Windows 8 Arrives(microsoft.com)
microsoft.com
Windows 8 Arrives
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/Press/2012/Oct12/10-25Windows8GAPR.aspx
222 comments
"Metro is every bit the usability disaster that people have claimed when not running on a touch screen."
It is good to see a total usability disaster in which Linux took the lead and Windows followed. It is usually the other way around. This really bodes well for Linux on the desktop.
It is good to see a total usability disaster in which Linux took the lead and Windows followed. It is usually the other way around. This really bodes well for Linux on the desktop.
And just like how many people are running Mate and XFCE now (gtk2 based) many people will be running Windows 7 (me) for the forseeable future!
>> "Short version - outside of Metro it's basically Win7SP3 and it works great. Metro is every bit the usability disaster that people have claimed when not running on a touch screen."
I've been using it on a MacBook Pro and with the multi-touch trackpad metro actually works reasonably well. Obviously it would be better with a touchscreen but I am able to tap to click, use two fingers to scroll left/right/up/down and moving the mouse the the screen corners activates charms/open apps/last opened app. Maybe PC mouse makers (including MS) will come up with similar mice to make the experience better for non-touchscreen devices.
I've been using it on a MacBook Pro and with the multi-touch trackpad metro actually works reasonably well. Obviously it would be better with a touchscreen but I am able to tap to click, use two fingers to scroll left/right/up/down and moving the mouse the the screen corners activates charms/open apps/last opened app. Maybe PC mouse makers (including MS) will come up with similar mice to make the experience better for non-touchscreen devices.
MS does have the wedge mouse -- perhaps they'll update it to support the correct gestures?
http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/24/3265121/microsoft-wedge-to...
http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/24/3265121/microsoft-wedge-to...
Trackpoints in scroll mode are also omni-directional. But though it Just Works on Linux there are all sorts of hoops you have to jump through to get that working properly on Windows.
I can recommend Start8 which brings the start menu back and boots straight to desktop (one of my annoyances was going straight to the Metro home screen on boot). It's $5, but worth it in my opinion:
http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/
Surely you could just edit the ol' msconfig startup items for free, right?
They still have that, right? It's been a while since I used Windows.
They still have that, right? It's been a while since I used Windows.
Msconfig is in, yes, but the startup section is not. It redirects you to the startup section of the task manager, of which Metro is not an option for you to disable. Startup is simply the ability to disable services and programs that run on the desktop.
For example, mine has Java, Steam, Thinkpad Tools, Nvidia nView, Digsby, etc. Nothing Metro in there.
For example, mine has Java, Steam, Thinkpad Tools, Nvidia nView, Digsby, etc. Nothing Metro in there.
Plug: If you're running Windows 8 Pro and have an iPad you can try out the Win 8 Metro's multitouch features using my app (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWUEAx4dqP4&hd=1). Send me an email: support at jumpdesktop.com and I'll send you a free coupon.
That looks quite amazing! Thanks!
As an aside, I've actually been meaning to learn about writing drivers for a while, especially in preparation for a uni course. So with windows 8 here and all of it's cool touch gestures, it would be even cooler. So I'm not sure if you would know this, but can you point me towards any resources for essentially simulating touches? I was thinking of building a battle Etch-a-sketch app for a school project, that would actually have two players use two etch-a-sketch systems in drawing stuff. If it was only one user, I could use the mouse pointer, but being two, I probably need touches. I hope I made myself clear enough. If it's better for you, just email me at alexsb92 [at] gmail [dot] com. Thanks.
As an aside, I've actually been meaning to learn about writing drivers for a while, especially in preparation for a uni course. So with windows 8 here and all of it's cool touch gestures, it would be even cooler. So I'm not sure if you would know this, but can you point me towards any resources for essentially simulating touches? I was thinking of building a battle Etch-a-sketch app for a school project, that would actually have two players use two etch-a-sketch systems in drawing stuff. If it was only one user, I could use the mouse pointer, but being two, I probably need touches. I hope I made myself clear enough. If it's better for you, just email me at alexsb92 [at] gmail [dot] com. Thanks.
I'm not exactly sure what you want to do. If you just want to handle touch input in Windows 8 then take a look at this: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/xaml/hh... .
If you want to simulate touches programatically then take a look at this api: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh80...
Edit: I don't think you'll need to write a driver either way.
If you want to simulate touches programatically then take a look at this api: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh80...
Edit: I don't think you'll need to write a driver either way.
I bought jump when it was only $7.99. It worked like magic and I never opened SplashTop since. For anyone reading this, this app is amazing and works both on iPad and iPhone. Since you can get it for free from the developer, then you can't lose. Definitely gonna try it when I upgrade my windows machine. So far it works great to access my mbp
Does the Android version offer the same functionality?
If it does I'll be sure to buy it for my Nexus 7. Very nice way to get an idea of how well Windows 8 works on tablets!
However it seems the android app is still at version 4.0, so I guess we have to wait for an update.
However it seems the android app is still at version 4.0, so I guess we have to wait for an update.
Right. The Android app doesn't have this functionality at the moment, but we're going to port it over soon.
We have an issue with Windows 8 that stopped us to installing it on some personal notebooks until sp1 cames. We installed Virtual CloneDrive from SlySoft knowing that it doesn't support Windows 8. After having a blue screen and being not able to boot the system again we tried with booting it safely and we couldn't! so we reinstalled Windows 7 there. Although it was expectable to fail, it was not expectable to not recover.
Beyond that, we were developing interception technologies to hook inside windows 8 metro applications successfully.
Beyond that, we were developing interception technologies to hook inside windows 8 metro applications successfully.
I've been using Virtual CloneDrive on Win 8 RTM since the first day I upgraded my computers (about 2 months ago), because I had to re-install several softwares from iso's... It worked just fine, and I actually never suspected any incompatibility issues.
I am so glad I read this. I'm about to install win8 pro on my work 'puter and I have Virtual CloneDrive installed there! Thanks!
Ive been running Windows 8 on a Mac inside a VM (Fusion) for about a month.
I like Metro (but this is coming from a mec geek - so there you go). BUT I agree it will take time to get used to. But I suspect a hack will be out shortly allowing you to by pass Metro completely. I can't imagine the corporate world being happy about Metro.
I like Metro (but this is coming from a mec geek - so there you go). BUT I agree it will take time to get used to. But I suspect a hack will be out shortly allowing you to by pass Metro completely. I can't imagine the corporate world being happy about Metro.
The question is for those of that dont hit the win key and start typing etc, can the metro dash be completely bypassed? So can I boot to a screen that looks much like Win7?
> Metro is every bit the usability disaster that people have claimed when not running on a touch screen
Is there a way to switch to 'Classic Desktop'?
Is there a way to switch to 'Classic Desktop'?
The classic destkop is always there a click again in the start screen.
That's one click too many.
You do the search->run thing but average joe user is not going to be doing it that way.
Oh I totally agree. It just so happens that the new start interface works well with my existing workflow, which I think is more of a coincidence then anything else. I can't imagine what the user experience is going to be like for somebody who actually expects to navigate through a tree of folders for their applications.
Navigating through a tree has been deprecated for a bit already, given how prominent Search is placed in the Start Menu and how the tree is confined to a little section instead of eventually (after a dozen levels) covering the whole screen. But there probably are still those that like that way.
I happen to think that Windows 8 is a welcome refresh. At first, I was confused by the dashboard but I am finding it easier and easier to navigate around.
For instance, going to the traditional desktop is as easy as clicking the "Desktop" tile. And opening a new tab in the metro-IE was a bit confusing but after figuring out that double finger pressing the touchpad brings up the tab list and url bar it has become easier.
