Windows 8

[Captain Picard's Hair]

Love it or loathe it, it's launching in just over a week (10/26 to be exact). After that point it will become the new default for new brand-name PCs. Are you ready?

[Sonic Glitch]

I'm ready with a brand new(ish) Windows 7 PC I'm ok waiting until I have to replace this one to get Windows 8, especially since the odds of the next model being touch screen are better and that's likely a better way to use Windows 8. I mean, the open preview worked fine with just a touchpad so I may take advantage of the $15.00 upgrade but I don't feel like I have to.

That said, the HP Envy x2 is one sexy looking piece of machinery...

[Tyyr]

I've got a copy of Window's 7 64bit Pro and you can't make me stop using it. Since I build my own computers from here on out that's what's going on them until Microsoft finally pulls support for it. Hopefully this shit will have tanked by then and Windows 9 won't suck.

[Sonic Glitch]

I'll be honest, I really don't understand the whole "it's so difficult to use/the learning curve is huge" argument. I used the Beta on a non-touch PC, using the trackpad in place of fingers and it worked fine. It doesn't really strike me as anything outrageously different aside from the new UI screen ... from which you can get to your traditional desktop. Is the lack of a start button REALLY such an inconvenience that the entire software is worthless? (Tyyr this is not particularly directed at you, just a general musing).

Or is this an example of a generation gap and somehow since I am a member of a younger generation, it's easier for me to adapt to these newfangled technology things?

[IanKennedy]

I'll be honest, I really don't understand the whole "it's so difficult to use/the learning curve is huge" argument. I used the Beta on a non-touch PC, using the trackpad in place of fingers and it worked fine. It doesn't really strike me as anything outrageously different aside from the new UI screen ... from which you can get to your traditional desktop. Is the lack of a start button REALLY such an inconvenience that the entire software is worthless? (Tyyr this is not particularly directed at you, just a general musing).

Yes, there's part of a traditional desktop, but not all of it. There's no start menu for example. Running Windows 8 on a virtual machine is a nightmare, the "put your mouse in the corner of the screen" thing is almost impossible (given the edge of the window isn't the edge of the screen).

Or is this an example of a generation gap and somehow since I am a member of a younger generation, it's easier for me to adapt to these newfangled technology things?

I don't think so I think it's more of a tablet / desktop thing. People don't IMHO want to use their desktop like they use their tablet. They're not the same thing. It will be interesting to see just what happens with Windows 8. Microsoft has basically said "it's our way or the highway" with that start screen. I think that's a very brave thing to do as people can go to Unix for zero cost. To push them to learn something new on something as fundamental as the start menu is a dangerous choice.

[Sonic Glitch]

I'll be honest, I really don't understand the whole "it's so difficult to use/the learning curve is huge" argument. I used the Beta on a non-touch PC, using the trackpad in place of fingers and it worked fine. It doesn't really strike me as anything outrageously different aside from the new UI screen ... from which you can get to your traditional desktop. Is the lack of a start button REALLY such an inconvenience that the entire software is worthless? (Tyyr this is not particularly directed at you, just a general musing).

Yes, there's part of a traditional desktop, but not all of it. There's no start menu for example. Running Windows 8 on a virtual machine is a nightmare, the "put your mouse in the corner of the screen" thing is almost impossible (given the edge of the window isn't the edge of the screen).

Or is this an example of a generation gap and somehow since I am a member of a younger generation, it's easier for me to adapt to these newfangled technology things?

I don't think so I think it's more of a tablet / desktop thing. People don't IMHO want to use their desktop like they use their tablet. They're not the same thing. It will be interesting to see just what happens with Windows 8. Microsoft has basically said "it's our way or the highway" with that start screen. I think that's a very brave thing to do as people can go to Unix for zero cost. To push them to learn something new on something as fundamental as the start menu is a dangerous choice.

Fair enough. The "Mouse in the corner of the screen" thing actually worked fairly well for me. Like I said after a day or two of adjustment I got used to it, but as they say your mileage may vary. Also for me, while the lack of a start button is initially irritating: you get used to it. I am intrigued however, by the idea of a unified operating system across platforms (with the possible exception of WindowsRT if I understand the difference between the 2 correctly).

