Windows 8 is the new Windows XP

[Astra.Xtreme]

So please do explain how Win XP will make computing faster/easier in the business world. And while you're at it, consider that 95% of people out there barely know how to do anything on a computer except open an internet browser or "hunt and peck" and email together.

See what I did there?

That doesn't account for any of the actual context... Did you even read what I said? If you could navigate around 95, you could navigate around XP with almost no learning curve. Like I said, 8 is a massive change from any version of Windows, which is exactly why people will have major issues with it.

I remember the upgrade from 95 (or maybe it was 2000) to XP and besides the colors being different and things being "rounded", there was very little to get used to.

[encarta]

Keep dreaming. XP was basically the only choice back then, people have Windows 7 now.

EDIT: I see who the OP is.

[Dot Matrix]

That doesn't account for any of the actual context... Did you even read what I said? If you could navigate around 95, you could navigate around XP with almost no learning curve. Like I said, 8 is a massive change from any version of Windows, which is exactly why people will have major issues with it.

I remember the upgrade from 95 (or maybe it was 2000) to XP and besides the colors being different and things being "rounded", there was very little to get used to.

Yes, I did read what you said. But there was a learning curve with XP. Especially after SP2. There were new systems in it that required learning, and training. Same with Vista, if you could navigate XP, you could navigate Vista. That still didn't stop the most hardened Windows users from complaining about the changes, especially the cleaned up Explorer UI.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Don't mind me. I've posted my thoughts on Windows 8 compared to Windows XP several times previously, so I'm just going to sit back and watch this "debate" go round and round in circles. Again.

[Astra.Xtreme]

Yes, I did read what you said. But there was a learning curve with XP. Especially after SP2. There were new systems in it that required learning, and training. Same with Vista, if you could navigate XP, you could navigate Vista. That still didn't stop the most hardened Windows users from complaining about the changes, especially the cleaned up Explorer UI.

Why would there be a learning curve after SP2? Service packs don't change anything in the UI. I'm sure there was training involved for power users, but that's not who we are talking about here. Normal users figured out how to use XP will minimal effort. It won't be that way with 8.

And the reason Vista got a bad vibe was because of driver issues that made it an unstable mess from the beginning. It was fine after the fixes, but the reputation was already destroyed by then.

[Dot Matrix]

Why would there be a learning curve after SP2? Service packs don't change anything in the UI. I'm sure there was training involved for power users, but that's not who we are talking about here. Normal users figured out how to use XP will minimal effort. It won't be that way with 8.

By SP2, XP acquired a wide range of new technologies, new Control Panel widgets, and the like. Remember, XP RTM had NONE of the security technologies it does today. The Windows Firewall, and Default Programs features came in SP1, and SP2 added the (then) new Security Center. These were all features which required training and resources to deal with.

[Astra.Xtreme]

By SP2, XP acquired a wide range of new technologies, new Control Panel widgets, and the like. Remember, XP RTM had NONE of the security technologies it does today. The Windows Firewall, and Default Programs features came in SP1, and SP2 added the (then) new Security Center. These were all features which required training and resources to deal with.

I know. But why would that affect anything for the normal user? All of this is completely transparent to them and doesn't affect how somebody goes on with their normal work day.

[Knife Party]

this is probably one of the most retarded and ill logically crafted Windows 8 "info pieces" drivel. Windows 8 for the desktop right now is all PR and no substance, its all glam and no actual useful software being developed. So sick of seeing these articles praising W8, its current state is subpar, very subpar. Metro is garbage and it will be 2 years from now if things look like they do now. As for the desktop, don't get me started on that mess.

[spaceelf]

I have to laugh at anybody who posts a comment like that and is too lazy to explain their thoughts... A lot.

Cool. I do it all the time. Laugh away.

What would I care about the business world?

For the consumer/power user world, having the common power tools available by right clicking at the lower left is fantastic. Will save me a lot of time when I use them.

Having the full on reset will save me from OEM crapware madness. I'll be able to buy a machine and decrapify it instantly.

Having a much bigger start screen will save me from having to search for every other program, or having to go into folders for everything or having 300 Uninstall Programs or other extra links in there which nobody actually uses.

Having all WinRT apps using proper hardware acceleration will get me away from the GDI apps I still use (if there were better alternatives in those app categories I would use them, but there aren't.)

Are you saying people are too stupid to learn to right click and use hot corners? Because that about sums up what you need to know about WinRT apps and the start screen.

[LaP]

The "average user" didn't know or care about the differences between the 95 and NT code bases.. all they saw was their stuff running nicely on 9x, upgraded to XP and all of a sudden a lot of software wouldn't work anymore.