I also like the new native mail client and calendar apps.
For the record, I am running Windows 8 on a 2011 macbook air via bootcamp and it runs perfect. Guild Wars 2 also gets about 10 fps more than it does on the mac client for what its worth and makes it actually playable on an Air :)
Following this tangent a bit more, I feel like if the drivers were updated enough to support 3 finger left and right gestures to wipe between the different screens I wouldn't revisit OSX for a while.
Windows 8 is a fun operating system.
For instance, going to the traditional desktop is as easy as clicking the "Desktop" tile. And opening a new tab in the metro-IE was a bit confusing but after figuring out that double finger pressing the touchpad brings up the tab list and url bar it has become easier.
I also like the new native mail client and calendar apps.
For the record, I am running Windows 8 on a 2011 macbook air via bootcamp and it runs perfect. Guild Wars 2 also gets about 10 fps more than it does on the mac client for what its worth and makes it actually playable on an Air :)
Following this tangent a bit more, I feel like if the drivers were updated enough to support 3 finger left and right gestures to wipe between the different screens I wouldn't revisit OSX for a while.
Windows 8 is a fun operating system.
Perhaps it will wear off, but Windows 8 feels quite refreshing compared to other interfaces.
[deleted]
The Verge gave it a pretty solid score (8.8/10): http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/23/3537710/windows-8-review
The Surface, not so much (7.0): http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/23/3540550/microsoft-surface...
The Surface, not so much (7.0): http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/23/3540550/microsoft-surface...
i.e. Windows 8 got a good score, Windows RT not so much.
I'd also imagine that the Surface's 7.0 is because of the hardware. Every review I've read has said that the hardware is pretty fantastic and the keyboard covers work surprisingly well.
It's only Windows RT that people seem to be complaining about.
It's only Windows RT that people seem to be complaining about.
Overall they have not broken Windows for PC users - that's OK. Nothing to see here.
The most interesting thing will be in cheap tablets area.
The most interesting thing will be in cheap tablets area.
I see this as a pretty big leap. Remember, this OS isn't about forgetting about Windows or forcing change on anybody. It's about creating an ecosystem similar to what Apple has. They want you to use their apps (Office, Bing Search, X-box Games) across all of their products (Desktop, Surface, Windows 8 phone) and make it so you can access the same info anywhere you are.
I'm surprised more people haven't picked up on this rather bold move.
I'm surprised more people haven't picked up on this rather bold move.
It's not that people haven't picked up on this "bold move". It's that they want an operating system, not an ecosystem.
I've gotten to look Metro more than I did at first. I still don't stay in it; I mostly just head to the desktop and use the newer, flatter Windows 7 I find there.
The elephant in the room for me is the horizontal scrolling. I'm sitting there spinning the mouse wheel vertically, and what's on the screen is moving horizontally. That's a total disconnect.
Why this emphasis on horizontal scrolling? I don't see how the horizontally scrolling items are in any way easier to use than a vertically scrolling set of items. Seems like different, for difference's sake.
The elephant in the room for me is the horizontal scrolling. I'm sitting there spinning the mouse wheel vertically, and what's on the screen is moving horizontally. That's a total disconnect.
Why this emphasis on horizontal scrolling? I don't see how the horizontally scrolling items are in any way easier to use than a vertically scrolling set of items. Seems like different, for difference's sake.
Horizontal scrolling is easier and more natural if you're using touch. The wide screen gives you lots of room to sweep your finger back and forth and "throw" the content if you want to. Horizontal touch scrolling also evokes the feeling of paging through a book.
Of course, if you're not using touch, then yes, I agree it feels a bit weird at first. It doesn't take that long to get used to though.
Of course, if you're not using touch, then yes, I agree it feels a bit weird at first. It doesn't take that long to get used to though.
Besides, it kind of makes sense now that everything is widescreen.
This was my biggest issue as well. It seems Metro could have been easily set vertically, but instead there was this odd choice for horizontal that just feels incorrect.
I might be wrong, but I think they're mimicking the xbox dashboard which goes horizontal since you're moving it with the right & left trigger buttons. Feels natural on xbox but i think they probably wanted a sense of familiarity and thats why its horizontal on windows? Idk. Just my assumption.
Anyone whose University participates in Microsoft DreamSpark will be happy to know it's available for free there already.
Free on DreamSpark or MSDNAA? I can't seem to find it on Dreamspark...
MSDNAA (which has been replaced by "DreamSpark Premium")
Windows 8 Pro upgrade for $39 dollars ($15 for newer PCs). [1]
That's... reasonable.
I might consider buying a copy of Windows 8 Pro at that price and then waiting until it hits SP1 to install it.
I might even spin up a VM to try it out.
I like that the $39 upgrade applies to anyone with Windows XP, Windows Vista or Windows 7. I think they're realizing that a lot of people don't upgrade OS because they don't want to upgrade their hardware.
(like my old Win XP laptop that I use as a VNC terminal to other machines).
The only reason why I wouldn't want to jump in with two feet is that I have a general dislike for the Xbox dashboard and I suspect that Metro would be very similar to it.
[1] You can use this tool to check that you have a genuine version of Windows http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=52012
[2] Windows OEM licenses are transferable if it included the hardware
http://www.microsoft.com/oem/en/licensing/sblicensing/pages/...
[3] Windows retail licenses are transferable
http://www.microsoft.com/About/Legal/EN/US/IntellectualPrope...
Here's a direct link to a PDF for Windows 7 Home Basic in English
http://download.microsoft.com/Documents/UseTerms/Windows%207...
[4] Windows Anytime Upgrades are pretty much considered to be OEM
That's... reasonable.
I might consider buying a copy of Windows 8 Pro at that price and then waiting until it hits SP1 to install it.
I might even spin up a VM to try it out.
I like that the $39 upgrade applies to anyone with Windows XP, Windows Vista or Windows 7. I think they're realizing that a lot of people don't upgrade OS because they don't want to upgrade their hardware.
(like my old Win XP laptop that I use as a VNC terminal to other machines).
The only reason why I wouldn't want to jump in with two feet is that I have a general dislike for the Xbox dashboard and I suspect that Metro would be very similar to it.
[1] You can use this tool to check that you have a genuine version of Windows http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=52012
[2] Windows OEM licenses are transferable if it included the hardware
http://www.microsoft.com/oem/en/licensing/sblicensing/pages/...
[3] Windows retail licenses are transferable
http://www.microsoft.com/About/Legal/EN/US/IntellectualPrope...
Here's a direct link to a PDF for Windows 7 Home Basic in English
http://download.microsoft.com/Documents/UseTerms/Windows%207...
[4] Windows Anytime Upgrades are pretty much considered to be OEM
17. TRANSFER TO ANOTHER COMPUTER. (retail)
a. Software Other than Windows Anytime Upgrade. You may transfer the software and install it on another computer for your use. That computer becomes the licensed computer. You may not do so to share this license between computers.
b. Windows Anytime Upgrade Software. You may transfer the software and install it on another computer, but only if the license terms of the software you upgraded from allows you to do so. That computer becomes the licensed computer. You may not do so to share this license between computers.
18. TRANSFER TO A THIRD PARTY. (retail)
a. Software Other Than Windows Anytime Upgrade. The first user of the software may make a one time transfer of the software and this agreement, by transferring the original media, the certificate of authenticity, the product key and the proof of purchase directly to a third party. The first user must remove the software before transferring it separately from the computer. The first user may not retain any copies of the software.
b. Windows Anytime Upgrade Software. You may transfer the software directly to a third party only with the licensed computer. You may not keep any copies of the software or any earlier edition.
c. Other Requirements. Before any permitted transfer, the other> I might consider buying a copy of Windows 8 Pro at that price and then waiting until it hits SP1 to install it.
