Windows 8 Metro: The fall of windows or the best invention ever

gbee

fionny wrote: »

I cant see how it affects them if people want to enable the start menu... .

Given the story above vis only running Windows 8 on new PCs, they want to remove as many tools as they can.

_Kaiser_

fionny wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how w8 performs in the market when its released.

Only if they assess retail sales/upgrades vs OEM preload numbers.

Obviously every new PC will ship with it.. be interesting to see how many "Windows 7 downgrade" calls/licenses are sold though.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

stevenmu

I'm obviously in the minority here, but I've been using the preview a week or two now, and I really like it.

It only took me a few minutes to get used to metro replacing the start menu, mostly because I use them the same way, i.e. I hit the windows key on my keyboard and start typing in what I want, then click something in the results. When more apps start supporting the search contract and then you can search for apps and within apps from the one box, that'll be very cool.

I've also been pinning my most used desktop applications to the taskbar, which I do in Windows 7 anyway, so the classic start bar isn't really important to me.

What I'd love is a device I can bring to my desk in work and dock into a multi-monitor, keyboard and mouse setup and use as my main PC, then pick it up as a tablet to walk into a meeting or go on the train/bus, and carry on where I left off, then get home and dock it into my TV to watch movies or listen to music etc. Windows 8 is a huge leap towards that.

It does have fairly limited additional value for existing PCs/laptops etc, so I can see there being a line drawn, with existing hardware staying on Windows 7, and new hardware with touch or other modern interfaces (kinect style gestures etc) going with Windows 8.

_Kaiser_

stevenmu wrote: »

What I'd love is a device I can bring to my desk in work and dock into a multi-monitor, keyboard and mouse setup and use as my main PC, then pick it up as a tablet to walk into a meeting or go on the train/bus, and carry on where I left off, then get home and dock it into my TV to watch movies or listen to music etc. Windows 8 is a huge leap towards that

Introducing, the Asus Padphone... getting close

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_IFZXKukgo

LuckyLloyd

Took the Release preview last night on a slightly knackered Toshiba 2gb AMD Dual Core machine. It's pretty buggy:

- the password defect is a joke, and very surprising and unsettling for an essential release candidate;
- some of the apps need a lot of finishing off imo;
- some things in terms of settings and preferences changes simply don't work;

It would also be nice to have the option to boot into the desktop, but we'll have to wait and see what the finished version brings in that regard.

However:

Cabaal wrote: »

Installed release preview this morning, its just awful interface wise to anything I've ever used before including the first time I used xp and its horrible kid colored interface.

This has a very good chance of alienating people and almost pushing them to OSX, Linux and Chrome/Android devices

a lot of the doomsday type reactions in this thread seem off base to me and a bit out of touch with the general Windows user.

This thing is fast, boot times are low and general speed and performance appears very impressive at first glance. And ultimately it will ship with new PCs and for vast swathes of the market the important thing when it comes to buying machines is price. Avoiding the metro interface is not going to be worth €100's to people. It isn't that bad. People will live with it on their primary laptop (assuming they bux fix like crazy between now and public release), and I think it could work really well in the ancilliary device market.

They needed to do this folks.

Fysh

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

a lot of the doomsday type reactions in this thread seem off base to me and a bit out of touch with the general Windows user.

This thing is fast, boot times are low and general speed and performance appears very impressive at first glance. And ultimately it will ship with new PCs and for vast swathes of the market the important thing when it comes to buying machines is price. Avoiding the metro interface is not going to be worth €100's to people. It isn't that bad. People will live with it on their primary laptop (assuming they bux fix like crazy between now and public release), and I think it could work really well in the ancilliary device market.

They needed to do this folks.

I'm not sure I can agree with the assertion that Microsoft, in order to keep their desktop offering relevant, needed to make every machine running Windows 8 and every server running Windows 2012 default to a UI based on the Giant Crap Touchscreen Mobile Phone paradigm, regardless of whether a touch interface is present.

New UI concepts are one thing, forcing them onto machines that lack the hardware which forms the basis of the UI concept is quite another. Metro as an option is a completely different thing to Metro as the enforced standard.

_Kaiser_

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

a lot of the doomsday type reactions in this thread seem off base to me and a bit out of touch with the general Windows user.

This thing is fast, boot times are low and general speed and performance appears very impressive at first glance. And ultimately it will ship with new PCs and for vast swathes of the market the important thing when it comes to buying machines is price. Avoiding the metro interface is not going to be worth €100's to people. It isn't that bad. People will live with it on their primary laptop (assuming they bux fix like crazy between now and public release), and I think it could work really well in the ancilliary device market.

