Is Windows 8 behind Windows 7 in pre-launch interest?

There is no doubt that Windows 8 is perhaps the biggest launch for the Windows OS family since, well Windows 95 nearly 17 years ago. Now, there's a claim that there is less interest in Windows 8 than there was of Windows 7 in the days prior to the launch of both operating systems.

Computerworld.com reports that, according to the latest stats from Net Applications, 0.18 percent of PCs around the world now have Windows 8 installed. Of that number, just 0.2 percent of Windows-based PCs had Windows 8 running on their hard drives. The site says that in June 2009, four months prior to the launch of Windows 7, the pre-release version was installed on 0.75 percent of all PCs and 0.8 percent of all Windows-based PCs.

While the numbers may be correct, they may not tell the whole story; perhaps the biggest issue is Windows Vista. Launched for consumers in January 2007, it's considered to be one of the worst, if not the worst, Windows version released by Microsoft. Lots of bugs and hardware driver issues kept many people from updating their Windows XP PCs or buying new PCs with Windows Vista.

When the pre-release versions of Windows 7 came out, it was clear that it was such a big improvement over Vista that many PC owners decided to jump ship quickly. Windows 7 quickly surpassed that of Vista and is either ahead of, or very close to, Windows XP (depending on which stat service you believe).

Now Windows 7 is such a success, it may be keeping many PCs owners from downloading and installing the pre-release versions of Windows 8, even if it is a solid OS. With Microsoft offering a $39.99 price for early Windows 8 adopters, it may take off pretty quickly once it is officially released.

Source: Computerworld.com

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Image content recognition, crowd-sourcing and kiwis

Next Story

TechSpot: HP Omni 27 Quad All-In-One Review

62 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Microsoft Press Announcement: Tekzilla shows off some of the updates and explain why you should upgrade to Release Preview from Consumer preview if you're running Windows 8! [HD]

Link: revision3.com/.../e3-2012-microsoft-press-announcement

Microsoft is gambling with the Metro UI and apps. Also by bringing it now to the desktop. This can go either way, and currently I think it will backlash.

Mortis said,
Win 8 = Tablet OS
Tablet OS on a desktop = FAIL.

Simple as that.

Data probably shows that most people are far from power users. They are simple users that just want to do a few things. They will love Metro. It's the power users that have a problem with it, isn't that what the desktop icon is for?

I can admit that it's clunky, but fail? Nah. Seriously though, what were your thoughts on Windows 3.1 when we came from DOS at the time? How is this all that different? Oh, never mind.

Mortis said,
Win 8 = Tablet OS
Tablet OS on a desktop = FAIL.

Simple as that.


weird, i use it as a desktop. and im wondering why a desktop was not so mousefriendly for years.
all the clicking to do stuff untill you get a hernia. they drastically reduced amount of clicks needed for most basic tasks

Only problem I had with Vista and it was a big one, was instability. On the hundreds of computers I have worked with over the years, Vista is constantly having trouble with the "not responding", inability start programs before all the icons show up near the clock etc. etc. etc. Other that that, my calls for viruses decreased over 50%, and the Start Search menu completely changed the way I use my computer, in a good way.

What was really annoying were MS apologetic commercials that said "we listened to our customers, you said you wanted a computer that didn't crash and wasn't slow". So pathetic. My god if Windows 7 delivered on anything, it was certainly that. Win 8 is far less stable so far for me than 7. I hope they address these issues asap. I think Win7 preview was further along then Win 8 in certain areas, but I always look forward to major system changes. This one will be a scary one for many people.

I agree with Condere - also the prelaunch numbers are low because I see that "Power Users" are the most resistant to change, and have been the most vocal about hating Windows 8 and metro.

Here is the problem, and it is a simple human one.

Many if not most people make life changing decisions right there on the spot, on a whim and a prayer, and first impressions made during just a few seconds worth of time.

To make an analogy, read any article/guide/book on job interviews and they will tell you that you must make a good first impression. Otherwise it becomes very hard to change the interviewers opinion that you made by simply walking through their door.