They don't want to release service packs anymore and instead release constant updates including feature/performance upgrades. http://www.instantfundas.com/2012/10/windows-service-packs-n...
They don't want to release service packs anymore and instead release constant updates including feature/performance upgrades. http://www.instantfundas.com/2012/10/windows-service-packs-n...
I always assumed Service Packs were a way of "resetting" the version of Windows. Instead of installing Windows 7 then needing to immediately endure 2 hours of updates/restarts, you could simply install Windows 7 SP1 with all the relevant updates and patches already applied.
No, Service Packs sometimes even introduced significant new functionality. Mostly, any non-critical fixes would wait for a SP, to make testing easier.
I imagine that Microsoft will do for Windows what they do for other products like IE: Offer periodic "rollup" updates that apply several updates at once.
I imagine that Microsoft will do for Windows what they do for other products like IE: Offer periodic "rollup" updates that apply several updates at once.
While I can't find a link, I seem to recall Microsoft moving to a "no new features" policy for Service Packs at (enterprise) customer request. This seems sensible, as Service Packs aren't merely "security rollups", but also product lifecycle checkpoints:
When a new service pack is released, Microsoft will provide either 12 or 24 months of support for the previous service pack, varying according to the product family (for example, Windows, Office, Servers, or Developer tools). When support for a service pack ends, Microsoft will no longer provide new security updates, DST updates, hotfixes or other updates for that service pack.[1]
[1] http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us
When a new service pack is released, Microsoft will provide either 12 or 24 months of support for the previous service pack, varying according to the product family (for example, Windows, Office, Servers, or Developer tools). When support for a service pack ends, Microsoft will no longer provide new security updates, DST updates, hotfixes or other updates for that service pack.[1]
[1] http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us
2 hours? I recently had to install a Server 2008 R2 machine. It required a solid working day of applying updates and rebooting to get it up to date. I was astonished.
E.g., Surface ships with Office 2013 preview, they'll son ship out the gold version as an update.
That's the upgrade price. AFAICT they haven't announced pricing for an installable new copy of the OS.
Newegg is listing OEM pricing at $100[0], and Pro for $140[1]. FWIW, this matches Win7 OEM pricing.
(It appears "retail" copies have been given the axe entirely, which isn't particularly surprising.)
[0] http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832416...
[1] http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832416...
(It appears "retail" copies have been given the axe entirely, which isn't particularly surprising.)
[0] http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832416...
[1] http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832416...
No Retail copies?
So to get a copy you have to buy a new PC or have an existing Windows OS?
Nope, the "System Builder"/OEM license appears to cover that as well now[0].
[0] (footnote) http://blogs.windows.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2...
[0] (footnote) http://blogs.windows.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2...
Pretty sure the pure "retail" version of the OS disappeared with XP->Vista. Everything on a store shelf today is an upgrade copy, and the version sold from people like Newegg (which is what I meant) is titled something like "OEM version for system builders".
I have a Windows 7 Retail copy sitting on my shelf.
Me too. And unlike the new "personal use license", it doesn't include new, ambiguous changes to the license text, like the prohibition against "licensing more than five copies of the software for commercial use in total" (concurrent or consecutive?) and the restriction that it may only be used on computers that "you are building for your own use". Given any reasonable interpretation of "build", this should exclude, say, a MacBook, and it leaves open questions about computers that I own but am "building" for the use of others.
I suspect the real reason for this train wreck of an EULA is that "no retail copies" is yet another stick to force volume license users to purchase software assurance, as it does mean that the only current-version Windows base license available to companies with more than five seats is the restricted, nontransferable OEM EULA. Or, oddly enough in the case of most volume license agreements, Mac OS X.
I suspect the real reason for this train wreck of an EULA is that "no retail copies" is yet another stick to force volume license users to purchase software assurance, as it does mean that the only current-version Windows base license available to companies with more than five seats is the restricted, nontransferable OEM EULA. Or, oddly enough in the case of most volume license agreements, Mac OS X.
I was able to buy a retail copy of 7 Ultimate from MS directly for ~$300.
Yup, fine print:
Offer valid from October 26, 2012 until January 31, 2013
and is limited to five upgrade licenses per customer.
To install Windows 8 Pro, customers must be running
Windows XP SP3, Windows Vista, or Windows 7.Question is, can I downgrade it to 7pro... I have some machines I want 7 pro on, but not 8... The upgrade from Vista Business to 7 Pro is $200
No, you can't downgrade Windows licenses.
While not exactly true, the exceptions don't apply to upgrade copies. Though from reading the Windows 7 Pro license agreement and the material on Microsoft's Web site, you could presumably get a full- or part-time student to buy a $65 copy[1] for you "while supplies last".
[1] http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msstore/en_US/pd/Windows...
[1] http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msstore/en_US/pd/Windows...
I suspect that you can buy a used license for Windows XP, Windows Vista or Windows 7 easily.
Really, just visit a friend/relative and find a dusty old PC that has a license sticker on it and ask if you can have it.
Really, just visit a friend/relative and find a dusty old PC that has a license sticker on it and ask if you can have it.
Windows OEM licenses aren't transferrable from the PCs they're sold with. Retail licenses are transferrable to another person, once.
I found this out in a predictable way, at Google they had machines that they bought for desktops which came with an OEM windows sticker but they always put Goobuntu on. I needed an XP license for a project so I thought, "Oh I'll use this one, I know its not being used elsewhere." and did an install with a vanilla distro and the product code.
The first thing that broke was it wanted the oem cab file. Fixed that.
Then it would complain "this product key is intended for the original system."
Since I was running in a VM I changed it piece by piece until it accepted the product code, first changed the type of CPU it was reporting, then the bios identifier string, and finally the ethernet MAC address. It finally acceepted the product code after all of that (not sure which parts were optional but only needed it for like a week) Considered those licenses pretty much worthless from that point on.
The first thing that broke was it wanted the oem cab file. Fixed that.
Then it would complain "this product key is intended for the original system."
Since I was running in a VM I changed it piece by piece until it accepted the product code, first changed the type of CPU it was reporting, then the bios identifier string, and finally the ethernet MAC address. It finally acceepted the product code after all of that (not sure which parts were optional but only needed it for like a week) Considered those licenses pretty much worthless from that point on.
For your future reference, Microsoft offers virtual machines of XP, Vista, and 7 for browser compatibility testing. They expire after three months, but for your uses, they're fine. You'd just grab the VHD out of the VM and use any of the import tools to convert it to your preferred VM format.
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=1157...
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=1157...
I've used these VMs and they are so infuriating I also want to just buy a full license. They're never able to validate, so they always nag you about "is your windows genuine?" (well I downloaded it from MS so I should hope so!) and shut down every half an hour. They're more trouble than they're worth.
From Microsoft's site http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=1157...
Note: You may be required to activate the OS as the product key has been deactivated. This is the expected behavior. The VHDs will not pass genuine validation. Immediately after you start the Windows 7 or Windows Vista images they will request to be activated. You can cancel the request and it will login to the desktop. You can activate up to two “rearms” (type slmgr –rearm at the command prompt) which will extend the trial for another 30 days each time OR simply shutdown the VPC image and discard the changes you’ve made from undo disks to reset the image back to its initial state. By doing either of these methods, you can technically have a base image which never expires although you will never be able to permanently save any changes on these images for longer than 90 days.