Yeah that was a problem with XP at the beginning. When i got xp i was not even able to connect to the internet with my adsl modem (isp win 9x app to do it was still not ported to nt and xp did not natively support it). I had to use a small untrusted 3rd party app until XP natively support it (isp never ported the app). Windows was going from a consumer os to an enterprise os converted as a consumer os. Many of the consumer os win9x apps did not work and was never converted to nt. My printer software to know how much ink was remaining never actually worked with xp and up and was never ported.

What ultimately "saved" xp is it took so long for MS to finish Vista and in the end Vista had exactly the same compatibility problem when it came out. Had xp has his Windows 7 it would have been less successful (sorry if Had xp has is the wrong way to say it english is not my native language).

But i still fail to see the link between XP and 8. Both are not facing the same problem. 8 is not facing a compatibility problem (like XP or Vista was). it is facing a usability problem. And we don't know yet if 8 will be quickly followed by an improved 9 like Vista was or if MS will give it time to mature like XP.

It was a nice read but i simply can't consider it to be all that relevant. Yes companies are slow to update. We all know that here. It has nothing to do with the popularity of an os. But in its current state a lot of companies might very well skip entirely windows 8 because of the training involved and wait for a more refined Windows 9 experience.

This is not adressed in what the op posted.

[aviator189]

+1

[jakem1]

OP is wrong. Windows 7 is the new XP. Businesses are still in the process of rolling out Win7. They'll be using that until it's end of life.

Sad but true.

You're comparing apples with oranges. The article isn't about business adoption of Windows 8, it's about how Windows 8 isn't the first OS to be initially derided.

[Astra.Xtreme]

Cool. I do it all the time. Laugh away.

What would I care about the business world?

For the consumer/power user world, having the common power tools available by right clicking at the lower left is fantastic. Will save me a lot of time when I use them.

Having the full on reset will save me from OEM crapware madness. I'll be able to buy a machine and decrapify it instantly.

Having a much bigger start screen will save me from having to search for every other program, or having to go into folders for everything or having 300 Uninstall Programs or other extra links in there which nobody actually uses.

Having all WinRT apps using proper hardware acceleration will get me away from the GDI apps I still use (if there were better alternatives in those app categories I would use them, but there aren't.)

Are you saying people are too stupid to learn to right click and use hot corners? Because that about sums up what you need to know about WinRT apps and the start screen.

You do realize this thread is about the business world, right? And power users make up the very very small minority of PC users.

People have gotten used to the typical Windows UI for the past 20 years, and taking that away without any option to bring it back is a terrible thing to force on people, especially for the business world. People are used to the desktop and start button, and forcing people to open Metro is a waste of time. And you can't expect most people to figure out the keyboard shortcuts which people are "supposed" to do now. For people like you and I, it's not a big deal. But for the other 95%, it won't happen.

[spaceelf]

You do realize this thread is about the business world, right? And power users make up the very very small minority of PC users.

People have gotten used to the typical Windows UI for the past 20 years, and taking that away without any option to bring it back is a terrible thing to force on people, especially for the business world. People are used to the desktop and start button, and forcing people to open Metro is a waste of time. And you can't expect most people to figure out the keyboard shortcuts which people are "supposed" to do now. For people like you and I, it's not a big deal. But for the other 95%, it won't happen.

Are they? I didn't use any keyboard shortcuts except alt tab when I used win8.

Also, reread the original post. It's not about the business world.

[xankazo]

Very nice read! Very spot on too!

I used to be on the hate bandwagon until I finally tried Windows 8 Enterprise Evaluation. The Metro interface is a nice addition to a very solid desktop experience. Winkey+D, that's all it takes to jump from the Metro to desktop and people find it a "deal breaker"? Incredible!

[techfreak]

Very good post and historically accurate. I remember using Windows 98 in a corporate environment in 2003 (while my home machine had Windows XP since its release), and the XP upgrade delay was more problematic than the upgrade to Windows 7.

However I doubt Windows 8, a.k.a. Windows NT 6.2, will have significant foray in the enterprise. Simply because of timing, and also due to the fact that the desktop client matters less (current releases of business apps are browser agnostic and work on a variety of platforms). Windows 7 is finally being deployed on a wide-scale, and these deployments took a lot of planning and infrastructure changes. By the time cycle begin anew, Microsoft will have released the Windows follow-up to the server and client. By then the paradigm may have changed again. God know what we'll be using then. Server 2012, on the other end, will see an earlier success.

And at the end of the day, its still good 'ol Windows.

[Astra.Xtreme]

Are they? I didn't use any keyboard shortcuts except alt tab when I used win8.

Also, reread the original post. It's not about the business world.

Doing everything with the mouse in 8 is much much slower than doing the same tasks in 7 due to the extra steps involved. Using keyboard shortcuts makes it a little closer, which is what a lot of people are telling people do to. Personally, I think constantly switching from mouse to keyboard is annoying, but apparently it's the new "thing" to do.

The word "business" is used many times in the OP. And many of those articles are about business adoption. Did you even read the whole original post?