Windows 8 has this same problem, and while the direction MS is taking isn't all that bad and likely for the good down the road, the sudden and drastic GUI changes are going to have many people within minutes of starting up their new PC very frustrated and wanting their "PC" back.

This is the experience we've been having with the clients from the IT shop that I work for. We lend them laptops with Win8 installed preparing them and giving them the option of going to Win8 down the road when their current PCs (many of which are XPs) have to go.

I can go on and on with the stubborn people.

Working in the service field for as long as I have, I know the world is full of people who are going to make it difficult for themselves and the people that will be trying to help them.

I suppose the way i look at it is, when Windows 7 was in Beta/RC stage and builds were getting leaked i was installing them a could see a very nice operating system to use day in day out. As soon as the availability to pre-order it became available my name was down and i waited, looking forward to when i could get my copy of my own.
The same has been true of Windows 8, iv`e used (and still do) the DP, CP and RP but i just don`t feel like i wan`t a copy as soon as it`s released. Don`t get me wrong, i don`t totally dislike what Microsoft has done, infact they have done a pretty good job of integrating a useable touch input onto the windows system which will enable them to create a new revenue stream via the Store.
If i had a tablet or other touch enabled device which supported Windows 8 i would probably wan`t a copy, but i haven`t at the moment allthough i may get one after RTM.
The buzz just isn`t there for me. When the postman delivered 7 (it came a few days early due to postal strikes) i was excited, pretty sad i know!
Windows 8, i can take it or leave it, it doesn`t offer me personally enough to get me to part with my money and upgrade.

Riggers said,
I suppose the way i look at it is, when Windows 7 was in Beta/RC stage and builds were getting leaked i was installing them a could see a very nice operating system to use day in day out. As soon as the availability to pre-order it became available my name was down and i waited, looking forward to when i could get my copy of my own.
The same has been true of Windows 8, iv`e used (and still do) the DP, CP and RP but i just don`t feel like i wan`t a copy as soon as it`s released. Don`t get me wrong, i don`t totally dislike what Microsoft has done, infact they have done a pretty good job of integrating a useable touch input onto the windows system which will enable them to create a new revenue stream via the Store.
If i had a tablet or other touch enabled device which supported Windows 8 i would probably wan`t a copy, but i haven`t at the moment allthough i may get one after RTM.
The buzz just isn`t there for me. When the postman delivered 7 (it came a few days early due to postal strikes) i was excited, pretty sad i know!
Windows 8, i can take it or leave it, it doesn`t offer me personally enough to get me to part with my money and upgrade.

considering you seem to've bought a Win7 license. And upgrading it to a Win8 license is just 15$. And you seem to like the OS... whats the problem?

Shadowzz said,

considering you seem to've bought a Win7 license. And upgrading it to a Win8 license is just 15$. And you seem to like the OS... whats the problem?

Iv`e got several Windows 7 licenses and quite a few Vista and XP ones so i will probably upgrade at least one. It`s just i`m not that bothered or hungry to use it on a desktop or laptop whereas i really wanted 7 on release even though i`d been using it for a while...
If i get a tablet though, that`s a different story
Also the $15 upgrade is for only licenses (pc`s) bought between now and RTM, i will probably just use the $40 (or in my case probably £40 which is only £5 less than i paid for my first copy of 7HP) upgrade from the RP....

Lots of bugs and hardware driver issues kept many people from updating their Windows XP PCs or buying new PCs with Windows Vista.

What are those "lots of bugs" that people keep talking about?

dodgetigger said,

What are those "lots of bugs" that people keep talking about?

Driver Problems, Data Execution Prevention out of control (DEP), and X program "has stopped working"

not interested in windows 8 for desktop...

the only windows 8 device i'm looking forward to is surface.

There is no doubt that Windows 8 is perhaps the biggest launch for the Windows OS family since, well Windows 95 nearly 17 years ago.

depends on how you look at it...

if your going more by visual/interface changes.. then yeah, i would pretty much agree as this seems to be one of the bigger/biggest changes to the overall Windows (from a more obvious perspective) in a while (besides when Windows XP first introduced stability to PC's for the average user which was obviously a big leap forward).

but if your not going by interface... then Windows XP was pretty much the last big boost for Windows due to it being the first stable OS made for the average computer user.

so basically i would say it's probably the biggest for Microsoft since Windows XP but mostly because of it's interface change otherwise it would be just another Windows 7 spin off for the most part. so i guess they had to try something more drastic like they did to try and grab peoples attention and they are probably slightly desperate to get people to adopt Windows 8 due to those $39.99 promotions for it.