Note: You may be required to activate the OS as the product key has been deactivated. This is the expected behavior. The VHDs will not pass genuine validation. Immediately after you start the Windows 7 or Windows Vista images they will request to be activated. You can cancel the request and it will login to the desktop. You can activate up to two “rearms” (type slmgr –rearm at the command prompt) which will extend the trial for another 30 days each time OR simply shutdown the VPC image and discard the changes you’ve made from undo disks to reset the image back to its initial state. By doing either of these methods, you can technically have a base image which never expires although you will never be able to permanently save any changes on these images for longer than 90 days.
Yes? I know that there is an elaborate forewarning of the VM's uselessness in the TOS. My comment was aimed at the parent, who mistakenly implied that the MS VMs were useful for something.
The stupid things restart every 30 minutes. I don't know what else I can say to underline what an annoying waste of time they are.
The stupid things restart every 30 minutes. I don't know what else I can say to underline what an annoying waste of time they are.
[deleted]
[deleted]
I'm just curious, is there any reason Google wouldn't have had MSDN access? I could see a "no arch-nemeses" clause or such.
(Or I could be showing my [lack of] age and MSDN didn't have easy download access in the XP era)
(Or I could be showing my [lack of] age and MSDN didn't have easy download access in the XP era)
At the time I was there (2006 - 2010) and this may sound strange to some, I am sure that someone at Google had MSDN access but finding that person would have taken longer than hacking together a solution (which took a couple of hours in front of the VM instance). I don't doubt that at the if at the time I needed this that the TechStop guys (and gals) hadn't yet been dismantled I could have just said "I need an XP license for about a week" and they would have obliged. But I didn't have time to hunt down an owner, I didn't want to expense an XP OEM kit for this simple project that was a 20% thing anyway, and well TechStop had fallen way hard from being a resource to being a nop.
That's a pity. I just bought a new ThinkPad and there was no way to get it without Windows. It runs Xubuntu now and it's really snappy. I'd be happy to give away or sell the unwanted Windows license.
That's the Windows "tax" everyone complains about. Microsoft gives huge discounts to OEMs if they promise to bundle Windows with every PC they sell.
At least in Germany (possibly in the EU in general), that's no longer true. There has always been a market for OEM license resales, but recently there was a ruling that gave it a legal foundation. Microsoft wouldn't tell you it's okay, but they are no longer allowed to prevent it.
Upgrade price for Win7 was ~115, so it's much more reasonable than Win7 was, which probably means they're going to try and monetize the Windows Store or whatever it's going to be called pretty hard.
Upgrade copies of Vista and Win7 can be installed on an empty hard drive with minimal tweaking, but I guess being kosher with the licensing is important for some users.
If you're not willing to honor the license, what possible point would there be to paying for the software in the first place? I'm willing to be a Win8 crack is live on thepiratebay within the week.
The discussion was about whether or not MS has decided to reduce their retail OS price from the ~$100 it is at right now. AFAICT, they have not.
The discussion was about whether or not MS has decided to reduce their retail OS price from the ~$100 it is at right now. AFAICT, they have not.
There is a grey area where you can have a Genuine copy of Windows that you paid for (and that can still Windows update) but was derived from an OEM license that was transferred to another machine.
This is still desirable compared to torrenting because a pirated copy will end up failing the Genuine check, will no longer get updates, and will happily be a part of some botnet some day.
This is still desirable compared to torrenting because a pirated copy will end up failing the Genuine check, will no longer get updates, and will happily be a part of some botnet some day.
That was a lot of years back. And then MS declared it will auto update and patch every XP, genuine or not.
From memory I think WGA was cracked..?
That said my current machine is Win7 enterprise that I somehow, if only through brute force rather than actual know-how, managed to convince that its install had been validated.
That said my current machine is Win7 enterprise that I somehow, if only through brute force rather than actual know-how, managed to convince that its install had been validated.
>If you're not willing to honor the license, what possible point would there be to paying for the software in the first place?
This practice is actually fairly common. For example, almost all the technical people I know have bought OEM licenses rather than retail licenses for previous versions of Windows when they're building new systems. According to Microsoft, an OEM license is only valid if you sell the new system to someone else, not use it yourself[1].
[1]http://www.microsoft.com/oem/en/licensing/sblicensing/pages/...
This practice is actually fairly common. For example, almost all the technical people I know have bought OEM licenses rather than retail licenses for previous versions of Windows when they're building new systems. According to Microsoft, an OEM license is only valid if you sell the new system to someone else, not use it yourself[1].
[1]http://www.microsoft.com/oem/en/licensing/sblicensing/pages/...
Because I don't know what sort of bonus addons are included with the pirate edition?
You make it sound like it's black and white.
I know plenty of people who would hate to torrent of, say, Photoshop, but also don't think it's worth $550 to them. Having a bought license that's legally of questionable origin is a compromise many non-business users would be more than willing to entertain.
I know plenty of people who would hate to torrent of, say, Photoshop, but also don't think it's worth $550 to them. Having a bought license that's legally of questionable origin is a compromise many non-business users would be more than willing to entertain.
But in case of OEM Windows licence it is black and white, no?
What would be peoples motivation to buy it for existing computer?
* "It's sorta legal, it's at least some kind of a licence, right?" -- they're misinformed / tricked /fools
* "I want to pay something, but retail costs too much" -- if you pay without getting anything useful in return, you're donating. Why not donate to charity?
* "I want to get Windows Updates" -- cracked copies used to get updates, and they're often bundled with updates already applied
My point is, I don't understand buying half-valid licence. Licence is either valid or you have no licence.
What would be peoples motivation to buy it for existing computer?
* "It's sorta legal, it's at least some kind of a licence, right?" -- they're misinformed / tricked /fools
* "I want to pay something, but retail costs too much" -- if you pay without getting anything useful in return, you're donating. Why not donate to charity?
* "I want to get Windows Updates" -- cracked copies used to get updates, and they're often bundled with updates already applied
My point is, I don't understand buying half-valid licence. Licence is either valid or you have no licence.
I think a valid, although not legal, motivation for that could be "I just want something Microsoft will activate because I want a clean (i.e.: without applying a random crack from the Internet which could install malware) Windows install, at the minimum possible cost".
>* "I want to pay something, but retail costs too much" -- if you pay without getting anything useful in return, you're donating. Why not donate to charity?
Because your sense of fair play says you've got something from MS so they, and not some random charity, deserve some of your money? Do you follow the same logic and donate to charity instead of tipping at restaurants?
Because your sense of fair play says you've got something from MS so they, and not some random charity, deserve some of your money? Do you follow the same logic and donate to charity instead of tipping at restaurants?
It seems to me that many people treat software licences like physical goods in their minds.
The idea of buying a chef's knife from Victorinox for one price if it's to be used to chop vegetables and another if it's to be used to trim fat from steaks is absurd. You buy the knife at the lowest price it's offered and use it however you like.
Software licensing does include the ability to charge different prices for different usage scenarios, but violating those conditions doesn't strike most people as unethical while obtaining the software without paying seems similar to theft.
The idea of buying a chef's knife from Victorinox for one price if it's to be used to chop vegetables and another if it's to be used to trim fat from steaks is absurd. You buy the knife at the lowest price it's offered and use it however you like.
Software licensing does include the ability to charge different prices for different usage scenarios, but violating those conditions doesn't strike most people as unethical while obtaining the software without paying seems similar to theft.
This is the same reason why the idea that you can't bequeath your iTunes purchases on death seems like lunacy to most people.
Purchased goods are purchased goods, and the idea that something is licensed with restrictions seems ridiculous to most people unless it's something upfront like a subscription that you are paying monthly fees to access.
Purchased goods are purchased goods, and the idea that something is licensed with restrictions seems ridiculous to most people unless it's something upfront like a subscription that you are paying monthly fees to access.
Because it is ridiculous.
