So, a lotta you hate Windows 8...

[JaredFrost]

They can't give an option, though. It just wouldn't work out well. They didn't give an option in Windows 95 for people to use the previous interface, just like they didn't provide an option in Windows Phone 7 for people to use the Windows Mobile 6.5 interface. I'm aware that Windows Phone is a different operating system to Windows Mobile, but essentially, the Metro experience of Windows 8 is a different operating system to Windows 7. There are valid reasons why companies don't forever allow users to use the previous interfaces of their products. There are reasons Facebook will ensure everyone uses Timeline, and there are reasons Microsoft didn't allow people to switch back to the MSN Hotmail version of Hotmail. It is not as easy as them just "giving users the option," like some people seem to think it is. One has to consider the possible technical support overheard, among many other factors.

Cool story, only it's pretty much false.

Windows 95 had the Program Manager, hell Windows ME did too.

And you could change to the old MSN Hotmail interface for quite some time also, sooo, there you go.

Facebook is a completely different company so it's not really relevant to what Microsoft does.

[Lee G. Veteran]

I don't like it. It reminds me of those Longhorn concept videos. I much prefer the interface of Windows 8.

Cool story, only it's pretty much false.

Windows 95 had the Program Manager, hell Windows ME did too.

So did Windows XP RTM and SP1. It was disabled in SP2.

[Dot Matrix]

I find re-learning how to use a system I've used since 1995 complicated. The fact that MS has said they will have tutorials proves I'm not alone.

Anyway, other than that, arguing with you about Windows 8 is pointless, you clearly love it, I clearly hate it. The difference is, I accept that some people do actually like Windows 8 and how it works for them. You just seem to think everyone should like it because you do. Before you disagree, take a look at your posts.

Liking it or not liking it isn't what I was getting at. I was simply stating that Windows 8 is no more complicated than Windows 7 is. If you can use Windows 7, you can use Windows 8.

[Mazhar]

What they hate is change, not Windows 8. Shame!

[firey]

The way I see it, Windows 7 is awesome enough to skip over any future Windows Versions that go with the tiled interface. I am using a computer, not a tablet. I want to multi-task (which I do every single day in a high capacity) Copying and pasting to multiple locations and folders at a time. Pulling files from multiple locations and directories at one time. Having the start menu be a small little box on the side of my screen.

Windows 8 and the immersive (aka full screen, horrible multi-tasking) environment, and the full screen start page. Just doesn't work for me, and unless I become crippled and forget how to use a computer properly it never will. I do hope Windows 9 will go back to the Windows 7 styling, though I would much prefer Longhorn (4074 styling), I hope that Windows 8 is a one off. Otherwise I will run Windows 7 into the ground, and hope that one of the other OS makers continues on the classic, non-mobile, desktop styling.

I'm not opposed to changes, just changes that I see no benefit from. I gladly went from 2000 to XP, XP to Vista, Vista to 7, between XP and Vista I tested every single leak and release. I am not opposed to change.

[Dot Matrix]

If Microsoft listened to half the people on Neowin, Windows 8 would be this.

Followed up by Windows 9

(Classic shell & start menu on by default of course)

No, no, if Microsoft listened to us, Windows 8 would be this:

[firey]

No, no, if Microsoft listened to us, Windows 8 would be this:

No, I am pretty sure if they listened to us, it would be Windows 7's look, and functionality with the Windows 8 background improvements (speed, file transfers, etc) not the stupid interface they stuck on it.

[Japlabot]

Nah that was Netspace ages ago, now its Chemist Warehouse. Many more things to do now! All those computers in every store don't run on sunshine and happiness.

I think that you would find that bad UIs are in your best interest. Bad UIs = More Stress. More Stress = More Prescription meds, More Prescription Meds = More Sales for Chemist Warehouse. More Sales = More Profit Share! I think Chemist Warehouses would have seen a major growth in prescription meds sales following every Siebel rollout.

[Dot Matrix]

No, I am pretty sure if they listened to us, it would be Windows 7's look, and functionality with the Windows 8 background improvements (speed, file transfers, etc) not the stupid interface they stuck on it.

Just give it time to mature. We know little to nothing about the Release Preview or Windows 9. I'll bet by that time most will be like "Classic what?".

[firey]

Just give it time to mature. We know little to nothing about the Release Preview or Windows 9. I'll bet by that time most will be like "Classic what?".

If you are 12... maybe.

[Dot Matrix]

If you are 12... maybe.

I'm 26, and currently using Windows 8 day in and day out at school and at home, and have yet to hit any sort of productivity roadblock. I'm mainly on the desktop working in Office, but I have been running a few of the more complete Metro apps on the side of the screen while I work. Music, calendar, mail, and weather all work nicely next to the desktop.