ThaCrip said,

depends on how you look at it...

if your going more by visual/interface changes.. then yeah, i would pretty much agree as this seems to be one of the bigger/biggest changes to the overall Windows (from a more obvious perspective) in a while (besides when Windows XP first introduced stability to PC's for the average user which was obviously a big leap forward).

but if your not going by interface... then Windows XP was pretty much the last big boost for Windows due to it being the first stable OS made for the average computer user.

so basically i would say it's probably the biggest for Microsoft since Windows XP but mostly because of it's interface change otherwise it would be just another Windows 7 spin off for the most part. so i guess they had to try something more drastic like they did to try and grab peoples attention and they are probably slightly desperate to get people to adopt Windows 8 due to those $39.99 promotions for it.


WinXP was a stability increase after SP1. Before it died on me many times, video drivers not working, or crashing if they did.It didnt feel more stable then WinME for me at the time. Plus a resource hog. Most of my time on the PC, was gaming time WinXP's demand for 256mb minimum was quite high back then, it was all i had WinXP ran slower then WinME and didnt feel more stable at all. This all changed at SP1 tho. altho i also got a new system not long after SP1 release

We cannot estimate the use of Windows 8 and compare it with the Windows 7 that was in beta 4 years ago base on percentage.

Today's global internet users are above 2.1 billion, so 0.18% of 2.1 billion it may be BY FAR greater of 0.75% of whatever the global Internet Users/PC Users was when Windows 7 was in beta in 2008 early 2009.

even without reading the article and only reading the topic i see it like this...

with Windows 7 everyone was looking forward to it because of the bad rep Vista had at the time. Windows 7 basically got it right, it's pretty much the new standard like Windows XP was for ages.

with Windows 8 i don't think anyone is really in a hurry to get it because of how good Windows 7 already is and it's modern enough of a OS to.

p.s. i have not used Windows 8 yet (ill get it and try it once it's RTM's) but i have a feeling iguanas might have a point as on the surface it appears they really messed up Windows 8's interface but it 'might' be good once you get used to it. but in the end, i can't see me dumping Windows 7 for Windows 8, at least not soon.

ThaCrip said,
even without reading the article and only reading the topic i see it like this...

with Windows 7 everyone was looking forward to it because of the bad rep Vista had at the time. Windows 7 basically got it right, it's pretty much the new standard like Windows XP was for ages.

with Windows 8 i don't think anyone is really in a hurry to get it because of how good Windows 7 already is and it's modern enough of a OS to.

p.s. i have not used Windows 8 yet (ill get it and try it once it's RTM's) but i have a feeling iguanas might have a point as on the surface it appears they really messed up Windows 8's interface but it 'might' be good once you get used to it. but in the end, i can't see me dumping Windows 7 for Windows 8, at least not soon.


WinXP was **** at release tho, Win7 was better at Beta then any previous release of windows at RTM.

Well, the display drivers support makes it worse. Apparently our well performing older graphic cards don't deserve support from ATI

Varemenos said,
Well, the display drivers support makes it worse. Apparently our well performing older graphic cards don't deserve support from ATI

Maybe because its AMD now.

Avatar Roku said,
Windows Vista is not even close to being one of the worst OSes. Windows ME was the worst.

i basically agree with you although Vista did get a bad rep from early on and it basically stuck with it for a while but i imagine once SP1 was released it was a pretty good OS overall. but with it basically being a watered down version of Windows 7 there is not much reason to use it nowadays.

Avatar Roku said,
Windows Vista is not even close to being one of the worst OSes. Windows ME was the worst.
Na, I found Windows ME very stable and worked well, stayed with it until XP. Vista was a joke, even pre-installed on Dell machines it would spend 10% of it's time not responding and if you dare to change hardware drivers near impossible to find something that worked.
I know friends that had Vista made them migrate to Apple

Avatar Roku said,
Windows Vista is not even close to being one of the worst OSes. Windows ME was the worst.