Does the license really need the installation itself to be an upgrade? That would be silly, as everyone who has tried knows that a Windows installation upgraded from a previous version is never as snappy as a clean installation. And in that case, reinstalling the OS would require user to install the old Windows first. That wouldn't much make sense, would it?
You can do a fresh install, but only if there's already a licensed version of windows on the hard drive. If you previously replaced the OS, then the upgrade won't let you register until you run a command from the shell and say it's ok.
What is this command? Is it in any of the Windows 8 guides?
Oh. I thought we were talking about win7 now. It wasn't hard to find when searching for obvious keywords like upgrade verification new install windows whatever.
I'm sure there are a lot of people willing to pay the new upgrade price but not willing to spend over $100 on windows.
Within the week? I'd be surprised if there isn't something there by tomorrow morning.
[deleted]
Upgrading from XP to Vista or 7 was pretty terrible. I can only assume upgrading from XP to 8 will be even more so.
The Taskbar and Start Menu have worked so well in the past, why change?
Perhaps the price might be a hint that it's worth less than previous versions..
Perhaps the price might be a hint that it's worth less than previous versions..
The horse and buggy worked so well in the past, why introduce automobiles?
(Note: Example with exaggerated contrast is used here for illustration purposes only, not for comparing size of change.)
(Note: Example with exaggerated contrast is used here for illustration purposes only, not for comparing size of change.)
Maybe you were thinking of the Ford quote: "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses."
Microsoft wants to leverage their desktop dominance to introduce people to their mobile offerings. The change from start menu to start screen fits right into that strategy. However you can get back the start menu by installing classic shell, pokki etc.
You don't have to install anything. Click the giant button that says Desktop, and woah, it's like Windows 7 all over again.
Uh... except for the Start Menu, which is what the parent comment was referring to.
Perhaps it will be a very good year for Stardock...
http://www.bing.com/search?q=windows+8+start+menu+replacemen...
(First result for me was "Stardock’s Start 8 Windows Start Menu replacement to cost $4.99")
http://www.bing.com/search?q=windows+8+start+menu+replacemen...
(First result for me was "Stardock’s Start 8 Windows Start Menu replacement to cost $4.99")
Mostly importantly, tablets and hybrid tablet/laptops are taking off and people want to use the same OS for both. And Microsoft has tried using the Taskbar and Start Menu for tablets before, and it sucked.
[deleted]
[deleted](3)
Well looks like this is judgement day for MS then.
The price is much lower than for previous versions of Windows, this makes me suspect that we should start expecting new releases of Windows much more frequently, similar to how Apple does it.
With the radical changes going on in Windows 8 it wouldn't surprise me to see a tweaked and improved Windows 9 in less than 2 years.
The price is much lower than for previous versions of Windows, this makes me suspect that we should start expecting new releases of Windows much more frequently, similar to how Apple does it.
With the radical changes going on in Windows 8 it wouldn't surprise me to see a tweaked and improved Windows 9 in less than 2 years.
I hope so. They clearly learned that the delay between XP and Vista was way too long. I think they learned that the shorter delay between Vista and Windows 7 was beneficial too.
Having the shorter releases seems to work very well, at least it has in the OS X world. The ability to release new features and get them in the hands of users faster than once every 3 or 5 years is a big improvement.
It's also nice to see them drop the price. At the old $99 or $129 level, an OS upgrade really needs to justify it's existence. Many people would just hold out and buy a new computer (especially if you only paid $400 or $500 for it). At $40 it's much easier to get people to update without waiting for a hardware refresh.
Having the shorter releases seems to work very well, at least it has in the OS X world. The ability to release new features and get them in the hands of users faster than once every 3 or 5 years is a big improvement.
It's also nice to see them drop the price. At the old $99 or $129 level, an OS upgrade really needs to justify it's existence. Many people would just hold out and buy a new computer (especially if you only paid $400 or $500 for it). At $40 it's much easier to get people to update without waiting for a hardware refresh.
> The price is much lower than for previous versions of Windows, this makes me suspect that we should start expecting new releases of Windows much more frequently, similar to how Apple does it.
I absolutely don't think so at all. I think the lower price is because they want people using the metro app store, because they want an app ecosystem to make them money the way Google / Amazon / Apple do right now. They dind't backport Metro so Metro apps are Windows 8 only, so it is in their best interests to get as many people on the platform as fast as possible to maximize app development and maximize profits from app sales.
I absolutely don't think so at all. I think the lower price is because they want people using the metro app store, because they want an app ecosystem to make them money the way Google / Amazon / Apple do right now. They dind't backport Metro so Metro apps are Windows 8 only, so it is in their best interests to get as many people on the platform as fast as possible to maximize app development and maximize profits from app sales.
It may also have to do with the fact that there is an App Store, which will be a new, probably significant, source of revenue. And, it makes it a little easier for someone who's not sure about the radically new UI.
Metro reminds me of the Acer Computer Explorer (I think that was the name, I was 11 at the time) that was installed on my very first computer (windows 95).
The computer booted up to a home screen with icons for all of your programs, and you had to click exit to desktop to get into windows.
The computer booted up to a home screen with icons for all of your programs, and you had to click exit to desktop to get into windows.
Come to think of it, the start screen isn't too far off from At Ease either. I remember all the Macs in school ran locked down copies to keep the students from messing with the computers and make it easier to find programs for the little kids.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_Ease
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_Ease
Metro reminds me of a Fisher Price toy.
And it STILL doesn't play DVDs without additional software! sigh
This makes sense from Microsoft's point of view. Why would they pay a royalty fee on every copy of Windows when such a small percentage of users play DVDs? Especially when the fix is as easy as just downloading VLC.
I have to imagine Microsoft picturing the majority of Windows 8 machines (between tablets and laptops) not including a DVD drive.
This seems far less egregious now than it was a few years ago...
Oddly, Windows 7 Pro does have DVD support out of the box.
Windows 7 does play DVDs out of the box. IIRC, so did Vista. I am surprised they went backward on this.
Licensing fees. Most copies of Windows never play a single DVD, so why let everyone pay?
The only way I am going to see Windows 8 is with a new PC (which is a few years away, next purchase is probably an Apple product), or at work.
At work the IT dept will hopefully skip this version all together, or take a few years before "approving" it.
At work the IT dept will hopefully skip this version all together, or take a few years before "approving" it.
Meh, the interface makes no sense without a touchscreen.
Exacerbating this is the fact that Windows 7 is arguably at full stride right now and has almost no points that I really want changed. Why then do I give myself (actually, pay for) a headache with this new release?
>> Exacerbating this is the fact that Windows 7 is arguably at full stride right now and has almost no points that I really want changed.
Sounds like another anti-innovation/change comment on hn. If this is not, please tell me how?
Sounds like another anti-innovation/change comment on hn. If this is not, please tell me how?
How is changing the desktop we currently have, which works for most people and everyone is used to, for a completely new system that is clearly meant for a device other than the PC, innovation?
Change != always good.
Change != always good.
I think he was just pointing out that Hacker News can be somewhat schizophrenic on this topic. "WTF why won't Craigslist improve, it is anti-innovation" vs. "Why did MS change their UI?!?"
And yes, before someone makes the statement, HN is made up of individuals with their own opinions etc. etc.
And yes, before someone makes the statement, HN is made up of individuals with their own opinions etc. etc.
I think the difference is between things that work don't need to be changed, just for the sake of change. Things that are broken, or suffer from poor usability should change. Not everything needs to change, but I think it's fair to want broken things to change without advocating that everything change just because.
But that's so short-sighted! You know what worked? The Motorola RAZR. But then the iPhone came out and it was a radical change and, even though many said at the time "I just need to make calls and text", it set the standard.