They needed to do this folks.

I still don't rate the "it's faster" argument here and it's not as if Windows 7 in a clean-install setup is a slouch either after all.

As I said above, sure it's gets to the login screen pretty quickly but any version of Windows I've used will take another 2-3 mins to finish setting up after this before you can get going (and I'm the type who likes a clean organised desktop and minimum amount of crap running in the tray/background)

Speaking of crap.. let's see how it runs when all the toolbars get installed, the "useful" apps like free antispyware (that are thinly disguised malware themselves) tools, itunes and all the other stuff the average user put on (or allow to be installed) on their machines. Or install something like SEP and watch the boot time double!

LuckyLloyd

Fysh wrote: »

I'm not sure I can agree with the assertion that Microsoft, in order to keep their desktop offering relevant, needed to make every machine running Windows 8 and every server running Windows 2012 default to a UI based on the Giant Crap Touchscreen Mobile Phone paradigm, regardless of whether a touch interface is present.

New UI concepts are one thing, forcing them onto machines that lack the hardware which forms the basis of the UI concept is quite another. Metro as an option is a completely different thing to Metro as the enforced standard.

I don't see how people will be inhibited from using the desktop and avoiding Metro. The Metro interface and apps are additions more so than replacements.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

I still don't rate the "it's faster" argument here and it's not as if Windows 7 in a clean-install setup is a slouch either after all.

As I said above, sure it's gets to the login screen pretty quickly but any version of Windows I've used will take another 2-3 mins to finish setting up after this before you can get going (and I'm the type who likes a clean organised desktop and minimum amount of crap running in the tray/background)

Speaking of crap.. let's see how it runs when all the toolbars get installed, the "useful" apps like free antispyware (that are thinly disguised malware themselves) tools, itunes and all the other stuff the average user put on (or allow to be installed) on their machines. Or install something like SEP and watch the boot time double!

As I was saying, I didn't do a clean install. I stuck it on a pretty banged up laptop and threw a few different things on to see what the performance was like. I was impressed.

Faster than Windows 7 is better whatever way you want to phrase it. It will be less fast the more you add obviously, but the comparison point is not to it's clean install self, it's to a loaded up Windows 7 or XP OS.

ShaneU

Digital upgrade to windows 8 pro is $40 in 131 markets. Works for xp, vista and 7 users.

http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/

bpb101

ShaneU wrote: »

Digital upgrade to windows 8 pro is $40 in 131 markets. Works for xp, vista and 7 users.

http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/

omg , only $40 for a piece of shít that is designed in any kindergarten
ill buy 2

thanks for the update , just wanted to be sarcastic

Fysh

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I don't see how people will be inhibited from using the desktop and avoiding Metro. The Metro interface and apps are additions more so than replacements.

What I've seen in the Consumer & Release previews contradicts this though, because we've not yet heard anything about whether you can usefully work without ever using the Metro UI. It's possible the RTM version will correct this but at this stage I doubt it.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

As I was saying, I didn't do a clean install. I stuck it on a pretty banged up laptop and threw a few different things on to see what the performance was like. I was impressed.

Faster than Windows 7 is better whatever way you want to phrase it. It will be less fast the more you add obviously, but the comparison point is not to it's clean install self, it's to a loaded up Windows 7 or XP OS.

The problem with "faster is better" is that we all know, with Windows, that Mean Time To Logon Screen is not a useful metric for startup time. From memory, Microsoft had some advisory for domain-bound XP machines where an additional profile loading time of up to 5 minutes was considered "normal" and not something that could be raised for investigation, which effectively means up to 5 minutes while AV clients and other additional services get going before you can properly start working.

This has been getting better in the last few years, but I'm not yet convinced that the in-the-field experience shows as massive an improvement as certain versions of the numbers may suggest.

bpb101 wrote: »

omg , only $40 for a piece of shít that is designed in any kindergarten
ill buy 2

thanks for the update , just wanted to be sarcastic

It's suitable that you talk of kindergarten design when you're throwing your toys out of the pram

I'm not particularly keen on Win8 at the minute, but at least MS are being smart about their upgrade pricing. Considering that both Lion and Mountain Lion have cost of the order of $25, there's a danger that charging excessive amounts for a new OS that doesn't necessarily have much new under-the-hood magic would make them appear the greedy beast of the desktop OS marketplace.

oxo_

I'm reserving final judgement until I see the final product.
I am totally unimpressed with it so far though, it's trying to Apple-ise my PC too much. Too many social media **** involved in it's development I reckon.

Overheal

Until it has more application support its effectively a dud.