Honestly I never had any issue with ME......... Vista on the other hand had issues; SP1 improved the situation a lot but...... the damage was done.

Exosphere said,
Na, I found Windows ME very stable and worked well, stayed with it until XP. Vista was a joke, even pre-installed on Dell machines it would spend 10% of it's time not responding and if you dare to change hardware drivers near impossible to find something that worked.
I know friends that had Vista made them migrate to Apple

one of the few with similar experience on ME but not on Vista doh
WinME ran like a charm, it crashed LESS then Win98 (still crashed a few times a week, back then that was normal ) and the system recovery did the trick about 50% of the times, faster then a reinstall of Win98
But I ran Vista from the start. But 64bit, dual core and 4GB of ram. It ran like a charm. However 90%+ of the Vista systems I encountered, where 32bit systems with 1GB ram, very ocasional 2gb (1 out 10 i guess) on single core CPU's..... Yes, Vista was not designed for these hardwares. It ran like ****. mainly because of 32bit tho.
Still today, win7 is sluggish and a slag when running on 1gb, single core 32bit.
Currently, Vista is faster then Win7 at many tasks. Win7 is slowed down ALLOT after SP1 and allot of the updates.

Also, people still says that metro is a mess. Thats because they didnt want to take the 2 weeks (thats the learning curve it have) to learn how to use it. After that... you can never go back to a start menu again. Feels so like last century, also too slow to find anything. Its really a mess (the start menu i say).
Im using since DP, when they removed the start button on CP i felt very bad, and thought of made a big mistake by installing on my main work computer (Im a system administrator for xerox now (worked in ibm and hp too)) (telling this because there is a saying that power users hate W8, and i think i am a REAL POWER user) but after the learning curve, and being able to customize my start screen... There is NO WAY i can ever come back to a start menu based OS.
Take the chance, learn it, and embrace, or keep using an old and slow OS like 7 or move to linux.

iguanas said,
Also, people still says that metro is a mess. Thats because they didnt want to take the 2 weeks (thats the learning curve it have) to learn how to use it. After that... you can never go back to a start menu again. Feels so like last century, also too slow to find anything. Its really a mess (the start menu i say).
Im using since DP, when they removed the start button on CP i felt very bad, and thought of made a big mistake by installing on my main work computer (Im a system administrator for xerox now (worked in ibm and hp too)) (telling this because there is a saying that power users hate W8, and i think i am a REAL POWER user) but after the learning curve, and being able to customize my start screen... There is NO WAY i can ever come back to a start menu based OS.
Take the chance, learn it, and embrace, or keep using an old and slow OS like 7 or move to linux.

I've been using the Windows 8 versions for a while now.. I know how to use Metro. I simply love it on my tablet, and hate it on my Laptop..

On my laptop, and on a desktop, my use of the start menu is VERY efficient.. I have stuff pinned as needed, the Programs folder is organized.
I find the Start Screen is far less so.. It's fine if you just use a few programs, but more than that, it's a real hindrance..

Also, and this is something that really bugs me, is the Start Screen covers the whole screen.. If I want to open up the calc, or notepad while watching a vid, or keeping an eye in IRC, or whatever, I like being able to do that..

Two weeks?! Please, maybe 2 days. In 2 weeks you would have learned how to use every damn feature in Win8.

iguanas said,
Also, people still says that metro is a mess. Thats because they didnt want to take the 2 weeks (thats the learning curve it have) to learn how to use it. After that... you can never go back to a start menu again. Feels so like last century, also too slow to find anything. Its really a mess (the start menu i say).
Im using since DP, when they removed the start button on CP i felt very bad, and thought of made a big mistake by installing on my main work computer (Im a system administrator for xerox now (worked in ibm and hp too)) (telling this because there is a saying that power users hate W8, and i think i am a REAL POWER user) but after the learning curve, and being able to customize my start screen... There is NO WAY i can ever come back to a start menu based OS.
Take the chance, learn it, and embrace, or keep using an old and slow OS like 7 or move to linux.

georgevella said,
Two weeks?! Please, maybe 2 days. In 2 weeks you would have learned how to use every damn feature in Win8.


yes, every one, as i had too.