If your mentality is always "if it ain't broke don't fix it" then you're probably going to get disrupted. Windows 7 wasn't broke, but the future of the desktop environment looks like it might be, so Microsoft is trying to merge desktop and mobile. It may not work, but you must at least somewhat sympathize with their need to try.
If your mentality is always "if it ain't broke don't fix it" then you're probably going to get disrupted. Windows 7 wasn't broke, but the future of the desktop environment looks like it might be, so Microsoft is trying to merge desktop and mobile. It may not work, but you must at least somewhat sympathize with their need to try.
Metro is no iPhone.
No, it doesn't need to be in order for the illustration to be apt. "If it isn't broke, don't fix it" is a mentality asking for disruption.
The argument isn't "If it isn't broke, don't fix it". It's that not all change is necessary (or even good). If something is clearly broken, by all means fix it. If it's not, then things get more complicated. Maybe a change is still in order (but maybe it's broken in a non-obvious way, like the Razr in a smart-phone world). The idea that change is always good and always a sign of progress is absolutely false.
I think everyone is getting stuck on the design decision concerning the start menu. Windows 8 is more than just a new start menu. There are a number of other changes that I believe sound very interesting, and are very much PC innovations and changes not made for tablets.
Innovation and change are not inherently good, but they are inherently risky and costly. This is especially true when it comes to the operating system on your main computer.
Change for the sake of being different is stupid and shows that you don't care about your current users. An improvement has to be worth the trouble of re-learning how to use the software and changing your habits. That's why the Ribbon got so much flak - it moved every button and ate up a lot more screen space, for relatively minor improvements to overall UI organization and discoverability.
The UI-formerly-known-as-Metro doesn't seem to offer even minor benefits to keyboard and mouse users. It's benefits to Microsoft are more clear, but that doesn't make the inconvience to users any less real.
The UI-formerly-known-as-Metro doesn't seem to offer even minor benefits to keyboard and mouse users. It's benefits to Microsoft are more clear, but that doesn't make the inconvience to users any less real.
This isn't change for the sake of being different, it's a radical (and risky) attempt at change such that the mobile and desktop environments become merged.
And you Microsoft Office ribbon example is great! That was another change that many saw as "change for change's sake", but it's become a UI function that the vast majority appreciate and depend on. I'm sure many of the HN crowd would have, or did, lambast the ribbon on introduction, and I'm equally sure many of them have come to love it. It sure didn't take me long.
And you Microsoft Office ribbon example is great! That was another change that many saw as "change for change's sake", but it's become a UI function that the vast majority appreciate and depend on. I'm sure many of the HN crowd would have, or did, lambast the ribbon on introduction, and I'm equally sure many of them have come to love it. It sure didn't take me long.
I know what Microsoft's attempting to do with Metro. What I don't know is what benefit it will have for desktop users. Merging their touch and desktop visual styles might strengthen Microsoft's brand, but I've yet to hear any plausible theories for how it will benefit (or even not harm) usability for desktop users. There's decades of HCI research that says touch interfaces should be different from desktop interfaces. So what's the upside for users? Why should they accept Metro, if not just because Microsoft has a monopoly?
>This isn't change for the sake of being different, it's a radical (and risky) attempt at change such that the mobile and desktop environments become merged.
How does this benefit the actual customer? I don't have a tablet, and I'm not planning to buy one. It's great that Microsoft will only have one code base for the two platforms, but that's great for them, not for me.
How does this benefit the actual customer? I don't have a tablet, and I'm not planning to buy one. It's great that Microsoft will only have one code base for the two platforms, but that's great for them, not for me.
well I don't particularly like it, but i manage.
the ribbon i think is far less of a drastic UI change then metro.
The ribbon was just changing the text menus to a persistent large tool bar with tabs. Metro is like bolting a touch interface overtop of the standard desktop interface and replacing the start menu with it.
the ribbon i think is far less of a drastic UI change then metro.
The ribbon was just changing the text menus to a persistent large tool bar with tabs. Metro is like bolting a touch interface overtop of the standard desktop interface and replacing the start menu with it.
Yessirree Bob, I remember what my rich uncle used to say. He said, "Son," (even though he was my uncle and not my father), "Son, if you really want to make money, forget all that stuff about finding a need and filling it. That's the old way. Everybody's doing that, and everything's been done. No, son, what you want to do is this. You want to find something that isn't broken, and fix it. That's where the big money is."
> and has almost no points that I really want changed.
Most of the wealthy people in Europe probably felt that way in the 18th century about their society. But it's a good thing that this particular opinion is silly and holds no water, right? Something existing to your level of liking is perhaps the best reason to change it.
Most of the wealthy people in Europe probably felt that way in the 18th century about their society. But it's a good thing that this particular opinion is silly and holds no water, right? Something existing to your level of liking is perhaps the best reason to change it.
> Something existing to your level of liking is perhaps the best reason to change it.
This seems... ridiculous to me.
Computers are tools enabling us to do certain tasks with greater ease. If the computer does this fluidly and with minimal effort then it is a good tool. On the other hand, if a new version of the tool adds to the effort required to achieve the same or similar tasks then the new tool is not as good as the old.
This has nothing to do with resisting change, but resisting change for change's sake.
This seems... ridiculous to me.
Computers are tools enabling us to do certain tasks with greater ease. If the computer does this fluidly and with minimal effort then it is a good tool. On the other hand, if a new version of the tool adds to the effort required to achieve the same or similar tasks then the new tool is not as good as the old.
This has nothing to do with resisting change, but resisting change for change's sake.
> If the computer does this fluidly and with minimal effort then it is a good tool
I strongly disagree that Windows 7 matches this description. I find managing windows to be very difficult, for example: no Always on Top, no Focus Follows Mouse, etc. Multiple monitor support is lacking (no option for second taskbar, etc.) Windows 7 also defaults to Reboot without explicit user permission. Some of this is fixed in 8, some of it is not. The point here is that Windows 7 is most definitely NOT "minimal effort" or "fluid". At least, not for me.
> On the other hand, if a new version of the tool adds to the effort required to achieve the same or similar tasks then the new tool is not as good as the old.
Is there any evidence that Windows 8 adds to the effort required to achieve the same task compared to Windows 7? I don't think so.
Also, huge swathes of the world are starting off their computing experience as Mobile-Only. Kenya has very few desktop computers as compared to cell phones, for example. Microsoft is preparing for the new paradigm while not forcing it on anyone (desktop mode, you could keep using Windows 7, etc).
The point is that just because the Windows-7-using elite of the world are happy right now DOES NOT mean that the product is good to leave as it is. There is huge room for improvement.
I strongly disagree that Windows 7 matches this description. I find managing windows to be very difficult, for example: no Always on Top, no Focus Follows Mouse, etc. Multiple monitor support is lacking (no option for second taskbar, etc.) Windows 7 also defaults to Reboot without explicit user permission. Some of this is fixed in 8, some of it is not. The point here is that Windows 7 is most definitely NOT "minimal effort" or "fluid". At least, not for me.
> On the other hand, if a new version of the tool adds to the effort required to achieve the same or similar tasks then the new tool is not as good as the old.
Is there any evidence that Windows 8 adds to the effort required to achieve the same task compared to Windows 7? I don't think so.
Also, huge swathes of the world are starting off their computing experience as Mobile-Only. Kenya has very few desktop computers as compared to cell phones, for example. Microsoft is preparing for the new paradigm while not forcing it on anyone (desktop mode, you could keep using Windows 7, etc).
The point is that just because the Windows-7-using elite of the world are happy right now DOES NOT mean that the product is good to leave as it is. There is huge room for improvement.
