More rumors on Microsoft's "Threshold" Windows plans pop up

The rumors about Microsoft's next major update for the Windows OS, beyond 8.1, began hitting the Internet earlier this year, with reports claiming the company is using the code name "Threshold" for those plans. Now a new report from known Microsoft info leaker "MSFTNerd" claims to have some more information on what might be included with "Threshold."

MSFTNerd's report has a caveat; he admits it is based on "a heavy dose of speculative information by Microsoft employees who are not directly involved in program management on these products and the boatload of semi-accurate rumors that are out there already." In other words, take this story with a larger grain of salt than usual from an Internet rumor post.

The report begins by claiming that a minor update to Windows 8.1 will be released by the third quarter of 2014, which will help the OS work better with Windows Phone 8.1 and the first major software update for the Xbox One.

Terry Myerson, head of Microsoft’s operating systems team, has already said the company is working on a unified app platform for its mobile and desktop Windows products. MSFTNerd's report claims that the goals for "Threshold" include offering a Windows common core "for touch/voice-first devices & mouse-first devices" along with a common app runtime. However, the interface for the touch and voice-first Windows products under Threshold will be different than the mouse-first devices. The report also says Microsoft's cloud services core will have an separate development schedule and will have different front ends for each interface.

The touch-first SKU for "Threshold" will be made for 4 to 8 inch devices, from smartphones to "phablets", according to this report, while the mouse-first version will be made for 10 to 30 inch devices such as tablets, notebook, hybrids and all-in-one PCs. Finally, the report claims the voice-first SKU will be made for products that have 40 to 80 inch displays. This sounds like it will be designed for the large screen Perspective Pixel PCs as well as for game consoles like the Xbox One that hook up to big screen TVs and are controlled by the new Kinect hardware.

The report also claims that the official start of development for Threshold is supposed to happen by the spring of 2014. However, it adds that could change depending on a number of factors, including the basic issue of making all of this work from a engineering aspect. It's also possible that the new CEO of Microsoft, who will likely be picked early in 2014, might have different plans for Windows.

Source: MSFTNerd

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft India releases Windows Phone app to prevent crimes against women

Next Story

Facebook updates Windows 8.1 app; adds ability to edit posts and more

116 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I don't mind the Mouse and Keyboard on my non touch desktop, actually like it, I use mixture of Modern apps and Desktop apps all day long, xbox music, xbox video, mail, Skype, and more. Sometimes Desktop Media player off and on, or media center

I so hope Microsoft lets current users pick between the coming start menu like Windows 7 version or Modern start screen which I have no issues with.

Very happy with my Windows 8.1 Desktop, Windows 8 Phone, (and someday I hope to afford a Surface tablet to replace XP laptop)

If this might release in late 2014 or early 2015, does that mean that Windows 9 will release a few months after it?. I just hope my recent upgrade to Windows 8 wasn't a bad move.

I just hope MS gives FREE upgrade copies to XP users. This will make a better WEB world and make life easier for web developers.

Dot Matrix said,
The fact that no other reputable tech site even bothered to post this is telling.

Neowin's track record on behind the scenes Microsoft news is pretty good. Your own predictions have been pretty far off the mark. I think I'll trust Neowin.

Windows Nashville said,

Neowin's track record on behind the scenes Microsoft news is pretty good. Your own predictions have been pretty far off the mark. I think I'll trust Neowin.

No. Just, no. Ha.

So basically they're trying to take Apple's next step before apple can. Who knows if people really want that though, even Apple users.

Neowin need to think harder about the feasibility of their future projections (or borrowed ones) more, so as to not feed the half-wits. Or is that how they like it?

"...while the mouse-first version will be made for 10 to 30 inch devices such as tablets..."

Really? So you're saying;

- you know Windows RT will be canned?
- you've speculated that MS don't think the Surface/S2 (not to mention so many OEM prods)are viable and the full-size Windows touch-tablet is dead?
- this is wild rumour mongering...?

Splitting the UIs by device type is a horrible idea. If MS is going to give us multiple options, then let us choose between those options!

The desktop UI only works properly on stationary machines with mouse and keyboard; Modern works on that and on tablets as well. Why lock users into just one or the other? Desktop is mouse-first, but Modern is not touch-first - it actually works slightly better with mouse and keyboard than with touchscreen!

I'm quite comfortable using Modern on my tower and laptop machines and don't want to be locked into the traditional desktop only and stuck with the Start Menu (shudder) because those systems are considered "desktops" by Microsoft.