[spaceelf]

Yes I did. It's about adoption by consumers AND businesses. So, basically, everyone.

And what extra steps? You lost me there.

[Stetson]

XP was successful because they spent years and years improving it with multiple large service packs.

They could do that with Windows 8, just keep improving it over 6-7 years, or they could do like they've done for the last couple of OS releases and just come out with new OS in 2-3 years.

[Dot Matrix]

Very good post and historically accurate. I remember using Windows 98 in a corporate environment in 2003 (while my home machine had Windows XP since its release), and the XP upgrade delay was more problematic than the upgrade to Windows 7.

However I doubt Windows 8, a.k.a. Windows NT 6.2, will have significant foray in the enterprise. Simply because of timing, and also due to the fact that the desktop client matters less (current releases of business apps are browser agnostic and work on a variety of platforms). Windows 7 is finally being deployed on a wide-scale, and these deployments took a lot of planning and infrastructure changes. By the time cycle begin anew, Microsoft will have released the Windows follow-up to the server and client. By then the paradigm may have changed again. God know what we'll be using then. Server 2012, on the other end, will see an earlier success.

And at the end of the day, its still good 'ol Windows.

Maybe not for Betty the secretary, but enterprise developers will sure be running it.

[LaP]

Maybe not for Betty the secretary, but enterprise developers will sure be running it.

Dev making native apps for consumers yes. Web devs like me i don't think so. We just upgraded to 7 from XP ...

[Astra.Xtreme]

Yes I did. It's about adoption by consumers AND businesses. So, basically, everyone.

And what extra steps? You lost me there.

Shut down options take extra clicks, moving to the exact location in the corners is tedious, multi-tasking on multi-monitors is difficult, etc. Those are just a few things I deal with on a daily basis that is wasting more of my time. Though having Start8 installed now will solve these problems. I like the idea of Metro (or Modern) for a tablet, but on a PC, it just gets in the way too often.

[spaceelf]

Shut down is the one thing I'll agree with you on. That was...kind of a stupid decision. But it's not like I shut down my comp every ten minutes so whatever works.

[Astra.Xtreme]

Shut down is the one thing I'll agree with you on. That was...kind of a stupid decision. But it's not like I shut down my comp every ten minutes so whatever works.

Yeah, I don't think that's a big deal either. I also don't like that you can't edit the properties of an icon on the Metro screen. You have to physically find the file/shortcut in Explorer and then go to properties. Also not too big of a deal though.

[AJerman]

Yeah, I don't think that's a big deal either. I also don't like that you can't edit the properties of an icon on the Metro screen. You have to physically find the file/shortcut in Explorer and then go to properties. Also not too big of a deal though.

Expanding that... That's the thing. The whole start screen deal is perhaps one of the biggest core features of Windows 8. It's the front and center view of the OS. It's what you see when you start up, it's what you see whenever you want to open another program, and if MS had their way and could magically convert everything to Metro, it would be all you'd see period, but the Start screen is so incredibly poorly designed. It feels like a prototype version of what they will eventually use, but shockingly it's their final design. MS always seems to need to release one version that sucks, then a second version that's what the first should have been whenever they redesign something. My biggest complaint about the start screen is the inability to zoom on the tiles. My main system at home is running on my TV in my living room. It's a 10 foot experience, and Windows 8 fails horribly at it. It seems like it might be an ideal task for Windows 8. A big, easy to read start screen. But on the contrary, I can't make the tiles bigger so they are easier to see and better to use with that 10 foot experience. It's just poorly designed, and no amount of fanboyism is going to change that. The start screen concept COULD be okay if it were far improved over what it is now, but what it is now is a beta at best. IF the start screen UI survives into the next version of Windows, which I doubt, I could see it becoming drastically improved, and maybe even usable.

And I'm always someone who loves new versions of any software, embraces new features, even if they require relearning, because usually they mean improvement. I'm the one that was defending 95 and XP and all that when people complained. You're right, some people complain to complain just to complain. Some people complain because they hate any change or anything new. Then there are those of us complaining because we know the computer industry enough to know that Windows 8 is just plain not up to par. Jamming a tablet UI down the throats of desktop users is by far the worst decision ever. Being able to run a desktop on the tablet version, and being able to use both on a Pro tablet is an amazing idea. They just haven't ironed out the details of how it's going to work. There needs to be a clear separation in the UIs. I understand they want metro apps to run on Windows 8 desktops, but the whole metro design idea is poorly conceived and cumbersome. Can it be great, will it be good eventually, sure, it'll grow into it's own, but that usually happens around the time of the next release. Windows 9 might finally be decent. Windows 8 will undoubtedly be another Vista. Something that plenty of people used, and plenty of people still use, but nobody really liked it. It's a good example of the last time they changed the UI and got it wrong the first try. Windows 7 turned out fantastic after that. Same with Windows Phone 7->8. WP7 was alright, but WP8 is what it should have been the first time.