Oh wow, you're comparing the industrial revolution to a minor OS upgrade. I guess we feel the need for revolutions in our lives, but this is a bit too much.
I didn't intend on comparing to the industrial revolution specifically. I more meant it that the wealthy are happy and content with the way things are, the poor are not (and not merely because they are poor, but because there are better ways of doing things for everyone, not just the poor).
The comparison was meant to open the discussion to the idea that many of the world's future computer users are not familiar with, nor care about, the workflow in Windows 7. Windows 8 may be better for them to use.
The comparison was meant to open the discussion to the idea that many of the world's future computer users are not familiar with, nor care about, the workflow in Windows 7. Windows 8 may be better for them to use.
The 40 dollar price point is probably less about convincing Windows 7 users to upgrade or purchase it in lieu of, as it is about getting Windows XP users to upgrade who would never upgrade to Win 7 at its current price point.
And concerning the the 15 dollar upgrade for recent purchases of PCs with Win 7 this is a quick little money grab by MS. They already sold the OEM the Win 7 license so they aren't cannibalizing any potential existing sales.
And concerning the the 15 dollar upgrade for recent purchases of PCs with Win 7 this is a quick little money grab by MS. They already sold the OEM the Win 7 license so they aren't cannibalizing any potential existing sales.
That is why I found the Win 8 announcement so weird originally. Why let it compete against Windows 7, which is to me the best version of the OS by a wide margin.
What else were they supposed to do? Let it compete against Windows 3.1 instead? Just not release it for another three years?
Well, maybe the second of those would have been a good idea: spend a few more years adding features and polish. But presumably they wanted basically that OS out there competing with iOS and Android. And perhaps they reckon more people will buy Surface and Windows Phone devices when the UI feels more familiar on account of using it on desktop and laptop computers.
And, actually, it's hard to see how Windows 8 would get more users, or make more money for Microsoft, if they wait three years instead of starting to sell it now and gradually improving it over those three years. I can see only one way: if the wait lets them make more radical changes that they can't apply to an OS that's already out there being used. But there's a limit to how much you can change at once without alienating everyone, and Windows 8 may be pushing it already.
Well, maybe the second of those would have been a good idea: spend a few more years adding features and polish. But presumably they wanted basically that OS out there competing with iOS and Android. And perhaps they reckon more people will buy Surface and Windows Phone devices when the UI feels more familiar on account of using it on desktop and laptop computers.
And, actually, it's hard to see how Windows 8 would get more users, or make more money for Microsoft, if they wait three years instead of starting to sell it now and gradually improving it over those three years. I can see only one way: if the wait lets them make more radical changes that they can't apply to an OS that's already out there being used. But there's a limit to how much you can change at once without alienating everyone, and Windows 8 may be pushing it already.
Windows 8 is better than Windows 7 in every way. I have been running Windows 8 for two months and loved Windows 7 but would never go back.
I actually agree and disagree.
Disagree: I used the windows 8 RC for a while and I actually like it (The desktop portion, metro was a waste for a non-touch screen PC). The additions to the OS were absolutely worth while, especially at these prices. I would upgrade today, without any concern if....
Agree: It wasn't a headache:) I have 2 ATI 4870s in crossfire right now and the ATI drivers were not working well. A lot of stuff that worked on windows 7 was not working on windows 8. Granted, that was the RC, but I don't want to install and find out that it wasn't fixed. 2. Users need the option to opt-out of metro. Period (!).
I'm going to wait for SP1, allow developers to catch up a bit and then jump in. I really liked the speed and the additions made to windows 8, I just think it needs a little time mature.
Agree: It wasn't a headache:) I have 2 ATI 4870s in crossfire right now and the ATI drivers were not working well. A lot of stuff that worked on windows 7 was not working on windows 8. Granted, that was the RC, but I don't want to install and find out that it wasn't fixed. 2. Users need the option to opt-out of metro. Period (!).
I'm going to wait for SP1, allow developers to catch up a bit and then jump in. I really liked the speed and the additions made to windows 8, I just think it needs a little time mature.
Have you tried it?
I have.
The interface is freaking unusable.
It is like Microsoft decided to exit the desktop market with a bang.
"We are failing, and we are taking Windows with us".
The interface is freaking unusable.
It is like Microsoft decided to exit the desktop market with a bang.
"We are failing, and we are taking Windows with us".
To each his own I guess, the only time I ever use the Metro UI is when I'm searching for something, which usually consists of hitting the start button, searching "Chrome" (for google chrome) and then hitting enter. Any other time that I've used the interface it was just for development or testing. How often do you see yourself using it?
Windows XP - success
Windows Vista - failure
Windows 7 - success
Windows 8 - potential failure
Just following a pattern.
Windows Vista - failure
Windows 7 - success
Windows 8 - potential failure
Just following a pattern.
I see Vista characterized as a failure over and over again, and Win 7 as a success. Win 7 is somewhat better than Vista, but the distance between them isn't that great. Besides the fact that UAC prompts were more frequent in Vista, was there some particular problem with Vista?
For a year or two there I was running workstations with both, and didn't see much difference.
I think Vista took the heat for imposing security where none existed.
For a year or two there I was running workstations with both, and didn't see much difference.
I think Vista took the heat for imposing security where none existed.
It's the little things that add up, Vista is like Win7 with an itchy wool sweater over top. Win7 refined UAC, the quicklaunch/taskbar is amazing and the running task previews actually work, the start menu app search is better, the system tray notifications can be more finely tuned, and it runs significantly better on mid/lower end hardware.
I hardly notice a difference between Vista post SP1 and Win 7.
Vista had teething problems early on which burnt a lot of people. Unfortunately, that's what seems to be stuck in everyone's minds.
Vista had teething problems early on which burnt a lot of people. Unfortunately, that's what seems to be stuck in everyone's minds.
I ran both Vista and Windows 7. As far as I was concerned, in terms of usability they are both pretty much the same as long as you turned indexing off on you Vista drives.
Do you feel like Vista ran slower than 7? That was my issue with Vista, the new design was fine, but it just seemed to run poorly compared to the speed of 7.
That pattern only holds if you think that the world started at Windows XP. Going back another few years:
Windows 3.1 - Success
Windows 95 - Success
Windows 98 - Success (moderate, whatever)
Windows NT 4 - Success
Windows Me - Failure
Windows 2000 - Success
Windows 3.1 - Success
Windows 95 - Success
Windows 98 - Success (moderate, whatever)
Windows NT 4 - Success
Windows Me - Failure
Windows 2000 - Success
If you switch that metric from good/bad instead of success/failure, it makes more sense. Something doesn't have to have been objectively good to be sucessful.
Here's how I remember it:
3.1 was the first windows GUI for mass consumption, and was successful, and pretty decent for it's time.
95 was also succesful, but I remember it being very, terribly unstable. Moreso than 3.1.. i put it in the bad column based on that.
98 improved on this and added a lot. Good.
ME was utter dogshit.
Kernels changed from ME to XP, so I make the link there. Microsoft did provide a direct upgrade path from ME to XP.
XP was awesome
Vista was horrid.
7 was awesome
Now 8. If they continue the pattern, 8 will suck.
It seems like there's a micro pattern like "new UI paradigm" >> "polish and improve new UI". 98 improved on 95, 7 improved on vista, XP improved on 2K.
Here's how I remember it:
3.1 was the first windows GUI for mass consumption, and was successful, and pretty decent for it's time.
95 was also succesful, but I remember it being very, terribly unstable. Moreso than 3.1.. i put it in the bad column based on that.
98 improved on this and added a lot. Good.
ME was utter dogshit.
Kernels changed from ME to XP, so I make the link there. Microsoft did provide a direct upgrade path from ME to XP.