I'd much prefer the same UI we have now - Modern with desktop - just tweaked better for the particular device (but with those tweaks adjustable by the user).

I hope this rumor is dead wrong.

DConnell said,
Splitting the UIs by device type is a horrible idea. If MS is going to give us multiple options, then let us choose between those options!

The desktop UI only works properly on stationary machines with mouse and keyboard; Modern works on that and on tablets as well. Why lock users into just one or the other? Desktop is mouse-first, but Modern is not touch-first - it actually works slightly better with mouse and keyboard than with touchscreen!

I'm quite comfortable using Modern on my tower and laptop machines and don't want to be locked into the traditional desktop only and stuck with the Start Menu (shudder) because those systems are considered "desktops" by Microsoft.

I'd much prefer the same UI we have now - Modern with desktop - just tweaked better for the particular device (but with those tweaks adjustable by the user).

I hope this rumor is dead wrong.

I don't think they're splitting up the UIs. If anything, it sounds like if these rumors pan out that Metro will adapt to the screen it's displayed on, something that I expected would happen. It's the sole reason Metro was developed in the first place, but honestly, Microsoft cannot simply rip Metro from the codebase anymore at this point. The key term there is "unified," and that's not going away, new CEO or not.

Dot Matrix said,

If anything, it sounds like if these rumors pan out that Metro will adapt to the screen it's displayed on, something that I expected would happen.

"Adapting to the screen it's displayed on" is something that should have happened from the start - surely it's absolutely obvious?

Forcing a touch-focused UI onto millions of desktop machines that don't have a touch screen was pure idiocy - which could all have been avoided given all the feedback from the Win8 preview versions, which MS in its arrogance chose to ignore.

gb8080 said,

"Adapting to the screen it's displayed on" is something that should have happened from the start - surely it's absolutely obvious?

Forcing a touch-focused UI onto millions of desktop machines that don't have a touch screen was pure idiocy - which could all have been avoided given all the feedback from the Win8 preview versions, which MS in its arrogance chose to ignore.

Metro is not touch focused. If you think that, then any UI change in the future is going to annoy you. Do you seriously want to cling to that darn desktop for the rest of your life, when technology moves past it?

gb8080 said,

"Adapting to the screen it's displayed on" is something that should have happened from the start - surely it's absolutely obvious?

Forcing a touch-focused UI onto millions of desktop machines that don't have a touch screen was pure idiocy - which could all have been avoided given all the feedback from the Win8 preview versions, which MS in its arrogance chose to ignore.

What touch-focused UI? I've found that Metro actually still works slightly better with mouse and keyboard than a touchscreen. Just because it isn't useless for touch like the traditional desktop doesn't mean it's touch-first.

Dot Matrix said,

Metro is not touch focused. If you think that, then any UI change in the future is going to annoy you. Do you seriously want to cling to that darn desktop for the rest of your life, when technology moves past it?

Of course t's touch-focused. The tiles are big because the "fat-finger problem" (google it) meant that using the start menu without a mouse was impractical.
The windows desktop is fine for the work I do, and I'll stick with a mouse on my desktop PC until I get a pixel-thin fingertip.
As already stated, "adapting to the screen" (specifically, touch or non-touch) should have been an obvious UI feature from the start, not a sudden revelation.

If it's touch-focused, then why am I able to use it with no difficulty on a traditional PC with mouse and keyboard? In fact, when it's practical, I use my wireless keyboard with trackpad on my Surface RT, which has only the most rudimentary desktop. So where am I using the keyboard and trackpad? That's right - in Modern! And it works perfectly.

I still say it's merely touch-capable, not touch-focused. If it were touch-focused, then the mouse/keyboard interactions would feel bolted-on and inefficient, which IMO they don't.

MS obviously spent a lot of effort making sure that Modern worked just as well on traditional setups as on touch-enabled ones.

The "Modern is touch-only/touch-focused" statement is a myth.

Are you guys serious? Is the iPad touch-focused? Then why am I able to connect an external PHYSICAL keyboard to it?

So yes, Windows 8 Start Screen IS touch focused. The ability to use a different input method does not change that.

Does iOS have features and gestures and interactions specifically designed for the attached keyboard?

Modern does. In fact, I find it's still easier to work in Modern with a mouse and keyboard than with a touchscreen. Again, just because Modern is the first UI Microsoft has done that actually works well with a touchscreen, that doesn't mean that's the sole focus.