Ryoken said,

I've been using the Windows 8 versions for a while now.. I know how to use Metro. I simply love it on my tablet, and hate it on my Laptop..

On my laptop, and on a desktop, my use of the start menu is VERY efficient.. I have stuff pinned as needed, the Programs folder is organized.
I find the Start Screen is far less so.. It's fine if you just use a few programs, but more than that, it's a real hindrance..

Also, and this is something that really bugs me, is the Start Screen covers the whole screen.. If I want to open up the calc, or notepad while watching a vid, or keeping an eye in IRC, or whatever, I like being able to do that..

win+r, calc,enter. Its actually faster than going to start menu
I spent 99.9% of day on desktop, and when i go to metro, i find things i have pinned there so easily that i dont think i spend more than 1 to 3 seconds.
3 seconds top if i dont have the program pinned.
I have to admin i dont use a single metro app. But metro does not bother me, i have most important apps pinned in taskbar (chrome, file explorer and outlook) and some RDP shortcuts and ticketing software on the desktop.

iguanas said,

win+r, calc,enter. Its actually faster than going to start menu
I spent 99.9% of day on desktop, and when i go to metro, i find things i have pinned there so easily that i dont think i spend more than 1 to 3 seconds.
3 seconds top if i dont have the program pinned.
I have to admin i dont use a single metro app. But metro does not bother me, i have most important apps pinned in taskbar (chrome, file explorer and outlook) and some RDP shortcuts and ticketing software on the desktop.


That's not faster than the two clicks it takes to open the Calc.
Or the two clicks it takes to open Notepad.


I have ~10 things pinned to the taskbar.. another 15-20 pinned to the Start Menu.. I can access them all faster with my mouse in the small area where the start menu is, than typing it in, or scrolling in Metro.

Trust me, It's not my first day

Ryoken said,

That's not faster than the two clicks it takes to open the Calc.
Or the two clicks it takes to open Notepad.


I have ~10 things pinned to the taskbar.. another 15-20 pinned to the Start Menu.. I can access them all faster with my mouse in the small area where the start menu is, than typing it in, or scrolling in Metro.

Trust me, It's not my first day

it is OK. But its you that are making it slower. if u were on 8 and did it (win + c + a +enter) would notice that it is faster than your 2 clicks (go to start, go to the most accesed app (calc)
Also I truly think You can actually access pinned apps as fast as start menu pinned in metro (never had 15 or 20 also, but it really permit that amount?), put those 20 most used in one grooup, in the first one, maybe on the second group.the first one. But as i said. People tends to complaint without even learning. Anyways...
You will have to adapt, or leave the ship, not the other way.
For better or worse, start menu is dead, and if metro don't do it. something else will arrive. I don't see Sinofsky team reviving start menu.
Also its preferences, i think you will find your free substitute for start menu if you really want, and all kind of hacks will go out for make 8, feel like 7. But the truth is that is a much better OS beside the controvertial gui.
Have a good day.

georgevella said,
Two weeks?! Please, maybe 2 days. In 2 weeks you would have learned how to use every damn feature in Win8.

Although "learnt to use" and "Liked them" have two very different meanings....

Ryoken said,

I've been using the Windows 8 versions for a while now.. I know how to use Metro. I simply love it on my tablet, and hate it on my Laptop..

On my laptop, and on a desktop, my use of the start menu is VERY efficient.. I have stuff pinned as needed, the Programs folder is organized.
I find the Start Screen is far less so.. It's fine if you just use a few programs, but more than that, it's a real hindrance..

Also, and this is something that really bugs me, is the Start Screen covers the whole screen.. If I want to open up the calc, or notepad while watching a vid, or keeping an eye in IRC, or whatever, I like being able to do that..


what win+r calc isn't enough? Is that too involved for you?

Ryoken said,

I've been using the Windows 8 versions for a while now.. I know how to use Metro. I simply love it on my tablet, and hate it on my Laptop..