Odaise Gaelach

Overheal wrote: »

Until it has more application support its effectively a dud.

I think you've got it there. The converse is also going to be interesting: how will perceptions of the new Start Screen and Metro change when more apps become available for it and it essentially becomes more useful?

Overheal

People will flock to it then, but that will be long after the promotional period has expired and the cost of upgrading goes up. within two years though you can expect there to be a lot of android and windows mobile devices competing alongside one another. oh, and the iPad. In fact I'd be shocked if within the next 3 we don't see an iPad Pro out in the wild. Mark this post.

Odaise Gaelach

I wouldn't expect the cost of upgrading to go up too much. If Microsoft are planning to make an absolute bumload of cash from the Windows Store then maybe they'd sell it at a much cheaper rate than previous versions of Windows; and that includes OEM copies.

RUCKING FETARD

Overheal wrote: »

People will flock to it then, but that will be long after the promotional period has expired and the cost of upgrading goes up. within two years though you can expect there to be a lot of android and windows mobile devices competing alongside one another. oh, and the iPad. In fact I'd be shocked if within the next 3 we don't see an iPad Pro out in the wild. Mark this post.

I'll quote it for ya.

Surface prices are rumored to be

Prices for the Microsoft Surface tablet range may have been prematurely revealed thanks to a sneaky source.
The Next Web says a source close to Microsoft let slip on the tablet pricing, claiming the Surface tablet sporting Windows RT, and powered by Nvidia's Tegra 3 chip, will set you back $599 (around £380).


The Intel powered Ivy Bridge slate, which will run Windows 8 Pro, will apparently retail at a rather eye watering $999 (around £640).

^^^Short on details, 64GB Ipad is near same price. If they dropped the price abit they could call the new revamped Ipad coming in few months(?), bigger screen blah blah....the pro.

Ipad Mini is coming out at xmas priced at $200 to compete with the cheaper Android offerings/Google Nexus.

So then we have the Ipad Range--> mini, medium and pro.:D

Fysh

RUCKING FETARD wrote: »

I'll quote it for ya.

Surface prices are rumored to be

^^^Short on details, 64GB Ipad is near same price. If they dropped the price abit they could call the new revamped Ipad coming in few months(?), bigger screen blah blah....the pro.

Ipad Mini is coming out at xmas priced at $200 to compete with the cheaper Android offerings/Google Nexus.

So then we have the Ipad Range--> mini, medium and pro.:D

There are a few issues with your comment:

For one thing, the advantage a Windows tablet has over a Mac is that it automatically enables infrastructure integration much more easily. Native Exchange for mail, much easier Sharepoint integration, AD authentication, blah blah blah. Oh, and because it's a Windows-based tablet there's none of the bizarre doublethink about productivity software that you get with the iPad ("It's a machine you can use for working! Except we're a premium consumer electronics manufactuer, so we won't provide any really useful or consistent support for people trying to work in a corporate/enterprise environment!"). You'll pay through the nose, but you get the tablet that you insist you need along with all the software you actually need to be productive.

As for pricing - I would say there's nary a 99s chance in hell that Apple will price a 7" iPad at the $200 price point. That's lower than the cost of an iPhone, and they're already on record saying that as far as they're concerned between the iPod range and the iPhone they have the mini-tablet arena covered. They are a premium company, whose policy is to only sell products where they can have a substantial margin. The only possible way they can have that sort of margin on a 7" touchscreen selling for $200 is if they're forcing their supply chain to make a loss, and even Apple aren't that suicidally stupid. You'll notice that the only mention of $200 in the article you quote is in reference to the Kindle Fire and the Nexus 7.

It does seem that the Surface tablets are aiming for a price point they'll have to fight very hard to earn, but I guess we'll have to see what MS brings to the table. These may be the devices that showcase Win 8 at its best, or they could be a very expensive dud a la BB Playbook. Time will tell, I guess.

Capt'n Midnight

If you measure share by amount spent or profit made then Apple own the tablet market. If you do surveys you find that most buyers of cheaper tablets do so for economic reasons, they aspire to get an Apple.

Apple have very few models of iphone / ipad.
This makes support easier
It also gives them economies of scale in design and production

why would they spend a lot of time and effort in shooting themselves in the foot ?

Capt'n Midnight

Fysh wrote: »

For one thing, the advantage a Windows tablet has over a Mac is that it automatically enables infrastructure integration much more easily. Native Exchange for mail, much easier Sharepoint integration, AD authentication, blah blah blah.
...
It does seem that the Surface tablets are aiming for a price point they'll have to fight very hard to earn, but I guess we'll have to see what MS brings to the table. These may be the devices that showcase Win 8 at its best, or they could be a very expensive dud a la BB Playbook. Time will tell, I guess.