A lot of thought was put into the k/m interactions, to the point that I'd say it's almost an even balance between touch and pointer, with maybe a slight skew toward pointer. I certainly don't feel like I'm using a "touch OS" forced onto a tower system - I'm using an OS that works perfectly on my tower, but also very well on a touch-enabled device.

The focus is not on one particular control type, but on making a version of Windows that's adaptable to a variety of system types. Since Modern works almost as well with a touchscreen as with a k/m setup, I'd say it's moving in the right direction.

It's not an either-or situation.

gb8080 said,

Of course t's touch-focused. The tiles are big because the "fat-finger problem" (google it) meant that using the start menu without a mouse was impractical.
The windows desktop is fine for the work I do, and I'll stick with a mouse on my desktop PC until I get a pixel-thin fingertip.
As already stated, "adapting to the screen" (specifically, touch or non-touch) should have been an obvious UI feature from the start, not a sudden revelation.


Um... No. The tiles are big because they display information. They're "live tiles." That's their primary function. That's what they were designed to do. You can't do that with tiny, hard to see icons. The "fat finger problem" is all in your head.

And you're taking my "adapting" quote out of text. It's highly impractical to "adapt" a certain Ui for devices, because there is no defined lines as to what a device can do. Replace "adaptive" with responsive. The desktop isn't responsive. Metro is.

Dot Matrix said,

Um... No. The tiles are big because they display information. They're "live tiles." That's their primary function. That's what they were designed to do. You can't do that with tiny, hard to see icons. The "fat finger problem" is all in your head.

And you're taking my "adapting" quote out of text. It's highly impractical to "adapt" a certain Ui for devices, because there is no defined lines as to what a device can do. Replace "adaptive" with responsive. The desktop isn't responsive. Metro is.

Metro has never been "responsive". It's intrusive. It gets in the way of productivity rather than adding to it. That's why businesses have avoided 8 and 8.1 like the plague.

Windows Nashville said,

Metro has never been "responsive". It's intrusive. It gets in the way of productivity rather than adding to it. That's why businesses have avoided 8 and 8.1 like the plague.

Um... Again, no. It *is* responsive. Look at how apps re-size themselves (*better* than desktop apps) on different sized screens, and when they're snapped. That's called responsive design, and it's something the desktop doesn't have. And it is no way "intrusive."

Resize themselves to full screen on a 27" monitor? That is what is so impressive?

Microsoft Office programs re-sizes themselves when you make the window bigger. They display more tools.

Photoshop re-sizes itself when you change the window size. Collapsing and expanding panels when needed.

Games adapt when you change resolution, displaying more of the world. Some games adapt immediately when you adjust the window size.

So don't say the desktop does not have responsive design. It is up to the programmers to do that. It is nothing to do with Desktop mode incapable of doing that. There is a re-size event in .NET, and I have used it before to do just that - display more stuff if you expand the dialog (just like how Office does it with the tools).

Face it, desktop environment gives MORE flexibility. Program GUI designers can decide what their program looks like. We have Apple iTunes on Windows that has their style (gray gradients, their branded icons, ...) and there are programs like Steam that has a dark color scheme and a unique look. We have MMO and video game launchers that have border-less design, drop shadows, custom cursor arrows, custom close/minimize buttons, custom clickable buttons, custom progress bars, and so on. They can make their own rules and guidelines. They can adapt to resolution differences automatically IF THEY PROGRAM THAT. The desktop environment give much more freedom in that area. You can make a small utility that only needs 300x200 resolution (calculator or single-purpose program). Or you can make an entire Direct X game take up the full screen. With modern UI, the default is "FULL SCREEN YEAH!!!" even if you have a 27"+ monitor.

Don't you people realize that people purchase 27" monitors for a reason? So we can have more stuff on the screen at once. Give me one good reason why I need a music app using my full 2560x1440 resolution. Even the photos app drives me crazy at this large resolution.

And yes, I do find the modern UI intrusive. I got a 27" monitor for a reason! The ONLY apps that are worth full screen are videos like Netflix, and games.

Windows Nashville said,

Metro has never been "responsive". It's intrusive. It gets in the way of productivity rather than adding to it. That's why businesses have avoided 8 and 8.1 like the plague.

And, if Metro is so "intrusive," how have I been able to stay productive with it? How has the whole of Microsoft been able to stay productive with it? How have others here been able to stay productive with it?