I suppose we can all agree that for Microsoft this will either be a smashing success or the biggest flop since Vista yes (or perhaps Windows ME)?

[Captain Picard's Hair]

Hitting the charms menu can be a bit tricky with a mouse, though it should work beautifully with swipe gestures on a touchscreen (swipe in from the left- or right-hand side to access the corresponding functions). I find certain keyboard combinations useful:

http://www.winbeta.org/guides/comprehensive-list-windows-8-keyboard-shortcuts

Since I guess Ian is running his VM on a Mac which lacks a windows key, some of the more useful shortcuts may be harder to access though perhaps its possible to map a key to that function.

[Captain Picard's Hair]

For now most reviews of Win 8 on a desktop platform have taken the approach of using the start screen as a sort of full-screen start menu (though I mostly use a select few programs and tend to have them pinned to my taskbar). There are programs which can add a third-party start menu resembling the traditional desktop version and others that can disable certain features of the new "Modern" interface (no longer called Metro due to a copyright dispute with a major German retailer). It's quite clear what direction Microsoft is going, though. The company does a lot of consumer studies with new software, so they've presumably done studies of Windows 8 with test subjects. A lot of the internet reaction to the stuff has been negative, though whether that's just a vocal minority will shortly be proven.

Then again, before it took over the world, venerable old Windows XP didn't have a great start: http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-is-the-new-xp-7000006095/

As to tablets, Windows 8 (Windows RT for non-Intel tablets, which lack the ability to run the huge existing catalog of desktop programs except for the built-in copy of Office), can do some things Ipads or Android tablets can't in the realm of easy app switching swipe in from left-hand side) and running multiple apps side-by-side, what Microsoft calls "Snap" (see below, demonstrated with IE10 and the messaging app snapped to the side). It also makes it easier to access settings without leaving the current app and includes universal search (both part of the "charms" accessible from a swipe in from the right-hand side).

[Tyyr]

Is the lack of a start button REALLY such an inconvenience that the entire software is worthless? (Tyyr this is not particularly directed at you, just a general musing).

Why should I? Seriously, why? What does this change benefit me at all? What does Windows 8 do so much better than Windows 7 that I should spend the time and effort to learn an entirely new OS? Honestly, I really only went to Windows 7 because they dropped support for XP. "It boots faster." Big fucking deal, I reboot my computer once a week and once I put in my SSD I could give two fucks if it boots in 11 seconds instead of 15.

Windows 8 is a tablet UI being foisted on desktops. They are not the same thing. I do not want to use them the same way. Fuck Windows 8 on Desktops.

That said, I actually like it for tablets, then Microsoft went and priced the Surface through the fucking stratosphere and sold me a Nexus 7.

[Sonic Glitch]

Is the lack of a start button REALLY such an inconvenience that the entire software is worthless? (Tyyr this is not particularly directed at you, just a general musing).

Why should I? Seriously, why? What does this change benefit me at all? What does Windows 8 do so much better than Windows 7 that I should spend the time and effort to learn an entirely new OS? Honestly, I really only went to Windows 7 because they dropped support for XP. "It boots faster." Big fucking deal, I reboot my computer once a week and once I put in my SSD I could give two fucks if it boots in 11 seconds instead of 15.

Windows 8 is a tablet UI being foisted on desktops. They are not the same thing. I do not want to use them the same way. Fuck Windows 8 on Desktops.

That said, I actually like it for tablets, then Microsoft went and priced the Surface through the fucking stratosphere and sold me a Nexus 7.

Surprisingly enough I don't actually have an issue with this. I too do not intend to upgrade immediately, what I am trying to get at is that there seems to be a general atmosphere of 'How dare Microsoft issue this new software with these changes that I don't like! It's the most inconvenient/horrible thing since [insert your own here]." No one is forcing anybody to upgrade and you are perfectly free to ignore it if you wish. That is what I don't get (in general).