[firey]

I'm 26, and currently using Windows 8 day in and day out at school and at home, and have yet to hit any sort of productivity roadblock. I'm mainly on the desktop working in Office, but I have been running a few of the more complete Metro apps on the side of the screen while I work. Music, calendar, mail, and weather all work nicely next to the desktop.

What works for you doesn't work for me. I have Weather, Music, Clock, Email all running on the desktop in the foreground while I am working, no need to switch to another screen to see it. I prefer it that way, but that's just me.

Also the 12 comment was for anyone who doesn't know what classic desktop environment meant when windows 9 came out.

[Alwaysonacoffebreak]

The start feature there is actually pretty neat. I wish they could actually put that in Windows 8 :( Thats enough of a change for 1 OS and after that they should start moving along.

[McKay]

I find re-learning how to use a system I've used since 1995 complicated.

Lot's of people used that argument going from DOS to a GUI.

No, I am pretty sure if they listened to us, it would be Windows 7's look, and functionality with the Windows 8 background improvements (speed, file transfers, etc) not the stupid interface they stuck on it.

People have bitched and moaned about every version of Windows, "Why can't it be the same as the last version!!"

There are still communities out there full of people trying to make Windows 95 and 98 work in modern life.

[_neutrino Veteran]

nope i think Win 8 is doing great and that would have just been horrible.

[+pmrd Subscriber²]

The people who did that video have 0 talent for design. It's just horrible everything is mashed together in a cluster-**** of a mess. I think I just vomited a little while watching the video and I hope that person now works picking up garbage because that's pretty much what I see.

[psreloaded]

What they hate is change, not Windows 8. Shame!

Not true...

[Dot Matrix]

The people who did that video have 0 talent for design. It's just horrible everything is mashed together in a cluster-**** of a mess. I think I just vomited a little while watching the video and I hope that person now works picking up garbage because that's pretty much what I see.

It's not horrible, but it's ot great either. Another mouse UI.

[Calum Veteran]

Cool story, only it's pretty much false.

Windows 95 had the Program Manager, hell Windows ME did too.

And you could change to the old MSN Hotmail interface for quite some time also, sooo, there you go.

Facebook is a completely different company so it's not really relevant to what Microsoft does.

It isn't false. Windows 95 included the Program Manager, just like Windows 8 includes the Desktop experience. Was there an official option to set the Program Manager as the default shell in Windows 95, completely turning off the Windows Explorer shell? I don't believe there was. The situation regarding that seems to be very similar to the situation with Windows 8.

As I mentioned in the post you quoted, the option to revert back to the MSN Hotmail interface wasn't there forever, and it certainly wasn't there for long.

Mentioning Facebook is relevant because they are a company who develop and release software and web services, just like Microsoft. I was pointing out why software companies don't provide these options, not just why Microsoft doesn't. The fact most, if not all. software companies follow this idea should indicate to you that it's just not a good move for Microsoft to do this.

[Calum Veteran]

So instead of learning to manage how you work on your own you want forced restrictions? Seems kind of silly to me and doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but hey.. whatever floats your boat.

It's becoming "this is how you *have* to do something" instead of "this is how you *can* do something". Having options doesn't hurt anyone.

If it was possible for Microsoft to not impose those restrictions, I'd probably say they shouldn't, but the Metro experience just wouldn't work as well without those restrictions. For example. in order to be able to have more than two apps open on one screen at once, Microsoft would have to implement some way of resizing Metro apps. The Metro experience would essentially become as flawed, cumbersome, and inefficient as the Desktop experience.

[firey]

It's not horrible, but it's ot great either. Another mouse UI.

Which is what most users using a computer use... I want a mouse UI, I want a UI designed around the mouse, not a UI that *works* with a mouse.

[Calum Veteran]

[. . .]

Windows 95 had the Program Manager, hell Windows ME did too.

[. . .]

On further research, it appears that Windows 95 provided no way to disable the new Windows Explorer shell and use the Program Manager in the same way that shell was used in Windows 3.1. It appears the Program Manager was merely an application in Windows 95 through to Windows Me, rather than a completely different shell that could have been used instead of the newly introduced Windows Explorer shell: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_95 ("Build 58s still included Program Manager as found in Windows 3.1, although this application was supplemented by the new desktop and taskbar/Start menu designs.")

Thus, my point still stands.

[Calum Veteran]

What works for you doesn't work for me. I have Weather, Music, Clock, Email all running on the desktop in the foreground while I am working, no need to switch to another screen to see it. I prefer it that way, but that's just me.

[. . .]

The Start Screen provides a way for you to see all of that information on one screen, due to what can be shown on tiles.That's the beauty of it. You could have your Start Screen up on one screen, with all of that, and then another screen free for a couple of applications.

[Hum]

I don't hate Windows 8 -- I'm simply ignoring it.

[Panda X]

That video always reminds me of those Longhorn videos from 2003.