Dot Matrix said,

And, if Metro is so "intrusive," how have I been able to stay productive with it?

Just out of interest, what do you do with it? What's your normal work, what are your five most-used applications?

(to answer my own question FWIW I use Word, Outlook, Adobe Reader, IE, Visual studio (2008 and 2013). Since I have several of them open at the same time, I use the desktop with a mouse, and the Win8 UI adds nothing of value over Win7 for me. I took the $40 upgrade option for my laptop but see no reason to upgrade either of my desktop PCs. I use Start8 to let me start applications more efficiently)

gb8080 said,

Just out of interest, what do you do with it? What's your normal work, what are your five most-used applications?

(to answer my own question FWIW I use Word, Outlook, Adobe Reader, IE, Visual studio (2008 and 2013). Since I have several of them open at the same time, I use the desktop with a mouse, and the Win8 UI adds nothing of value over Win7 for me. I took the $40 upgrade option for my laptop but see no reason to upgrade either of my desktop PCs. I use Start8 to let me start applications more efficiently)

I use it just like I use desktop apps, they're stacked to the side of the monitor. I usually have three or four open at a time depending on what I am doing. Usually, FB or Twitter, Skype when I communicate with friends, family, and co-workers, and when it snows here, I have Weather docked so I can keep an eye on that. All these apps eliminate the need for other browser tabs to be open, therefore reducing clutter.

I usually like to browse Flipboard daily, as well, along with Newseen.

I'm constantly sharing to FB, Twitter, and E-mail, so the Share Charm is of much value to me, along with Search. Having both those options quickly accessible on the side is a huge bonus, and something that has boosted my productivity.

Dot Matrix said,

I use it just like I use desktop apps, they're stacked to the side of the monitor. I usually have three or four open at a time depending on what I am doing. Usually, FB or Twitter, Skype when I communicate with friends, family, and co-workers, and when it snows here, I have Weather docked so I can keep an eye on that. All these apps eliminate the need for other browser tabs to be open, therefore reducing clutter.

I usually like to browse Flipboard daily, as well, along with Newseen.

I'm constantly sharing to FB, Twitter, and E-mail, so the Share Charm is of much value to me, along with Search. Having both those options quickly accessible on the side is a huge bonus, and something that has boosted my productivity.

That's not "productive". These aren't the kind of applications that would create chargeable work output, chargeable time, billable hours.
They are for consumption / social purposes, not creative work.
Not surprising that you don't understand why for many who are generating content, Win8 gets in the way of productivity.

gb8080 said,

That's not "productive". These aren't the kind of applications that would create chargeable work output, chargeable time, billable hours.
They are for consumption / social purposes, not creative work.
Not surprising that you don't understand why for many who are generating content, Win8 gets in the way of productivity.

I agree, real productivity is severely lacking in the modern UI world.

gb8080 said,

That's not "productive". These aren't the kind of applications that would create chargeable work output, chargeable time, billable hours.
They are for consumption / social purposes, not creative work.
Not surprising that you don't understand why for many who are generating content, Win8 gets in the way of productivity.

Then why bother asking me, if you're just going to move the goal posts?

FYI, I'm IT support. My horrendous workflow of constantly flipping through windows at work on Win7 could be easily replaced with stacked Metro apps, if you must know. Or does that not count either? Or must everybody be calculating a million things while using CAD3D and Photoshop all at once for it count (as everyone here claims for productivity purposes)?

Sorry, but you did yourself pose the question above:
"And, if Metro is so "intrusive," how have I been able to stay productive with it?
How has the whole of Microsoft been able to stay productive with it?
How have others here been able to stay productive with it?"
The answer depends on what you mean by "productive". For the work I do, Win8 gets in the way more than it helps. My wife is translating a novel and typically has two Word windows open plus IE open at a dictionary page: that requires movable overlapping windows so she can set it up "just right". Win8 wouldn't help at all.
Yes, I know that Win8 still has desktop mode. I use it on my laptop. But Win8 brings nothing to the work I do, compared to Win7.
Different people use computers in different ways. I haven't "moved the goalposts", merely observed that how enthusiastic you are about Win8 (and you yourself are at one end of the scale) depends on what you do.
Reverting to on-topic, I do hope that "Threshold" will take this into account and provide a UI that is more appropriate to non-touch-enabled systems.

