Discussion on:

Windows 7 will not be the new XP because Windows 8 is not Vista

Will Windows 8 destroy the desktop as we know it? Or will we be able to have our desktop cake and eat Metro, too? Will the tablet form factor have the chops to satisfy the power user?

To get a tablet to do what I do, I'd need a larger monitor (or two or four), a keyboard and a proper mouse or touchpad.

The only way I could see that as viable is the old style laptablets with the rotating touchscreens, proper keyboard, real (more than a few gigs) storage, etc.

Microsoft may influence PCs, but as we've seen repeatedly they aren't always successful at driving change.

You arrive at your work desk, plug in your Windows 8 tablet into a docking station with your favorite physical keyboard and mouse and array of monitors and BOOM, your consumer tablets turns into a capable real Windows work horse! Ain't that Magic*?

* word "Magic" has been indirectly patented by Apple inc.

because it isn't yet.

This also overlooks the apparent incompatibility of the Metro interface for desktop applications, but I'll grant that what we've seen is aimed at developers and I'll withhold further criticism of it until the beta release.

Oh, and W7 can't be the 'new' XP; XP is still the XP.

...except without the malware. So I can just get back to work.

The notion that Windows OSs are inherently unsecureable is as outdated as the idea that using Linux requires command line skills and is difficult to install.

Someone asked me the other day at work why their friend's Mac had malware on it. I told her the Mac isn't superman, it's a computer just like a Windows installed computer or Linux distro installed computer.

It's an outdated idea that needs to die. I think it will die as Macs continue to grow in popularity.

Their friend probably downloaded the malware. There is a basic difference in core system used by Apple and Linux - both Unix based.Windows 7 still uses a lot of the "exe" and "dll" files that were on early systems - sure they may have been tweaked and upgraded, but probably some haven't been changed in years. When you build on a bad base, you get a bad system. Now if IBM's mainframe S/W could be made "PC friendly", I don't think you would see much in the way of malware (unless someone downloaded it). I remember an article in 2600 a while back where they tried to hack into IBM's VM system and could not. It seems all the "hacking" is predominantly done to Window systems or through the backdoor via a WIndows work station with access to a secure mainfram (even those used by the government).

Do you NEED Linux anymore? I say no, been using Windows 8 DP since September 2011, and you can run Linux packages directly in it, and this has been documented.

You can turn off the Metro interface if you don't want it. Unsure if there is a switch in Windows to do so, but already there is a registry fix. When they become compatible, turn it on if you want.

doing so also disables almost all of the other new features of W8. If that remains the case in the final release (hopefully not), then why upgrade from W7?

I've been saying that in every Win 8 blog I've commented on. I have come to loathe Metro on the Desktop. It's cumbersome and ugly and looks like it was designed for (or by) Kindergartners. I don't need another interface between me and the OS. And, I want the full features at the Desktop. A tablet or phone is a different matter, but they still need to make it look better.

LoL mudpuppy, WAIT then till you see the NEW Windows flag/button logo then, MS has dropped their old one that dates back to Windows 3.x in favor of a new logo that looks like to me a plus sign in a box...NOT kidding you.

Indeed. I personally don't see a need to upgrade from Win 7. It has taken this long to get it to perform as well as XP. It is just another M$ ploy to force the consumers to shell out more money. That's been the pattern for years. I hope I live long enough to see another company step in and take the reigns from M$ and give the public what it wants: A choice. Like many others I am retired, with 5 self built desktops that all pretty well scream. I don't want or need a new OS that requires more hardware and will take away many features I like.

Ummmmmm, IT won't be an upgrade, Windows 7 will be totally WIPED from your PC, and unless Microsoft does something before RTM version is released YOU will have to format your computer and do a clean install of Windows 7, cannot back track from Windows 8 to Windows 7. Will have to be a clean install.

Doesn't believe that is true, seeing as how I use Windows 8DP, and will upgrade it to the beta when released, but killing off the Metro interface doesn't change any option that you have with the tiles. EVEN clicking on the start flag's options are still there but on the right side of the screen.

This is a simple task, just download MetrotweakUI and you have back your comfortable Windows 7 desktop.

Can easily be done, just use MetroTweakUI to turn off the tiles and get a regular desktop

Are WE ready?

I have a Dell Precision 380 and it pounds it out.Windows8?Big questions.

So how's the Metro *Touch Interface* on your Dell Prescision??

From what I've read, although my mind could be changed, I won't be upgrading-- and I, like many others, have a disk sitting on my shelf for every Microsoft OS with the exception of Windows 3.0-- back then I was an Apple 2e fanboy.

