Five Reasons why Windows 8 will be dead on arrival


Recommended Posts

And yet every device is not a PC. Mixing Apples and Oranges again. I am gonna watch movie on PC and use VLC player to project it via HDMI cable to big screen in leaving room in HD1080 format with 3D Capability. I am not going to watch same movie in my little phone. Your argument is so Invalid, it is beyond commedy. Perhaps you should install Ubuntu 11.10 and see different world and possibilities.

Or, put movie on phone, plug phone into TV? Portable 1080p videos that you can easily carry around to any HDMI equipped TV.

Actually whole Neowin forum should pay me $100 for saying that Vista is going to be a flop [...]

We could, but that would be silly considering you apparently joined Neowin after Windows 7 came out Vista had already been publicly perceived as unsuccessful. :p

  • Like 1

MS has a history of being wrong on every other version...... Millenium - wrong, XP - right, Vista - Wrong, 7 - Right, from the way people are talking, 8 will be following this pattern again... remember talk sometimes means more then function..... vista for me worked fine, but it was a failure in everyones eyes

MS has a history of being wrong on every other version...... Millenium - wrong, XP - right, Vista - Wrong, 7 - Right, from the way people are talking, 8 will be following this pattern again... remember talk sometimes means more then function..... vista for me worked fine, but it was a failure in everyones eyes

That's a very black-and-white view on Windows' history, your last sentence proves that. Just after XP came out, many people actually hated it. Same with Vista, but the difference is it hasn't been forgotten yet. Before the actual Windows 7 came out, it got bashed as well (so that means Windows 8 isn't going to certainly fail).

Microsoft is also certainly not playing a good-bad-good-bad game.. People will actually always try to find patterns everywhere, but it doesn't mean that the future is clearly predictable.

  • Like 1

i approve this thread and as ive said i may just skip w8 and stick to osx lion and w7 as a backup. im almost certain w7 will get a 2nd service pack. im tired of microsoft pushing metro down our throats, it's a horrid user interface IMO. windows did not need a refresh already, they had it almost perfect with w7.

That's a very black-and-white view on Windows' history, your last sentence proves that. Just after XP came out, many people actually hated it. Same with Vista, but the difference is it hasn't been forgotten yet. Before the actual Windows 7 came out, it got bashed as well (so that means Windows 8 isn't going to certainly fail).

Microsoft is also certainly not playing a good-bad-good-bad game.. People will actually always try to find patterns everywhere, but it doesn't mean that the future is clearly predictable.

I'm ONLY going by public opinnion after it was out for a while, not when its released, people still hate millennium, people still hate vista, it just seems to be the publics perception for some reason with microsoft

windows 7 wasn't really bashed, it was more praised as the fix all, windows vista was looked at as a failure from the start of the longhorn alpha.... XP was only "bashed" because of the UI Theme, and the fact this pattern exists isn't me saying its going to fail, I'm just saying they already planted the seeds of failure in peoples heads with some of the radical stories out there on it... and no mater what it wont fail, every new PC will have it... VIsta didnt "fail" it just was precieved as crap

  • Like 1

I'm ONLY going by public opinnion after it was out for a while, not when its released, people still hate millennium, people still hate vista, it just seems to be the publics perception for some reason with microsoft

Sadly enough public opinion is created by more technologically advanced people, like the people on this site.

They are already shooting Win8 down while it's not even in it's beta stage.

  • Like 1

When its in Beta I will stick it on a seperate HDD, put it into my laptop, make my own mind up and decide if I will update on release. All other 'reference/recomendations/opinions' will be taken with a pinch of salt.

As long as all my hardware and software is supported then Im happy.

It's amazing how people just keep saying they'll switch to another OS because of some really early version of an OS they might not like..

It's still a DEVELOPER PREVIEW!

?which means there are developers out there that are currently working on apps that fit this Windows 8 ecosystem. Isn?t it alarming ?

Plus, Windows 8 will be released mid-late 2012. This is this year. They have about 8 months remaining to work on this if they want it to be in stores in November.

My god, twenty posts for a comment that is a link to an article that is really little more than flame-bait and, or trolling (or both). I, however, will contribute much two cents with:

1. No one needs Windows 8 on the desktop.

Wrong... incremental upgrades, are still upgrades.

2. Metro: An ugly, useless interface.

It is not a final product. Once you actually use it for a while, it grows on you. That said, however, is not to say that there does not need to be some significant tweaks for it to work smoothly on the desktop.

3. Where are the Windows 8 Applications?

I think it might have to do with the fact that it runs legacy apps. The applications taking advantage of the new API are likely going to be slow in coming, though they will be here in due time.

4. Vexed Windows developers.

See above.

5. Too little, too late for the smartphone/tablet market

Microsoft has a track record of always winning in the end. When in Vegas, you don't bet against the house. When in the tech industry, do not bet against Microsoft. They always win because they have the most to lose by not doing so.

?which means there are developers out there that are currently working on apps that fit this Windows 8 ecosystem. Isn?t it alarming ?

Plus, Windows 8 will be released mid-late 2012. This is this year. They have about 8 months remaining to work on this if they want it to be in stores in November.