gb8080 said,
Sorry, but you did yourself pose the question above:
"And, if Metro is so "intrusive," how have I been able to stay productive with it?
How has the whole of Microsoft been able to stay productive with it?
How have others here been able to stay productive with it?"
The answer depends on what you mean by "productive". For the work I do, Win8 gets in the way more than it helps. My wife is translating a novel and typically has two Word windows open plus IE open at a dictionary page: that requires movable overlapping windows so she can set it up "just right". Win8 wouldn't help at all.
Yes, I know that Win8 still has desktop mode. I use it on my laptop. But Win8 brings nothing to the work I do, compared to Win7.
Different people use computers in different ways. I haven't "moved the goalposts", merely observed that how enthusiastic you are about Win8 (and you yourself are at one end of the scale) depends on what you do.
Reverting to on-topic, I do hope that "Threshold" will take this into account and provide a UI that is more appropriate to non-touch-enabled systems.

If she needs all that open at once, why is "overlapping windows" any help? It would be better to have them all stacked, so there's no need to waste time by constantly having to click around in the taskbar.

The way I see it is this: the best productivity would be to have any windows you need at any given second open, and stacked. Anything else can be tucked away in the task switcher, therefore reducing clutter. Overlapping windows don't help any when there's dozens of them strewn about.

Dot Matrix said,

If she needs all that open at once, why is "overlapping windows" any help? It would be better to have them all stacked, so there's no need to waste time by constantly having to click around in the taskbar.

The Windows desktop is a metaphor for a real desktop. On my real desktop I have numerous bits of paper, overlapping so that I can see enough of them to get context and to switch my attention to them when needed.
Windows desktops work the same. The whole concept of "Windows" is bound up with overlapping windows, otherwise the trademark might as well be "Microsoft Tiles".
You don't need to click around in the taskbar. Clicking any visible part of a window brings it to the front.
Desktop works the way I work in real life. Metro tiles don't.

Dot Matrix said,
Um. The Surface isn't a 4-8 inch device, yet it's touch first...? What are they doing?

It's a mouse-capable device. It's touch-mouse. Devices in the 4-8 inch range are not mouse-capable, and are touch-only.

Doesnt matter. By the time Microsoft FINALLY figures out how to make a decent OS that people would actually WANT, they will be completely irrelevant in the marketplace. Stick a fork in 'em, they are DONE.

John Nemesh said,
Doesnt matter. By the time Microsoft FINALLY figures out how to make a decent OS that people would actually WANT, they will be completely irrelevant in the marketplace. Stick a fork in 'em, they are DONE.
Did you copy this from a text from the '80s/'90s? I can remember reading this back in the days we moved to the UI instead of command lines.

derekaw said,
@Max Norris PC sales are in decline... Confused.

Article a day or two back about Chromebook sales mentions Windows PC desktops are up 10%.

WOW! Microsoft is finally realizing that one has to have different UIs for different devices. How in the world did they miss that so very basic concept with Windows-8? Arrogance? Idiocy in high places? Something else?

What is so bad about creating a UI that adapts to different environments? This was their 1st go at it, 8.1 a refresh. They're still evolving it and make no mistake, it's not going away. What the rumor means is that touch/voice devices will live in Metro while the traditional desktop/laptop computers will have a desktop mode that will be much more refined and improved than the Frankenstein we have now. Remember Mac OS X? It pretty much sucked for the first 4 iterations until they started getting the new environment right.

These things... they take time.

It looks like MS rushed half backed products out the door just to have something in the market then they start working on what they really thought they should have given us all along. Great!

Legacy office running on a legacy desktop on a tablet proves my point. Ideally MS would have given us tablet office on a tablet but instead they come up with marketing that tries to convince people that you are getting something extra, some people fall for it.

What a mouse first tablet? Real tablets don't need mice.

Vista was anything but rushed. It was the longest time MS spent on any OS.

I don't consider it rushed. The driver ecosystem wasn't ready, nor the hardware, neither of which was controlled by MS, and neither of which would have progressed to the degree that we see today if Vista were just another XP. This was back when average system RAM was below 1 GB and people were just barely starting to transition from P4's to dual core processors. That, and Vista really took the bullet for all the usage changes that Windows 7 would otherwise have gotten slammed for, including UAC, and a more search-centric task flow.

Raa said,

Vista.

They didn't rush Vista. However, hardware vendors did the opposite of rushing when it came to drivers.