I agree that sounds reasonable, wait until they give us something closer to the final product before we judge, and complain BUT ...

that approach ignores the reality of software development. When they release that version it will be all but cast in stone. The only changes they will make will be making will be for serious problems. Things that cause crashes or corrupt data.

They will not tweak the UI in response to complaints. So, if we have problems with the UI, it is actually past time that we JUMPED UP AND DOWN SCREAMING AT THE TOP OF OUR VOICES to be heard. A single voice will be lost in the background noise of all Windows users. Even the average writer will just be a voice in a storm. It will take LOTS of users and writers making lot of noise for MS to make any changes at this point. Right now, the current form of Windows has the momentum of a hurricane. It is almost impossible to change it's direction.

I can say that hurricanes change course quite often which is why the tracks "best guesses" beyond 3 days. Personally, I am not looking forward to the Metro UI in any shape or form on desktops which is where I do most of my computing. Tablets? Definitely the right direction. Laptops? I can see it going either way depending on use case.

I would just like the option to turn Metro off entirely if I so choose.

what you're left with is basically W7. None of the security or performance enhancements remain in effect if you disable Metro.

I've used the Registry hack on my W8 DP.
The built-in AV component still seems to function.
It didn't slow down.
W8 DP uses less RAM than W7 does.

Why should turning off an additional GUI layer, cause my PC to use more RAM?

"... plug in your Windows 8 tablet into a docking station ..."
Who carries a 30" tablet around with them?

Why ask a good question? You'll only get a pointless answer.

Seriously, though, this is the way Microsoft rolls. They treat hardware as an endless excuse to force people to upgrade computers instead of trying to minimize the footprint of the OS and leave the hardware to do the important things like running applications.

There seems to be some confusion.
W8 still uses less RAM than W7, even though I have used the hack.
It didn't slow down.
The AV component is still shown as running (in Process Explorer).

the Ribbon in Explorer (not necessarily a bad thing), the 'Pause Copy' function (among others), the enhanced Task Manager and probably other things I'm not aware of.

@mudpuppy1
Agreed.
Most of the real improvements remain.
Losing the new Copy function is unfortunate

Actually blarman that is incorrect! Windows 8 will work on a 1.3GHz CPU, and with only a single gigabyte of RAM.

It's MS Security Essentials; it's footprint is the same as running it on W7.

RAM is cheap these days.

You shouldn't have to use a registry hack to turn it off.

I shouldn't sacrifice any of the features mudpuppy points out; why are features of the desktop GUI dependent on the tablet GUI?

I'm not sure what your " 30" tablet " remark is about; I never referenced that and can't find it in this branch of the discussion.

"It's MS Security Essentials; ..."
W7 doesn't have that built-in, so it's a new feature in W8.

"RAM is cheap these days."
So I should waste it?
A 300 MB - 400 MB saving, is worthwhile on a PC with 4 GB of RAM.
That easily adds another instance of "Firefox +10 tabs".

"You shouldn't have to use a registry hack to turn it off."
I used the hack the kill the Metro Tiles and restore the "Start Menu".

"I shouldn't sacrifice any of the features mudpuppy points out; ..."
The "Explorer Ribbon" wastes too much space when it's open (I suspect that's why the "Details pane" was moved).
When the "Explorer Ribbon" is closed, it's no better than a menu.
They might as well have kept the "Command Bar".
Update
The Registry hack does not disable the "Explorer Ribbon".
I just checked it.

The new "Task Manager" still isn't as good as "Process Explorer" (so it's no loss from my perspective).
It has some improved Network statistics though.

"... why are features of the desktop GUI dependent on the tablet GUI?"
That's the million dollar question.

"I'm not sure what your " 30" tablet " remark is about; I never referenced that and can't find it in this branch of the discussion."
My bad.
You didn't mention it.
That was related to something Gromanon posted above.

Personally I would be amazed if Win 8 were released without a fully featured desktop in the place of the current "app". Current opinion seems to hold that Microsoft is currently making a lot of mistakes and coming late to market with many things. I very much doubt if they would take this risk.
Look at the current situation in the Ubuntu community and all the fuss over Unity. Unity may be great for a tablet: but its got a very bad press for the desktop. People are migrating away from stock ubuntu to mint and other variants (personally I favour Cinnamon).
I just cannot see Microsoft taking the risk of going the same way.

Being a little vague, but going back wasn't Presentation Manager just an application (bundled with Windows) that accessed the underlying OS? On Win3 this was very obvious, with HP and others creating Presentation Manager replacements (remember OpenView?), on Windows 2000/XP this capability was used by several virtualisation solutions to enable users to run multiple Win32 instances on a single Windows OS install. With Unix & Linux we've always had a clear separation between desktop/shell and OS. So perhaps the desktop "app" is MS's initial attempt at re-introducing separation?