XP was awesome
Vista was horrid.
7 was awesome
Now 8. If they continue the pattern, 8 will suck.
It seems like there's a micro pattern like "new UI paradigm" >> "polish and improve new UI". 98 improved on 95, 7 improved on vista, XP improved on 2K.
We're talking about Microsoft here! What about DOS?
I was talking about Windows, actually. I do remember some versions of MS-DOS being marginally better than others, but I don't think it had any predictable cadence.
The simple pattern is a popular myth. For ex, you didn't list Longhorn (after XP) that was such a fiasco that after 3 years of development it was completely scrapped. This was an overly ambitious release with a new relational db filesystem (winfs), new graphics stack (avalon), and new networking stack (indigo). It didn't converge. The team forked Windows Server 2003 and rushed out Vista with as much of the intention (but not code) as it could from previous development. I was on the windows team from 98-11.
failing? MS has been holding 70% to 85% of the desktop market for decades, even by conservative estimates.
They also used to focus on the desktop market. Now they focus on the tablet market, to the point of sacrificing the desktop user experience to gain entrance to that market. That might prove to be a big mistake.
The interface is freaking unusable.
It's funny that I keep hearing people say this, yet hundreds of thousands of people are using it just fine before it's even released. A large number of them even using it as their daily OS. This indicates to me that it is usable. Perhaps by "unusable", some people really just mean "different than I'm used to"? Because to me, unusable means impossible to use, which we know isn't true.
It's funny that I keep hearing people say this, yet hundreds of thousands of people are using it just fine before it's even released. A large number of them even using it as their daily OS. This indicates to me that it is usable. Perhaps by "unusable", some people really just mean "different than I'm used to"? Because to me, unusable means impossible to use, which we know isn't true.
There is no way out of the "metro" interface?
Clarification:
I assumed el_cuadrado was refering to metro being "unusable".
Is that true?
Clarification:
I assumed el_cuadrado was refering to metro being "unusable".
Is that true?
To run desktop apps, you can go to the desktop. I've been using it as my primary OS for several months now
Disclosure: MSFT Employee
Disclosure: MSFT Employee
I recently bought a laptop and it's the first time I've had windows on my home machine since 2004. Since it's only $15 to upgrade: Is it possible/easy to upgrade and go back to Windows 7 if I find it detestable?
Going back means using the restore disks or partitions that came with your computer, or installing fresh from a retail DVD of a previous OS. There's no "downgrade" process.
Of course, 1% of your time is spent in Metro if you use it on a desktop, and that's generally when you're searching for something.
Will this thing behave nicely when I put it on a machine which already has grub and several linux partitions? Or will it insist on killing grub or even do worse stuff to my machine?
I was hoping that it wouldn't kill grub but unfortunately it's just like before. My kubuntu partition lies idly as I haven't bothered re-installing grub yet.
I would assume it kills Grub. I haven't tried, but Microsoft will most likely demand you use the Windows boot loader as they usually do in previous versions. Then you can probably re install Grub and set all of them back up together.
I've been using it since the RTM and it seems fine.
However I can't say I am any more productive than I was with Windows 2000.
However I can't say I am any more productive than I was with Windows 2000.
Microsoft has a problem with not specifying fallback fonts for non-Windows machines: http://wsld.me/KPlc
Looks like they're setting the font explicitly to 'Segoe UI' and nothing else in many spots. Telerik, a .NET CMS provider does a similar thing.
Looks like they're setting the font explicitly to 'Segoe UI' and nothing else in many spots. Telerik, a .NET CMS provider does a similar thing.
I suspect they believe only visitors with Windows machines will ever visit their site.
I'm trying to download it from GB and looks like it only allows from the US. So I hopped on my US-VPN and still redirects me to the GB site. Anyone have any idea how I get around this? (Note - I have a valid US credit card and am prepared to pay in USD)
Ars Technica’s five-page review of Windows 8: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/10/window...
[deleted]
I don't think regular users will like this much, and forcing them to go into Metro will only make more people hate it, rather than like it. Fan bases grow when the growth is natural, not when it's forced.
http://www.foolproof.co.uk/is-planet-earth-ready-for-windows...
http://www.foolproof.co.uk/is-planet-earth-ready-for-windows...
It really wouldn't surprise me at all if it turned out that tons of regular users loved Metro. The problem I keep reading about is the fact you can't stay in Metro all the time. There are some settings that you have to go into desktop mode to mess with, and if you're only used to Metro that's going to be really confusing.
The design is that there really isn't a "desktop mode". the desktop is a feature/surface of the system, it's not something you switch your whole computer into.
While perhaps technically true, as a user you really don't notice any of that. When you log in to Windows 8, it automatically shows the Start screen. While this is Metro, all you have to do is start any desktop application, and the desktop appears.
This is no different in Windows 7. After logging in, surely you would start any application, either by opening the Start menu, or by clicking a application pinned to the task bar, or by double-clicking a shortcut on the desktop. You can put anything onto the Windows 8 Start screen (just right click a file or directory and select Pin to Start), so it's functionally identical -- just with bigger buttons.
And if you really don't like it, you can always move the Desktop tile to the top left, so you can enter the desktop by pressing Enter.
This is no different in Windows 7. After logging in, surely you would start any application, either by opening the Start menu, or by clicking a application pinned to the task bar, or by double-clicking a shortcut on the desktop. You can put anything onto the Windows 8 Start screen (just right click a file or directory and select Pin to Start), so it's functionally identical -- just with bigger buttons.
And if you really don't like it, you can always move the Desktop tile to the top left, so you can enter the desktop by pressing Enter.
...and screws up my evening by apparently breaking flash. We only warned our clients 4 months ago.
How does it apparently break Flash? It's working fine for me in Chrome and Internet Explorer.
Yeah I should have clarified: for IE10, if you're not on the compat list, and you're in ModernUI.
We did warn them... but did they listen?
We did warn them... but did they listen?
Windows 8 has been available for months for free on Microsoft BizSpark (http://www.microsoft.com/bizspark/)
So how can I buy it? (full, not upgrade). I thought that they'll sell digital Win 8 Pro for 79$ but can't find any option for this at MS store.
Run for the hills!
i like how the kids look super into the new surface (pic 4).. i bet those peeps were either "paid" to be there, or set up so that they would all look so interested in that device.. srsly, why would someone buy a surface?
Wow, a big surprise that actors are employed in marketing material. Next thing you're going to tell me is that Justin Long and John Hodgman got paid for the Mac vs PC commercials or that the guys in the Samsung Galaxy ads weren't actually real people happening to stumble upon a crowd at an Apple store.
Unless by putting "paid" in scare quotes, you were implying something slightly less scrupulous...
Unless by putting "paid" in scare quotes, you were implying something slightly less scrupulous...
yeah i was.. i was just saying that those kids look waaay to interested in what that guy is doing, and his facial expression also seems a little off.. i may have miss-communicated my intention, for that, i apologize
Someone once said Windows 8 looks like a 5 dollar app. That sums it up for me
Short version - outside of Metro it's basically Win7SP3 and it works great. Metro is every bit the usability disaster that people have claimed when not running on a touch screen.
The good news is that you really don't have to interface much with Metro at all. It replaces the start menu, but it does so in a manner that works with how I'm used to dealing with the start menu already. That is, I already just hit the Win key and then start typing until the thing I want pops up, and that behavior has carried over.
So, yeah Metro is awful for all the reasons everybody has already laid out. Despite that, Win 8 has been a solid performer and I won't be loading Win7 back on this system.
My primary home system will continue to run Win7 until I am comfortable that my production applications will all run successfully (and by that, I mean "games").