Studio384 said,
Yes, Vista was rushed, that's why no other major OS has ever been in development as long as Vista... wait.

Did you forget the "Reset"?

No, Microsoft tablets were rushed out the door. Why give people a tablet with the legacy desktop running legacy office? Because tablet office was not ready and still isn't. It's nuts to expect someone to run legacy office on a tiny tablet on a tiny desktop where neither is designed for touch input. So Microsoft comes out with an advertising campaign convincing you that you get more with legacy office and the legacy desktop and overlooking that tablet office does not exist. It's worked fairly well really but I am surprised how many people don't see through the marketing to what really is a rushed and incomplete product set.

derekaw said,
No, Microsoft tablets were rushed out the door. Why give people a tablet with the legacy desktop running legacy office? Because tablet office was not ready and still isn't. It's nuts to expect someone to run legacy office on a tiny tablet on a tiny desktop where neither is designed for touch input. So Microsoft comes out with an advertising campaign convincing you that you get more with legacy office and the legacy desktop and overlooking that tablet office does not exist. It's worked fairly well really but I am surprised how many people don't see through the marketing to what really is a rushed and incomplete product set.

You actually used Office on a Surface?

Firstly it's fine. Secondly, if you're using a Surface without touch/type cover you're doing it completely wrong.

Enron said,

They didn't rush Vista. However, hardware vendors did the opposite of rushing when it came to drivers.


Certainly can't deny that.

I still think Vista (the final product) was rushed, more so after the "Longhorn reset". SP1 couldn't come fast enough, but the bad taste remained.

Maybe for your needs; I bought my first Tablet PC, a Convertible one in 2002... and never bought another laptop. I was able to use Office and any other programs I needed with a pen or the keyboard or the pad. As far as I am concern Touch is just another way to interact with my Tablet, nothing more.

There are some minor (read: major) points I would like to point out:

1. The "minor update" mentioned here is what we know as Windows 8.1 Update 1, whose codename is Windows 8.1 Spring 2014 GDR, and it would be released in Fall 2014? Right...
2. Microsoft start working on the next version of Windows after the RTM of the previous version has been hit, with other words, the next update for Windows is in the works since August 2013, why would they hold back a team 8 months before they can start in Spring 2014 on Threshold? As far as we know, Update 1 wouldn't be that big.
3. Why is the mouse-first edition for tablets larger then 8 inch? Howe does that make sense? By the way, what with the smartphones with 3,5" screens? They aren't allowed anymore either? O, and let's not forget about massive screens of 40+ inches that have touchscreens, which where promoted by Microsoft (remember the 81 inch touch display).
4. Everythin in this rumor, is completely against anything we've heard of untill today, which came from much more realible sources.

Not exactly right. MSFTnerd got many things right, and he has been a very credible source of rumors for a while now. He doesn't always get everything right, but he does get much of what he says right. I do agree that the Update 1 release on Fall 2014 sounded completely wrong, unless there's miscommunication here: I still believe, from what we've heard, update 1 comes in the spring and maybe that fall 2014 one will be some update 2 we have heard nothing about, in preparation for Threshold in Spring 2015 (since we know MS has moved to a spring release).

Just give us our Start Menu back and fix the quirks on the Xbox One. Millions don't care what you do with the rest of your products.

JHBrown said,
Just give us our Start Menu back and fix the quirks on the Xbox One.
Fixed! Could not edit my post earlier. Don't want to offend anyone so soon after Christmas. Cheers!

JHBrown said,
Just give us our Start Menu back and fix the quirks on the Xbox One. Millions don't care what you do with the rest of your products.

Maybe they give you the superior Start Menu on your Xbox One, and make you drag a cursor around to open things.

So the phones and small tablets will have the same WP-esque SKU, while larger "productivity" tablets will have the desktop SKU?

I mean I guess this makes sense, but what happens if I want to play a game on a phablet and a tablet? Does that mean I'll need 2 xap's, or will the phablet xap work on the tablet too?

Every app will have ONE package, which probably will contain different executables for different device types. But, in effect, you'll only see the 1 app and it'll decide which version to execute depending on what device you're using.

And let's hope it doesn't take away choice for those of us that like Windows 8.x the way it is. All I want is a refinement of what we've got now. I don't want it split into different UIs by device.

As long as it's truly choice I can get on board. But if it's just going back 100% to the old interface with no alternative like so many people here seem to want, then no.

I don't want to be stuck with the 97/XP/7 text-based Start Menu again.

