the system files with something that can automatically repair problems for the user so that their machine will never be non-bootable and will not have viruses leaching into system executables and DLLs.
Well, they completely futzed all of that up, and Vista, and the fact that they exported customer support to a 3rd party that knew nothing about how Vista actually worked, created a nightmare.
Suddenly now, we have all of these things like Defender, Security Essentials, the much unpublicized Windows Home Server for backups so that you can recover from something that actually was working before SFC blew it all away etc.
You can tell there is great disconnect between the teams inside Microsoft, you can tell that there was a high level strangle hold on keeping Microsoft from solving users problems (maybe it was Bill Gates, since his departure seems to coincide with some changes).
At any rate, Windows-7, seems to solve the case of VD inside of Microsoft (Vista Debacle), But, they are charging for it, instead of giving it away as a free or even dirt cheap upgrade.
Why can't they give it away? Because their market is plummeting as enterprises are choosing Linux for core servers, and desktop sales have sailed off into the dumps.
They are now in a position of scrambling to get something right. If they fail now, another 40% of their customer base will disappear within the next 2 years.
For the consumer, choosing an iPad for web browsing and email is much more value than choosing a desktop that you can't take with you, or a laptop that you have to lug around.
It will be interesting to see what happens. Microsoft is in a tough spot because of their lack of focus on the consumer. They've tried to make the corporate marketplace the value proposition, and just relied on peoples familiarity with windows at work as the drive to have windows at home.
But, the availability of real vertical market applications and a sandboxed, virus free world on mobile devices has a very attractive pull for most people.
I like your take, Jason. I had not looked into Windows 8 at all, but I agree that dumbing down the desktop OS for a tablet friendly environment. It is still going to be too bloated for a tablet device, and too minimalistic for a powerful desktop OS. I guess they want to push people to the iPad and Linux desktops. :I
for the people who complain about people who will not like the UI. "You can't take five minutes to learn the new UI?" "It's called progress." "Adapt or die."
I know that isn't a finished product, but as it stands, that is a stupid UI.
I know that isn't a finished product, but as it stands, that is a stupid UI.
"It's called progress." "Adapt or die."
Sony had a videocassette that was far superior to VHS in 1975 - Betamax. That's about what Sony told consumers - (paraphrasing from over 30 years ago) - "Betamax is so much better than any other product that it will take the market by storm. You had better buy in now, or you'll be left behind."
Hmmm... that seems to have a familiar ring to it, no?
And Microsoft has done it too, with marvels like "Bob" and Windows-ME, and several others.
To @dgackey, who wrote, ???When you say ???no??? to nothing, it usually means you know nothing about your market.??? - I couldn't agree more.
In the meantime, I'll just stand back and watch. And I'll probably chuckle too.
Sony had a videocassette that was far superior to VHS in 1975 - Betamax. That's about what Sony told consumers - (paraphrasing from over 30 years ago) - "Betamax is so much better than any other product that it will take the market by storm. You had better buy in now, or you'll be left behind."
Hmmm... that seems to have a familiar ring to it, no?
And Microsoft has done it too, with marvels like "Bob" and Windows-ME, and several others.
To @dgackey, who wrote, ???When you say ???no??? to nothing, it usually means you know nothing about your market.??? - I couldn't agree more.
In the meantime, I'll just stand back and watch. And I'll probably chuckle too.
TV Crews still use beta because it is superior but the general public are not so bright and went with VHS because it was more widely available and was free of royalties like Android is becoming widely available because it is free.
It was actually the porn industry that decided to go with the VHS format. That was game, set, match and Beta lost.
The size of the Betamax cassette and the tape speed limited the maximum amount of time on a cassette to (IIRC) 60 minutes. Sony initially refused to run Betamax at reduced speed to allow more time on the tape. I remember my friends who owned Betamax buying movies that came on two cassettes.
VHS, on the other hand, allowed two hours per cassette. The porn industry jumped on this as a cost saving, and we all know what came of that.
(I had to do it...)
VHS, on the other hand, allowed two hours per cassette. The porn industry jumped on this as a cost saving, and we all know what came of that.
(I had to do it...)
That's weird because we could buy 2 hour and 4 hour Beta tapes here plus my recorder had SP, LP and EP modes. Sony invented the basics of both Beta and VHS but chose the former due to superior quality (higher relative tape to head speed) and sold the rights to VHS.
Recording time.
The original Betamax could only record 1 hour on tape, same as U-matic. JVC's VHS could do 2 hours, and they eventually squeezed 4 hours at LP (1/2) speed and 6 hours at EP/SLP (1/3) speed on a standard T-120 2-hour cassette. They wanted at least 4 hours because that was the average televised length of a U.S. football game.
Sony knew that slowing the tape speed would degrade the picture quality, and foolishly refused to do it. The consumer didn't mind, however. The buying public was willing to trade off higher picture quality for more recording time on tape. For the consumer, buying a single VHS tape was cheaper than buying multiple Betamax tapes.
Sony eventually did compromise, and got 5 hours on Beta-III, but VHS had already upped the ante to 9 hours on a T-180. By that time, Sony had already lost the war.
The original Betamax could only record 1 hour on tape, same as U-matic. JVC's VHS could do 2 hours, and they eventually squeezed 4 hours at LP (1/2) speed and 6 hours at EP/SLP (1/3) speed on a standard T-120 2-hour cassette. They wanted at least 4 hours because that was the average televised length of a U.S. football game.