On my laptop, and on a desktop, my use of the start menu is VERY efficient.. I have stuff pinned as needed, the Programs folder is organized.
I find the Start Screen is far less so.. It's fine if you just use a few programs, but more than that, it's a real hindrance..

Also, and this is something that really bugs me, is the Start Screen covers the whole screen.. If I want to open up the calc, or notepad while watching a vid, or keeping an eye in IRC, or whatever, I like being able to do that..

Yeah the whole full screen thing is my biggest issue. I'll have to install start8 or some other type of launcher, and I hope the run command isn't removed

Either way I think it'll be a niche OS and won't gain much market share from 7 or even XP for that matter.

randomevent said,

what win+r calc isn't enough? Is that too involved for you?

Don't be a smart ass, you know as well as anyone else sometimes you only know only part of the command your looking for, and the start menu is handy for that.
Unless the new run command dialog has auto completion and indexing; I don't think it was in DP.

iguanas said,

it is OK. But its you that are making it slower. if u were on 8 and did it (win + c + a +enter) would notice that it is faster than your 2 clicks (go to start, go to the most accesed app (calc)
Also I truly think You can actually access pinned apps as fast as start menu pinned in metro (never had 15 or 20 also, but it really permit that amount?), put those 20 most used in one grooup, in the first one, maybe on the second group.the first one. But as i said. People tends to complaint without even learning. Anyways...
You will have to adapt, or leave the ship, not the other way.
For better or worse, start menu is dead, and if metro don't do it. something else will arrive. I don't see Sinofsky team reviving start menu.
Also its preferences, i think you will find your free substitute for start menu if you really want, and all kind of hacks will go out for make 8, feel like 7. But the truth is that is a much better OS beside the controvertial gui.
Have a good day.

Wow, you expect the average user to remember win+x+y+z=bootysnatch? Ok high-and-mighty.

To them that looks like x+1256.65335F(4796)*y=768+563(rx+tx/56.34563)

Not a chance in hell they can remember all those shortcuts. Note the word "casual user" or "business user" not computer programmer, geek, nerd, hacker, or anything of that sort. With 500 other things on their plate daily, most people don't care or want to learn a bunch of ctrl+alt+win+x+del+tab+enter commands. They're not computer gamers, just food for thought.

KCRic said,
Wow, you expect the average user to remember win+x+y+z=bootysnatch? Ok high-and-mighty.

To them that looks like x+1256.65335F(4796)*y=768+563(rx+tx/56.34563)

Not a chance in hell they can remember all those shortcuts. Note the word "casual user" or "business user" not computer programmer, geek, nerd, hacker, or anything of that sort. With 500 other things on their plate daily, most people don't care or want to learn a bunch of ctrl+alt+win+x+del+tab+enter commands. They're not computer gamers, just food for thought.


casual user will learn faster to use metro then you probably.
at first i was like 'huh' and 'meh' but after using it for a few days, it all seem to feel way more natural then that little start button at the corner. i have 3 corners for that now! and dont even have to click anything for it to open up a small menu (that is surprisingly unintrusive) and considering i mainly used the start menu for winkey+type what i wanted. Looking for apps, games or anything is a big NO, so much stuff installed takes ages to dig through. Just a few programs pinned tho. But i've noticed i often dont even bother typing, as the mouse in metro is not much slower finding what i need, with the added moving my hand to the keyboard and back time, the speed might even be just as fast by just using my mouse. This surely is NOT the case for Win7, unless you pin everything. (i like the more classic look of start menu instead of those fugly buttons. yay text and the start menu maxxed at 20 i think)

abysal said,

Don't be a smart ass, you know as well as anyone else sometimes you only know only part of the command your looking for, and the start menu is handy for that.
Unless the new run command dialog has auto completion and indexing; I don't think it was in DP.


yeah I think we have win+f for that still!

Telling me not to be a smartass is like telling water not to be wet.

randomevent said,

yeah I think we have win+f for that still!

Telling me not to be a smartass is like telling water not to be wet.