DConnell said,
I don't want to be stuck with the 97/XP/7 text-based Start Menu again.

And many users don't want to be stuck with what they're offered now. As you say - the choice, will be a great idea.

Raa said,

And many users don't want to be stuck with what they're offered now. As you say - the choice, will be a great idea.

Yeah, but the idea that the interface for "mouse-first" will be different from the other two suggests that there may not be the option for the choice I want, which is simply a refinement of what we have now.

Choice is fine, losing some of the features and flexibility I now enjoy because MS wants to pigeonhole users based on device is not. I don't want to be limited to a subset of the current Windows 8.x design because my tower and laptop are considered "desktop" machines.

The only people I can see being satisfied with this are the "I don't want it so nobody should have it" Modern-must-die crowd.

Agree. I hope Microsoft doesn't "over-correct" because of the complaints of a loud, obnoxious minority.

The reality is that Windows 8.x is great on touch devices, and it concerns me that 10" devices will soon be "mouse-first." I could understand that for 13" devices... but not 10".

Either way, Microsoft is running out of time to get this right. They need to make a decision and then stick with it.

Why would having the option to boot into windows 8 as it is now, ****** OR ***** boot into windows 8 that works the same as windows 7 cause you to lose anything?

that's like saying that because you have windows on your computer, if you dual boot linux it'll take something away from your windows... i don't get it

Buttus said,
Why would having the option to boot into windows 8 as it is now, ****** OR ***** boot into windows 8 that works the same as windows 7 cause you to lose anything?

that's like saying that because you have windows on your computer, if you dual boot linux it'll take something away from your windows... i don't get it

Then just use Windows 7! Why would you pay to upgrade for the same? This arguement makes no sense!

Dot Matrix said,

Then just use Windows 7! This arguement makes no sense!


And this argument is wearing very very thin.

Raa said,

And this argument is wearing very very thin.

No thinner than the "I want Windows 7" argument. Windows 8 != Windows 7. And it never will.

Dot Matrix said,

No thinner than the "I want Windows 7" argument. Windows 8 != Windows 7. And it never will.

right, win8 has improvements over win7, but why can't people have a choice of it looking like it does now, or looking like win7?

Buttus said,

right, win8 has improvements over win7, but why can't people have a choice of it looking like it does now, or looking like win7?

Um. You can! Click the desktop tile and you're set. How hard is that to do?

Dot Matrix said,

Um. You can! Click the desktop tile and you're set. How hard is that to do?


About as hard as it is to shut down the computer?

Dot Matrix said,
Then just use Windows 7! Why would you pay to upgrade for the same? This arguement makes no sense!

They're not the same. Windows 8 is worth it even if just for how much faster it does startup/resume from sleep. There are many other benefits but that is the one that made it for me.

Buttus said,
Why would having the option to boot into windows 8 as it is now, ****** OR ***** boot into windows 8 that works the same as windows 7 cause you to lose anything?

that's like saying that because you have windows on your computer, if you dual boot linux it'll take something away from your windows... i don't get it

There's a vocal group saying that Modern has no place on "non-touch" hardware. My concern is that this rumor almost sounds like it's catering to those people, while effectively ruining Windows for those of us who do find Modern effective on non-touch form factors.

If choice is given it should be for the user to decide, not based on what hardware is being used.

We need one OS that can be scaled and adapted to the hardware being used, not three incomplete OSes that each provide a cherry-picked subset of the features Windows 8.x currently has.

people seem to be making this WAY more complicated than it needs to be. All there needs to be is 2 choices. simple yes/no radio buttons.

1. Disable modern interface/screens Yes/No
2. Activate Win7 Start Menu Yes/No

with just those 2 choices, it would solve every problem with win8

Raa said,

About as hard as it is to shut down the computer?

Get a computer with a power button or use the right-click Start menu. It takes no longer nor is it any more difficult to shut Windows down that it ever was.

Buttus, adding that in would make things way more complicated than they need to be. You remember than many Vista SKUs nightmare, why would that change here?

One, unified OS, is not an impossible goal.

Cute. In the meantime, Microsoft will continue to also sell millions of Windows devices, while simultaneously raking in cash from those Android devices.