Sony knew that slowing the tape speed would degrade the picture quality, and foolishly refused to do it. The consumer didn't mind, however. The buying public was willing to trade off higher picture quality for more recording time on tape. For the consumer, buying a single VHS tape was cheaper than buying multiple Betamax tapes.
Sony eventually did compromise, and got 5 hours on Beta-III, but VHS had already upped the ante to 9 hours on a T-180. By that time, Sony had already lost the war.
in the professional video market (u-matic tape for example) betmax DID win, hands down and was the industry reference technology. VHS only won in the home market and the two markets were isolated enough from one another than there was not much of a problem about that.
Betamax is still in use where quality is a consideration.
Sony may have over-designed that one, but there was nothing inherently cartoonishly stupid about it, like the modern "UX" from MS. (And, dare I say, other places that like to claim that they have the best UX team. Heard it a million times.)
Sony may have over-designed that one, but there was nothing inherently cartoonishly stupid about it, like the modern "UX" from MS. (And, dare I say, other places that like to claim that they have the best UX team. Heard it a million times.)
Microsoft obviously knows what we are looking for! Great job, great progress!!!
My understanding is that if you didn't want the interface they showed you could just revert to a more traditional desktop. Much like how in Windows 7 you can turn off all the fancy junk and make it more like a basic XP style interface. That would allow it to move between worlds rather well. Power and precision if you need it and big icons for fat fingers if you need that.
I think having all that code running a slate/tablet is a bit ridiculous. If you have a slate/tablet I can't imagine many times that I'll will want to run the traditional desktop experience. Having the option on a touchscreen laptop I can see working well, however not on a full desktop PC. For all in one desktop style computers again having both options might be good.
For the record I watched the video before reading any of article or replies. My first impression was not a good one. I imagined myself having to use that UI for daily work and almost outright rejected it. Then they showed the traditional UI and I backed down a bit. If Microsoft didn't have a reign on the file server, and office end of things I think they would have lost a lot more ground than they already have on the desktop side to both Linux and Mac.
For the record I watched the video before reading any of article or replies. My first impression was not a good one. I imagined myself having to use that UI for daily work and almost outright rejected it. Then they showed the traditional UI and I backed down a bit. If Microsoft didn't have a reign on the file server, and office end of things I think they would have lost a lot more ground than they already have on the desktop side to both Linux and Mac.
then it isn't running. This is one of the basic differences between windows server and windows professional/home versions. The services aren't running
And that MS is producing the OS with the modularity they keep promising.
I think we would all share this HOPE.
However, on decades of past performance we must assume that we hope in vain.
However, on decades of past performance we must assume that we hope in vain.
At least with XP, you could go back to the "Classic"-type UI. Not any more. Not for Office, either.
There is still a "classic" UI in Windows 7. It just looks more like an amalgam of XP and 2000 instead of pure 2000.
Note when MS dude is using Office, the taskbar reverts to W7 look. I imagine you can make it stick.
In a few years, the HP memristor which can function as memory, drive space, AND processor... at, potentially, 100s of times the speed of the fastest mid-range consumer computer, will make all of this moot. These things will function nearly like neurons in the human brain, have the potential to get away from binary/digital and into FAST analog computing, and NONE of the programs, OS's or UI's will work with any of them. Most likely, the next generation will need to re-learn computing entirely. This infant technology (at the moment) will lead to, pretty much, the computers found in "Star trek." where you tell it to do something and it just does.
The first ones will have a chip, about the size of the current HDSD card, that functions as a several hundred gig drive, 100 gig processor and be equivalent to having 100 gig of memory! Nothing we've seen so far will match that!
The first ones will have a chip, about the size of the current HDSD card, that functions as a several hundred gig drive, 100 gig processor and be equivalent to having 100 gig of memory! Nothing we've seen so far will match that!
But I do think that memristors are one of the underlying reasons behind the promotion of cloud computing, when the internet clearly isn't ready to handle it yet. They want to promote it and get it into common use before HP perfects the memristor, because as soon as they do the PC market is in their hands until the patent expires.
in computer control technology in industry. We saw much use of them there. I wonder what they(HP), think is an "improvement"?
This will revolutionize mobile computing all by itself. The term 3D doesn't refer to three dimensional video, but to the literal build of the transistors. The CPU will use entirely new methods to handle switching in a 3D circuit. This will make smart phones seem like a desktop.
Profound visions of the future coming from someone with the moniker, "janitorman".
Absolutely priceless.
Absolutely priceless.
Its biggest feature is something you could easily write as a shell replacement over a weekend.
I like the Linux approach where you can choose different UIs with the same base OS. Why can't they just call it the "Tablet UI" for Windows 7? I don't consider it an OS upgrade unless they're changing the file system, driver model, security approach or threading.
I agree entirely. I would like to see MS separate the Operating System from the User Interface. The core O/S could then be usable on different devices.
It has always been possible to create your own Windows desktop replacement. We've been doing it where I work since Windows NT. We needed to lockdown the PC from our end users in a retail environment and the best way to do that was to limit what users could do through the UI. From what I've been reading I think Windows 8 will offer more than one UI. A traditional one and the new Metro style interface.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