[Tyyr]

Ok, lemme expound on this. My computer is a tool. The operating system is part of that tool. The whole point of that tool is to let me use programs to do what I want to do. An operating system by itself doesn't do shit. The whole point of it is to let me use other programs to do what they do which is what I'm looking for. Firefox for the internet, my games, Office, CD burners, viewers, my music, photos, videos, etc. All the operating system does is enable those programs to interface with my hardware and accomplish what I want to accomplish. So long as my OS does that and provides me with the ability to manage my computer it's doing what I need it it do.

What does "upgrading" to Win8 do for me? Nothing. I don't care about Windows 8, nothing I've been shown so improves the OS in some way that makes me want to spend the money on it. It does nothing except make using my computer harder. At the end of the learning curve of Windows 8 are just the programs that I am already using! So if the only thing Windows 8 offers is to have to relearn everything just so I can do the things I already do then what's the benefit to me? There is none.

What I am trying to get at is that there seems to be a general atmosphere of 'How dare Microsoft issue this new software with these changes that I don't like! It's the most inconvenient/horrible thing since [insert your own here]." No one is forcing anybody to upgrade and you are perfectly free to ignore it if you wish. That is what I don't get (in general).

It's not that they're trying something new, it's that they're being shitheads about it. Rather than making Metro an option but still offering a familiar older style OS they are trying very hard to kill any vestiges of the old style OS and forcing Metro on people. If you want Windows 8 you're going to have to suck down Metro. And I don't really see anyone complaining about the Windows 7 interface. Honestly, it works. People realize that Microsoft is trying to force a tablet OS onto desktops and they don't like it especially given mainstream home computing's reliance on Microsoft. While they know they don't have to upgrade now they are going to have to upgrade eventually and either deal with Metro or hope it bombs so hard we get Windows 9 in short order or at least Microsoft pulls the stick out of its ass and releases a "Start Menu Service Pack."

Really, "You get used to it," isn't a ringing endorsement.

I am intrigued however, by the idea of a unified operating system across platforms (with the possible exception of WindowsRT if I understand the difference between the 2 correctly).

It's an interesting idea. The problem is that they're years late in doing it. The concept of a unified OS across Desktops (though not forcing you to use the same UI), Tablets, and phones is interesting but Windows phone has never taken off and they have just now released a tablet into a market already saturated with iPads and Androids. You'd have to convince people to give up their current phones and tablets to buy new Windows phones and Surfaces which... ain't gonna happen.

[Mikey]

As an observer much less informed - and perhaps more representative of the casual user - than you guys, here's my take. I just got a Windows notebook after a couple of years on Macbooks. I could expound on the advantages and disadvantages of Mac OS vs. Win, but this isn't the place. What I can tell you is that I have been able to take my experience with XP and use Win 7 without a pause. If, as I'm led to believe, Win 8 is just "different" but doesn't really have any capabilities over and above Win 7 - that is, doesn't do anything 7 can't or doesn't do anything significantly better than 7 - then you can keep it so long as I can get IE 10 for Win 7. I am thoroughly and completely unimpressed and unhappy with both IE9 and Chrome using Win 7.

[Tyyr]

They can't cut ties to Windows 7 or legacy versions of IE for a long time. There are a lot of people who don't know anything about their operating system and just take whatever comes on the new PC they buy from Dell. There are a lot of businesses who will not be upgrading for a long, long time. (For example, I literally recieved Windows 7 at work yesterday and only because it was preinstalled on my new laptop. They won't be rolling out Windows 7 for the entire business unit for another month.) So Microsoft is going to have to keep supporiting 7 for years more. Which is really going to put a kink in their ability to force Metro on the computing public.

[Teaos]

Look at what happened to Vista, even once it was fixed and did work well, people just didnt want it. so they had to keep upgrading XP for years longer than they intended, XP still has quite a large portion of the OS market.

If windows 8 goes the same way, people not wanting it not because it is bad, but because of bad press or being comfortable with 7 then 8 is gonna flop like Vista.

[Tyyr]

Personally I'd rather see a "Start Button" Service Pack to restore the functionality than the OS entirely flop.