You fail to see the point. The issue is with having a full screen interface come up and hide everything you're working on. With a start menu or 3rd party search run tool (like launchy), you can continue multitasking like a camp without being distracting by full screen switching.

abysal said,

You fail to see the point. The issue is with having a full screen interface come up and hide everything you're working on. With a start menu or 3rd party search run tool (like launchy), you can continue multitasking like a camp without being distracting by full screen switching.


You don't actually need to go full screen to use things pinned to the taskbar or desktop shortcuts or if you really want to go wild I'm sure you can even make a folder with shortcuts you need and pin that to the taskbar. It's like rocket science apparently! I'm a genius!

randomevent said,

You don't actually need to go full screen to use things pinned to the taskbar or desktop shortcuts or if you really want to go wild I'm sure you can even make a folder with shortcuts you need and pin that to the taskbar. It's like rocket science apparently! I'm a genius!

The whole point of the discussion we were having was regarding going full screen while wanting to search for, and or launch something, whether it be a command / app / or document. Riddle me this batman; can you do so without going full screen into start / find screen?

Obviously if I had something pinned or on my desktop, I wouldn't have to search for it would I genius?

abysal said,

The whole point of the discussion we were having was regarding going full screen while wanting to search for, and or launch something, whether it be a command / app / or document. Riddle me this batman; can you do so without going full screen into start / find screen?

Obviously if I had something pinned or on my desktop, I wouldn't have to search for it would I genius?


So your point is that there is no possible way you'll ever be able to have everything you use at your fingertips without going to the start screen? Sure, you might have to go in there to search, but once you found it, if you hate the SS so much, you'd pin it somewhere so you didn't need to hunt for it again. Then your multitasking would continue unabated past that point!

randomevent said,

So your point is that there is no possible way you'll ever be able to have everything you use at your fingertips without going to the start screen? Sure, you might have to go in there to search, but once you found it, if you hate the SS so much, you'd pin it somewhere so you didn't need to hunt for it again. Then your multitasking would continue unabated past that point!

My point is the full screen switching. The fact is I like the start screen, I would love to have it up at times where I just want to have live tiles do the stuff they do, however not at the expense of multitasking.

You never can predict and pin everything you want to the task bar. The start menu made accessing programs less intrusive, and finding documents faster.

Although for what it is, and aesthetics aside, I do commend the start screen for being incredibly fast, but that does not make up for going full screen and hiding anything you were doing.

Well, the prerelease version of Windows 8 isn't a solid OS. It has some serious stability issues (well, the RP does; the CP was fine, but had other issues). I have every expectation that all significant issues will be fixed by release, but I'm anxious for general availability not because I'm excited for Windows 8 (although I am, I'm not nearly as anxious I have been for the releases of XP, Vista or 7) so much as because I'm excited to get my hands on a Surface. I do agree that the initial $40 price tag makes it an essential upgrade, since it gives almost everybody no real excuse not to get it before the price goes up (a lot of people are likely even to buy it and not install it right away just to take advantage of that).

I don't see what is wrong with these numbers. Windows 8 is a tablet OS (or at least VERY tablet-friendly) that doesn't offer many new features to the laptop/desktop casual users.

Not everyone needs a glorified applications launcher... they have Vista/7 and it works pretty well so.

I'm sorry to say, but I don't expect Windows 8 to be received very well by the casual PC users. I predict a "Vista 2" episode...

I expect Windows 8 will be the fastest selling version of Windows ever. Update is cheap, revolutionary changes to software and hardware, hundreds of thousands of exclusive apps not available on old versions of Windows, super cheap ARM powered PCs. This release has many things going for it that no previous version of Windows had.

You are wrong. Win8 is very lightweight if you compare it to Win7. People like me doesn't want to spend money on 2 or more devices because they can't do the same thing or it's not portable enough. For livingroom usage people wants a tablet. But on the other hand they also want a device that contains the apps they use all the time. I want a lightweight tablet with a powerfull specs that I can use everywhere and take it with me when ever I want.

The business segment wants a tablet that can integrate with their network. Also a tablet that can be managed by the compnat IT staff. Windows 8 is the solution for that. The business segment will boost the Win8 tablet usage, people using this tablet on their jobs will get used to their tablet so they will also recommend it to others.