This is another WP in the making, when iPhone was released ,MS spent 2 years trying make WP giving Google the opportunity to take over the market with Android.
The development of Threshold is to start by spring 2014 . so you are looking at late 2015 at best, most likely early 2016.

guru said,
cute. in the meanwhile, google will continue sell millions of Android and Chrome devices

Bro, maybe you need to find new place to do your Google trolling.

guru said,
This is another WP in the making, when iPhone was released ,MS spent 2 years trying make WP giving Google the opportunity to take over the market with Android.
The development of Threshold is to start by spring 2014 . so you are looking at late 2015 at best, most likely early 2016.

I realize you probably see software development as some form of magic, but it takes time. Especially when you are starting a project from scratch... Android caught everyone by surprise including Apple (Who allowed them to steal many of the ideas going into the iPhone at the time...).

Your comment is absurd.

M_Lyons10 said,

I realize you probably see software development as some form of magic, but it takes time. Especially when you are starting a project from scratch... Android caught everyone by surprise including Apple (Who allowed them to steal many of the ideas going into the iPhone at the time...).

Your comment is absurd.

Yes, open operating systems that don't include a "walled garden" took EVERYONE by surprise, right? Like Microsoft's own success wasn't due to this very fact, right? If it took anyone "by surprise", they shouldnt be working in this industry! OPEN BEATS CLOSED EVERY SINGLE TIME!

guru said,
cute. in the meanwhile, google will continue sell millions of Android and Chrome devices

So much hate for the truth. Look no further than Microsoft's own "Scroogled" campaign if you want to see just HOW scared MS is of the Chromebook/Android threat!

guru said,
This is another WP in the making, when iPhone was released ,MS spent 2 years trying make WP giving Google the opportunity to take over the market with Android.
The development of Threshold is to start by spring 2014 . so you are looking at late 2015 at best, most likely early 2016.
I don't think you have any idea how software engineering works... You don't have to release everything all at once then start working on the next update later. Most likely, Microsoft has been working on Threshold in the past, but it's just not ready to be released yet. And they're continuing to work on it over time. Just because you're working on a feature doesn't mean it has to be included in the same system everyone else is working on.

John Nemesh said,

So much hate for the truth. Look no further than Microsoft's own "Scroogled" campaign if you want to see just HOW scared MS is of the Chromebook/Android threat!
How is Microsoft scared? They're already the underdog lol. If anything, the Scroogled campaign is a scare tactic targeted at Google's PR.

guru said,
The development of Threshold is to start by spring 2014 . so you are looking at late 2015 at best, most likely early 2016.

Yes, because everyone at Microsoft just went on vacation for half a year when Windows 8.1 was released.

Enron said,

Yes, because everyone at Microsoft just went on vacation for half a year when Windows 8.1 was released.

Mentally? They went "on vacation" about a year and a half BEFORE Windows 8 was released.

Pluto is a Planet said,
I don't think you have any idea how software engineering works... You don't have to release everything all at once then start working on the next update later. Most likely, Microsoft has been working on Threshold in the past, but it's just not ready to be released yet. And they're continuing to work on it over time. Just because you're working on a feature doesn't mean it has to be included in the same system everyone else is working on.

How is Microsoft scared? They're already the underdog lol. If anything, the Scroogled campaign is a scare tactic targeted at Google's PR.

How is Microsoft scared? Seriously? If you can't SMELL the fear coming out of Redmond when you see their anti-Chromebooks ads on TV, I don't know what to say. The thought of web based computing with a FREE OS scares the **** out of them, because they know it's going to eat their lunch. It has begun...

VHMP01 said,
So Apple was scared of MS with their MAC vs PC campain?

Good call. Nope. They smelled blood in the water, and it wasn't their own. Same with MS and Chromebooks.

guru said,
This is another WP in the making, when iPhone was released ,MS spent 2 years trying make WP giving Google the opportunity to take over the market with Android.
The development of Threshold is to start by spring 2014 . so you are looking at late 2015 at best, most likely early 2016.

Google did NOT "take over the market" with Android. Google loses money with Android. Funny enough Microsoft make money from Android rip-offs. This must be a new definition of "take over the market". Sort of like African Dung Beetles. There are more of them than there are humans on Earth. But that doesn't mean they've "taken over" the planet.

Seriously I don't understand all this "MS is scared" argument. You do realize that were it not for them bringing computing to the cheap masses you might not be using a computer right now, don't you? I very much doubt they are scared. They will recognize Google/Android with the amount of risk it exposes (that is, search/ads and mobile, which is far from the areas where MS makes 90% of their money) and counterattack... but it's nowhere near "scaring" them.