A clear benefit of separation is that with a subscription-based business model, you can keep the underlying OS stable for longer (good for QoS and low overheads, particularly in a cloud environment), whilst regularly releasing new presentation managers (good for generating profit).

Hence I wouldn't be surprised that Win8 only ships with a Desktop Starter App, with the full aero (equivalent) app available separately at extra cost or only available to subscribers.

Presentation Manager was the 1st "windows" a joint effort of Microsoft and IBM. It ran on an AT class machine with above board memory. A real dog. My company tried to sell it. If you accidently clicked on the wrong button; it would take forever to back up.

Firstly I wish I could express myself as eloquently as the writer. Secondly as a confirmed desktop and laptop user without any hope of ever going the hand-held device route, I will definitely be keeping my 5 computers on either Vista or Windows 7. One desktop still runs Windows 2000 SP4, while one runs XP-Home SP3, my main desktop runs Vista Ultimate 64, and the two laptops use Vista Business 32. As a senior citizen and pensioner, albeit an autodidact and IT Specialist, Microsoft will have to make room for increasing numbers of elderly people who have no desire to keep abreast with technological developments beyond the operating system to which they are accustomed. Therefore Microsoft will have to keep the above operating systems supported for a considerable time to come.

.... Microsoft supports the OS for 10 years [well among other reasons]. Some people can't upgrade every few years or so. Compare that with a Mac. Major OS upgrades every couple of years and they don't support any OS older than about 4-5 years.

...and lengthened out their release dates. Every 3 years is too much - it takes that long just to get the Service Packs out to make the OS stable and build apps.

Man I can't wait until HTML5 apps are the way everything rolls and we can ditch the OS nonsense completely...

The deciding factor might be whether Windows 8 on ARM tab's is going to be so hobbled and useless, to make it wholly irrelevant. No desktop mode might not be a total killer, but it differentiates with Intel Windows 8 to make everyone wonder why they would even bother.

If ARM Win 8 is Metro only, it leave a large gulf and change of process meaning your desktop/laptop by default needs to be Metro - otherwise you are back to the Aero traditional UI everyone is used to on Win 7 and Metro going forward.

Which leads us stright back to perhaps just doing an Apple and an iPad is really an iPod Touch XL, with Windows tabs on Windows Phone 7.5 XL OS might have been amore credible way forward. Apple figured this one out a couple of years back, will Microsoft ignore this?

A hobbled Win 8 to make it work in an ARM tab environment, because fundamentally Intel can't narrow the power drain gap, is the answer to a question no-one was asking.

Hopefully the 'Desktop' App for Metrro also does not crap out as much as Explorer shell used to

So, Microsoft has decided for us that the desktop is dead? Therefore, they don't have to bother supporting an OS that is designed to meet all a desktop users needs. They have decided that I MUST use a tablet as my sole computer, and pack my desktop off into a dark corner of the basement where I can play Tetris and do my taxes once a year.
Stuff it Microsoft.

Fletchold, all I can say is well stated. I, like many others, have been around since the MS-DOS days and have migrated through each and every OS that Microsoft has released, the good, the bad, and the ugly. They visited each category over the years. To be honest, I'm tired. I'm tired of Microsoft ramming some "new technology" down my throat that in large measure is meant to empty my bank account more than anything else.

The primary reason that XP has enjoyed such a long run is the fact that it does what the corporate and retail users need it to do in order to remain productive and to also enjoy their computer. If Microsoft were not killing XP it would be here for quite a number of years to come. It does what most users need it to do as economically and efficiently as possible. Microsoft lost touch with that concept a long time ago.

It's been a great ride but I'll be staying with Windows 7. It does what I want it to do. Since I'm a senior citizen, retired, and probably in the last years of my life it will more than likely outlast me. I will also wholeheartedly recommend Windows 7 to all who seek my counsel.

In the meantime I have two units that have respectively CenTOS Linux and Ubuntu Linux installed which work very well. So, to echo your comments, Fletchoid, "Stuff it Microsoft".

You want to be stuck with the same OS for 20 years? I guess you have a CRT TV instead of a flat screen or an old [regular] phone instead of a smartphone then?
XP is antiquated. It is unsecure [compared to Win 7 and even Vista]. It is stuck [primarily] at 32-bit. It can't handle much more than 3GB of RAM while applications [not just Microsoft's] are getting bigger. A typical XP machine with 1GB of RAM is getting sluggish.
There is a simple registry fix [unsure if you can turn it off in a GUI] for Win 8 to turn off the metro interface. I will probably be doing that once I do use Win 8. It took me a while to flip from the "classic" Windows 2000 era interface in Win XP to XP's "newer" interface.