Well everybody is bitching about a version that was delivered almost 5months ago. The people at MS are not sitting still, they've been working around the clock to fix problems and make it more useable.

I feel it will be a resounding success. Everyone I've showed the DP to has been quite pleased with it and it's not even feature-complete. :/

There's a difference between showing someone something, and them using it on a daily basis.

I'll reserve my judgement of Windows 8 until I see it myself, but all indications are leading towards DOA a la Vista as the article states. If it is DOA, I don't know how Ballmer can possibly remain in his current position.

OK, so this thread was started by whomever to provoke everyone's response. Regardless the OP's motivation, it worked, & all these contributions made for a very interesting read -- some posts will undoubtedly be right, some of course will be wrong, but IMO the real value is in seeing what everyone thinks about win8 so close to the release of the public beta. As with past Windows versions, taken alltogether those opinions will have a lot to do with how fast win8 is adopted, & might even determine its eventual success, or lack thereof.

My own 2 cents, purely FWIW...

Historically, from what I remember, win95 made it past a lack of both software & drivers because it had a lot of new, better stuff to offer. 98 & 98SE were similarly seen as tech steps forward. Maybe because they didn't really promote ME, maybe because it was too different, it hardly seems a blip on the timeline -- I remember seeing it on new hardware, but hardly anywhere else... then like now I hardly noticed it mentioned on-line or off. Then came XP, with an intro that in hindsight seems most notable because the more hard core tech folks eventually where outvoted & ignored -- how many remember the heckling XP got for its Fisher Price GUI? But the world got past that & wound up accepting XP like no other Windows version before it -- something helped along by the rapidly increasing numbers of PCs/laptops sold. Then came the abject marketing failure that was Vista... At its core Vista was a great OS -- the hugely popular win7 is more-or-less Vista SE afterall -- but MS failed miserably when it came to marketing, which includes making sure what you're selling & what customers buy are for the most part the same thing. However you feel/felt about Steve Jobs, that's one thing he Really excelled at. Microsoft went on to learn from their mistakes, and that learning brought us Windows 7. Yes, win7 is newer/better than Vista in all sorts of ways, but if you look at what went wrong with Vista, then look at win7, it's fairly easy to see Microsoft's lessons learned.

I think win8 [or whatever it comes to be called] is a break from tradition, as they try to turn the behemoth that is Microsoft in new, not soley PC-centric directions. Up until now one part of MS did well with some hardware, another did corp IT, another brought us the Xbox etc... I think it only logical, common sense really, that they try to bring those various parts closer together for a more efficient whole. The Apple & Google Microsoft's competing with today & in the future are not the same companies they were 10 or even 5 years ago. As big as Facebook is, how long before they start thinking about other streams of revenue? IMO win8 is a logical step that had to happen, & if it sells a lot of copies, great -- if not MS can & will live with that.

Microsoft is doing a lot to promote their brand, & they'd like to lock you into using their on-line services, as long as that locking part doesn't start to hurt their numbers re: those on-line services. If win8 doesn't sell enough fast enough you'll likely be able to do the same things re: those on-line services in win7. MS is betting [maybe more than they originally thought] that maybe more casual users will love Metro & the whole idea of a unified screen across different hardware devices -- those that don't like it can easily turn it off & get a faster, more efficient Windows 7. If Metro takes off, it'll undoubtedly become more integrated -- if not, it'll become easier to get the traditional desktop. MS would like everyone to upgrade from win7 to win8, & to encourage that they've added new stuff, but nothing as radical as the move from XP to Vista -- it's all carrots & no sticks. In terms of total sales win8 could turn out to be another ME, but tech-wise, since the biggest change seems to be Metro, & you can turn that off if you like, I don't believe it'll ever be another Vista.

There's a difference between showing someone something, and them using it on a daily basis.

I'll reserve my judgement of Windows 8 until I see it myself, but all indications are leading towards DOA a la Vista as the article states. If it is DOA, I don't know how Ballmer can possibly remain in his current position.

i agree with this too, ballmer will be gone if both wp7 & w8 is a failure. i give them props for trying but i just do not see good things coming out of this. i believe w8 could be the next windows me.

1. No one needs Windows 8 on the desktop.

Wrong... incremental upgrades, are still upgrades.

I think the point was that, from a desktop user's point of view, Windows 8's nothing more than a small service pack. In terms of new features which benefit desktop users specifically, I think that view point is correct.

2. Metro: An ugly, useless interface.

It is not a final product. Once you actually use it for a while, it grows on you. That said, however, is not to say that there does not need to be some significant tweaks for it to work smoothly on the desktop.

It's true that beauty is in the eye of the beholder / subjective, but I can't help feeling myself, that while the tile UI might work on small 3/4 inch screens, anything bigger than that just doesn't look right (tablets, 20"+ screens).

3. Where are the Windows 8 Applications?

I think it might have to do with the fact that it runs legacy apps. The applications taking advantage of the new API are likely going to be slow in coming, though they will be here in due time.

I was under the impression that the ARM tablet versions won't run native legacy apps?

4. Vexed Windows developers.

See above.