Also Microsoft will spend major cash on advertising to promote Windows 8. This will be the biggest ad spend they ever done.


Oguz said

Its the release MS has been waiting for for years, many years. Win7 was the start of the direction they wanted to go. Vista was work they could do beforehand. But Win7 was the first OS to be released without the silly (retarded actually) anti-competitive restrictions. They where just paving the path with Vista and 7. I for one, love the idea of 'One OS to rule them all' and out of any OS currently available, im glad its Windows. Im using Win8 RP on my work PC and i'm loving it already. Especially knowing its just the beginning. I do hope they will keep the desktop in Win9+.
One thing I do dislike, is not being able to run metro windowed. The docking the side is handy tho for mail/chat.

I was thinking it was due to Vista from reading the headline, right or wrong (I believe Vista was fine after SP1 and a lot better after SP2, but yes there were driver issues caused by 3rd parties along with the issue of OEM's selling vastly underpowered machines loaded with crapware).

Anyway the overall perception was that Vista was bad, so you have a lot of people either using it and wanting to change or holding back from it and wanting to change - Along comes Windows 7 with its universally praised performance and stability along with new features and a smooth as butter beta!

Windows 8 is meeting this challenge though with its very cheap upgrade prices, and I also expect a very aggressive marketing campaign to embed the new tile based metro interface into peoples heads along with the new capabilities and form factors allowed by the new features.

duddit2 said,
I was thinking it was due to Vista from reading the headline, right or wrong (I believe Vista was fine after SP1 and a lot better after SP2, but yes there were driver issues caused by 3rd parties along with the issue of OEM's selling vastly underpowered machines loaded with crapware).

Just to put the record straight you should also mention that MS did not help: the "Vista compatible" certification was a colossal blunder.....

duddit2 said,
expect a very aggressive marketing campaign to embed the new tile based metro interface into peoples heads

I'm not sure that will have the desired effect...

duddit2 said,
I was thinking it was due to Vista from reading the headline, right or wrong (I believe Vista was fine after SP1 and a lot better after SP2, but yes there were driver issues caused by 3rd parties along with the issue of OEM's selling vastly underpowered machines loaded with crapware).

Anyway the overall perception was that Vista was bad, so you have a lot of people either using it and wanting to change or holding back from it and wanting to change - Along comes Windows 7 with its universally praised performance and stability along with new features and a smooth as butter beta!

Windows 8 is meeting this challenge though with its very cheap upgrade prices, and I also expect a very aggressive marketing campaign to embed the new tile based metro interface into peoples heads along with the new capabilities and form factors allowed by the new features.

Yeah it seems pretty obvious to me; Windows 7 was installed so much because people hated Vista (I was still on XP and happy), now Windows 8 is following the hugely successful satisfaction rate of Windows 7, so of course it will have less hype.

At such a cheap upgrade price, it will be successful.

There's less positive interest, that's for sure..

The only people I find that are really excited for Windows 8 are the Touchscreen peeps.. The rest are indifferent, or against..

I see very few people against it and the few who are are of the hardcore variety that don't represent the normal computer user. These same people would have passed on a million other wildly successful consumer electronics products.

Avatar Roku said,
I see very few people against it and the few who are are of the hardcore variety that don't represent the normal computer user. These same people would have passed on a million other wildly successful consumer electronics products.

It's a pre-release OS..
There aren't many normal people that even know it exists yet. Plus most normal computer users don't buy an OS.. they get what came with their computer, and live on it till the computer dies, they die, or one of their family members who knows stuff does something about it lol

Ryoken said,
There's less positive interest, that's for sure..

The only people I find that are really excited for Windows 8 are the Touchscreen peeps.. The rest are indifferent, or against..


I don't have or want a touchscren and I love 8.

Ryoken said,
There's less positive interest, that's for sure..

The only people I find that are really excited for Windows 8 are the Touchscreen peeps.. The rest are indifferent, or against..

Well you're wrong there. Many people I talk to have the same positive comments as me. Windows 8 is faster than Windows 7, it has better features (new copy/paste additions, .ISO mounting, etc.) and also has the perks that you'd like for a tablet as well.