Corporate / integration with home networks is vital
I'd nearly consider fingerprint recognition / other hardware security features vital too

performance for gamers would be nice, but battery life and cost mean that's probably a non-runner

for selling to the average punter it will need some wow factor against the ipad and price is about the only one

android / kindle and other ebook readers / browsers will be far cheaper too

RUCKING FETARD

Fysh wrote: »

You'll notice that the only mention of $200 in the article you quote is in reference to the Kindle Fire and the Nexus 7.

It does seem that the Surface tablets are aiming for a price point they'll have to fight very hard to earn, but I guess we'll have to see what MS brings to the table. These may be the devices that showcase Win 8 at its best, or they could be a very expensive dud a la BB Playbook. Time will tell, I guess.

Ah, linked to wrong one, this one.

Though this one has it at a probably more realistic $250-$300, Google is making a profit on the Nexus at $200 and they're making it in America.

Microsoft's Surface plan means the world belongs to Android now

^^Not hard to see why China put the condition that Android must remain free for at least 5 years in Google's Acquisition of Motorola. (I posted this some where else)

AlmightyCushion

RUCKING FETARD wrote: »

Ah, linked to wrong one, this one.

Though this one has it at a probably more realistic $250-$300, Google is making a profit on the Nexus at $200 and they're making it in America.

Microsoft's Surface plan means the world belongs to Android now

^^Not hard to see why China put the condition that Android must remain free for at least 5 years in Google's Acquisition of Motorola. (I posted this some where else)

The Nexus Q is made in America, the Nexus 7 isn't and the consensus is that they are either selling it at cost or a small loss.

RUCKING FETARD

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

The Nexus Q is made in America, the Nexus 7 isn't and the consensus is that they are either selling it at cost or a small loss.

mixed them up. Thanks.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

Fysh

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Corporate / integration with home networks is vital
I'd nearly consider fingerprint recognition / other hardware security features vital too

performance for gamers would be nice, but battery life and cost mean that's probably a non-runner

for selling to the average punter it will need some wow factor against the ipad and price is about the only one

android / kindle and other ebook readers / browsers will be far cheaper too

I've been thinking about this, but if MS are smart about it they'll come up with something clever based on RDP's RemoteFX capability and let you stream gaming sessions from your Win8 gaming PC. If they wanted to really mess with people, providing that kind of connectivity to the Xbox 360 (or more realistically its successor) would be a good way to do it.

RUCKING FETARD wrote: »

Ah, linked to wrong one, this one.

Though this one has it at a probably more realistic $250-$300, Google is making a profit on the Nexus at $200 and they're making it in America.

Microsoft's Surface plan means the world belongs to Android now

^^Not hard to see why China put the condition that Android must remain free for at least 5 years in Google's Acquisition of Motorola. (I posted this some where else)

I'm still not seeing anything in what you linked that cites a believable source for the circa $200 price point. Again, Apple already make tablet-like devices in the iPod Touch and the iPhone. A data-enabled 7" tablet selling for substantially less than the iPhone would be cannibalism between their lines. The kind of price point you're talking about makes sense when you're trying to drive market share up, but Apple already own the market.

What I can imagine Apple doing is tinkering with the line so that the entry-level offering is now a 7" model (which will be pushed as "greater portability" not "a smaller screen than before), with 3G as a pricey optional extra and the larger onboard storage sizes only available on the full-size model. If they go that way they could even make the entry level model $400 and push it as "the most affordable iPad yet", but still maintaining their premium status and healthy margins.

cookie1977

Have to say now after using it for a while I'm beginning to like it. Certainly it takes time to get used to but it can be pretty good once you've set it up properly.

Fysh

cookie1977 wrote: »

Have to say now after using it for a while I'm beginning to like it. Certainly it takes time to get used to but it can be pretty good once you've set it up properly.

Out of curiosity, are you on a touchscreen setup or a normal machine?

Edited to addL:

Look's like it's an August RTM date with October for general release.

Overheal

Yeah I saw an internal memo that idly mentioned something along the lines of "As customers transition to Windows 8 this October"... and I'm thinking to myself Well, thats a nonchalant way to go about mentioning it..

BostonB

I don't really understand why people think its so different, I don't think it is. I use Classic shell on W7 and 8. A few different key presses and menus to do something thats about it. The Metro interface and app feel more like a skin than anything else, once past that it works much the same as W7. Though I've had a few application and driver incompatibilities. But you'd expect that.