Will Windows Phone 7 silverlight apps run on Windows 8? That would definately ease the pain for developers i'd imagine.

5. Too little, too late for the smartphone/tablet market

Microsoft has a track record of always winning in the end. When in Vegas, you don't bet against the house. When in the tech industry, do not bet against Microsoft. They always win because they have the most to lose by not doing so.

In the end I think it's going to come down to the price of Windows 8 tablets. If they're going to be selling for $800+, no one's going to buy one, except perhaps a few rich kids or businesses with cash to burn. That's going to be a challenge because Windows has traditionally needed greater hardware resources than competing operating systems, which in turn bumps up the BOM.

I think the point was that, from a desktop user's point of view, Windows 8's nothing more than a small service pack. In terms of new features which benefit desktop users specifically, I think that view point is correct.

This point is moot. See Windows 7.

It's true that beauty is in the eye of the beholder / subjective, but I can't help feeling myself, that while the tile UI might work on small 3/4 inch screens, anything bigger than that just doesn't look right (tablets, 20"+ screens).

The start screen is supposed to have desktop improvements. We'll see how it all fleshes out with the consumer preview.

I was under the impression that the ARM tablet versions won't run native legacy apps?

There will be x86 based tablets.

Will Windows Phone 7 silverlight apps run on Windows 8? That would definately ease the pain for developers i'd imagine.

Yes they will

In the end I think it's going to come down to the price of Windows 8 tablets. If they're going to be selling for $800+, no one's going to buy one, except perhaps a few rich kids or businesses with cash to burn. That's going to be a challenge because Windows has traditionally needed greater hardware resources than competing operating systems, which in turn bumps up the BOM.

The $800+ figure is for x86 tablets. ARM based ones will be cheaper.

i approve this thread and as ive said i may just skip w8 and stick to osx lion and w7 as a backup. im almost certain w7 will get a 2nd service pack. im tired of microsoft pushing metro down our throats, it's a horrid user interface IMO. windows did not need a refresh already, they had it almost perfect with w7.

The Desktop PC has never really moved beyond it's original, jack of all trades purpose -- the same basic hardware can be used for a server, an audio workstation, gaming etc... Yet the other half of that Jack of all trades thing is: Master Of None. More specialized hardware is & has been inevitable, whether you're talking cell phones or entertainment devices/hardware or refrigerators. MS would like to be an essential part of all that -- after all more people buy more new cell phones for example than they do PCs. Metro is a step in that direction, one that can work across devices/screens. On PCs it's also something than can, & often will be turned off.

With that in mind, I don't think MS is pushing anything down anyone's throat -- as I said in my earlier post, it's all carrots & no sticks... I can boot into XP Pro on this rig, & haven't seen any penalties from Microsoft because I was using their 2 generations old OS. My wife likes so-called casual games, & while she can boot into win7 64 whenever she likes, she prefers Vista where she feels they run faster/better -- she hasn't seen any penalties from Microsoft for using Vista. So if anyone doesn't like Metro, turn it off -- if you don't like having to trun it off, run win7. :)

Again 2 of those screens are used for work majority of the time. I have one screen (computer) dedicated for charting, another (30") dedicated for trading and the middle screen is used for browsing, gaming and what ever else 90% of the time. Once in a blue moon Ill use that screen for extra trading info. So I may be a "outlier" in terms of hardware but when it comes to avg computing, Im really no different then anyone else. So my screens may be a bit larger then the avg user, that doesnt change the standard usage any less.

Which is *precisely* why they are called niche-customers and outliers.

If your hardware (or software) needs are vastly different from the median/base user of an operating system (any operating system) trying to cater to those outliers will (not may) detract into taking care of the needs of the majority of the user base.

It's not meant to be (or designed to be) a criticism - just the reality of where you as a user (in fact, most Neowinians that use Windows of any flavor) fit.

Also, Gerowen, if you only offer *incremental upgrades* to an operating system (service packs and the like) you get what happened between XP and Vista (it was *how long* between XP and Longhorn, for that matter?).

There's a difference between showing someone something, and them using it on a daily basis.

I'll reserve my judgement of Windows 8 until I see it myself, but all indications are leading towards DOA a la Vista as the article states. If it is DOA, I don't know how Ballmer can possibly remain in his current position.

What indications? I have yet to see any that would lead me to believe Windows 8 will be DOA. And some trolling post by some OSS idiot is hardly an indication.

Who. Gives. a. crap.

Seeing people arguing about something that isn't even out yet..............................................................

Again. WHO CARES its just a damn OS! Does your life depend on it? I've seen caring people care less about their marriages/jobs then the way some of you are acting....

I may get flamed for this post but guess what.....its the internet.

For anyone concerned about Windows 8 ARM running legacy apps, you should check out the "Going Native" conference over at channel9.msdn.com

They say a huge push in getting C++ 11 done was to get ARM processor support in the compiler.

While this may not mean much to the folks out there who do not develop software, those who do should understand.

Linux is rock solid and awesome for web servers and stuff like that, but it still lacks in the desktop marketspace. It's ok for some stuff but still needs more work and a lot of the community keeps arguing instead of innovating.

I've tested over 30 distros...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!