Salesforce.com CEO predicts Windows 8 will be "the end" for the OS

Marc Benioff, the well known and highly outspoken founder and CEO of Salesforce.com, has never been shy about explaining his views about how cloud-based software is going to replace the traditional enterprise software model .... someday. Today, he let loose with a bold prediction about Windows 8.

Computerworld.com reports that, during a Q&A session at a company event in New York City, Benioff said that Windows 8 would be "the end" of the line for Microsoft's PC OS. He also feels that Windows will eventually become "irrelevant" as more and more business software services move to cloud-based solutions.

Benioff admitted, "Now, we're not completely there. Everything is not heterogenous client, everything is not LTE, everything is not cloud." But he also claims that some large businesses want to get rid of PCs in favor of employees using portable devices that they may buy and bring to work on their own, in the "bring your own device" approach.

Benioff said he recently talked to an unnamed CIO. He stated, "Her goal is to get rid of all of the PCs. She doesn't see a demand curve from users for PCs." Microsoft would not respond to Benioff's comments.

Of course, it's always good to take statements such as those made Benioff with a great deal of salt. Salesforce.com is, after all, all about the cloud and Benioff is trying to sell his services as better than traditional PC setups. Let's also keep in mind that Windows 8, and its cousin Windows RT, are being made with a theme of portability and cloud connections, as is Windows Phone 8.

Source: Computerworld.com | Image via Salesforce.com

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Cover-less 32 GB Surface sells out in UK and Canada

Next Story

Broken snow globe causes Microsoft building to be evacuated

82 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Everyone is looking at this wrong. This isn't about Windows or the PC in general. The battle is for control. Why is the record and movie industry happy with streaming, because you don't own what you pay for and you must continue to pay over and over to continue to stream. Why is salesforce and Google and all these cloud based products trying to say the pc is dead, because if we ever do get to a time where we are a cloud based society you will continue to pay over and over.
When you own a physical device that is in your hand, you choose to pay, you are NOT required to pay. If I buy an album or a piece of software on physical media, I may never have to pay for it again, if i so chose. Like the group of people that to this day use Windows 98 as their OS. If it meets their needs then they choose not to pay again.
When we physically have it, then we choose if you want to pay or don't want to pay and "business" cant do a thing about it. When we are leasing which is what all cloud computing is, then we either keep paying business or we aren't allowed to play.

What do you want to bet this guy owns an Apple computer. All the Apple owners go around spewing their nonsense claiming the PC is dead.

Not everyone even has internet access and people use their computers for much more than just browsing the internet.

As someone using Adobe CS products, I can't see myself not using a traditional PC or Mac. Tablets are great for those who CONSUME. But for those who PRODUCE for ye consumers, a tablet will not and cannot do.

Hell, I am using my Windows laptop to type this instead of my iPad. The iPad is nice for simple things, but I can do both work and play on this pretty thing I spent just as much on as the entry-level Surface or even the iPad.

This guy couldn't be more wrong. No one in a company really needs a "desktop" mode. If you can have all your companies programs and apps in Modern UI then it's much more productive than working in the classic desktop. And for the cloud, I would never put my companies data into the cloud only. The internet is way to fragile for that. Imagine the datacenter that stores your data is off line due to a natural disaster for 2-3 weeks. Your company would simply go bankrupt in that time.

Salesforce is not forgetting that MS is trying to be the next Apple, and Apple does not care about business.

Ignorant, arrogant, retarded. These clever analysts always forget that Silicon Valley != WORLD. They also assume that money is infinite for everyone.

And anyway, how will I do video editing in the cloud, really? Or ANYTHING that is computing power/bandwidth instensive? There DO exist tasks besides spreadsheets and word processing for an enterprise, you monkey.

lol what an idiot. these CEO's that compete with MSFT in cloud services are always going to say that. and in the end, all you see is windows machines and soon windows tablets all over the enterprise.

Windows 8 made me switch to Mac OS X for the first time in my life and I aint ever goin back!

and yes, I used it almost every day ever since the first beta went public; so I gave it more than enough chance, and I really wanted to like it, but Lion/Mountain Lion has been a far superior experience than I've ever had in all my 30 years of computing.

and to the tool who said "Microsoft sold more copies of Vista that Apple has sold Macs in the entire history of their company" erm Lion has currently a higher worldwide desktop share than Vista, so yeah. Total "sales" of Vista don't matter if most of them came bundled with PCs and were promptly rolled back to XP or whatever by many users.

I can see Windows eventually falling back to settle for the server/legacy office space and DIY gaming rigs. Even MS Office, one of its main advantages, is no longer as relevant as it used to be thanks to cloud suites and the BYOD trend.

Oguz said,
You will be back.
I might check back on the ghetto now and then out of nostalgia, but unless the Windows ecosystem gets a consistent and responsive UI across the board (which aint happening anytime soon..in fact it just got pushed back lol) never mind things like the seamless cross-device syncing of the iUniverse, I probably won't be staying

Edited by Arthax, Oct 20 2012, 11:10am :

Arthax said,
Windows 8 made me switch to Mac OS X for the first time in my life and I aint ever goin back!

and yes, I used it almost every day ever since the first beta went public; so I gave it more than enough chance, and I really wanted to like it, but Lion/Mountain Lion has been a far superior experience than I've ever had in all my 30 years of computing.

and to the tool who said "Microsoft sold more copies of Vista that Apple has sold Macs in the entire history of their company" erm Lion has currently a higher worldwide desktop share than Vista, so yeah. Total "sales" of Vista don't matter if most of them came bundled with PCs and were promptly rolled back to XP or whatever by many users.

I can see Windows eventually falling back to settle for the server/legacy office space and DIY gaming rigs. Even MS Office, one of its main advantages, is no longer as relevant as it used to be thanks to cloud suites and the BYOD trend.

So you tested extensively Windows 8 retail and Windows Phone 8 and a Win8 tablet and now you know you don't like it... wait wait, none of these exist yet. No further comment, sir!

bviktor said,

So you tested extensively Windows 8 retail and Windows Phone 8 and a Win8 tablet and now you know you don't like it... wait wait, none of these exist yet. No further comment, sir!

Windows 8 RTM'ed a couple months ago (trust me, not a lot changed between that and the Release Preview on the UI end) and I have a touchscreen monitor which I specifically got for it, but can't use much with my Mac so I'll be replacing it with a 27" Thunderbolt awww yeah baby

Ok so the competitor to CRM Online has a beef with Windows 8.

I would like to see them create an app that would share contact information with my ERP system and stop fighting a paradigm which will enable completely new ways of doing business.

Ok, so I downloaded the consumer preview version of windows 8. I didn't like it for the first 3 days, but aftyer that I changed. I found out just a couple of things like the charms menu, the search button and oh yeah...THE****ING DESKTOP TILE. You don't even have to ever use the win8 start screen if you don't want to and it runs just like a traditional pc. And don't give me wheres the start button. I never liked it in the first place and always thought it was stupid to have. Just right click in the bottom left corner and you have a start button. W8 is faster than 7 in every way shape and form. Bottom line, this guys is a duochbag bag and his opinion doesn't matter. one other thing, how can anyone take what he says seriously he has a mullet for christs sake.

i wonder..
so how many desktops on icons did you have on windows 7 ?

the real problem with Vista ?
SPEED
I benchmarked like crazy during the alpha's to rc's to rtm
and always got faster speeds on XP than Vista.
Believe it or not i'm not the only one who care about performance.
there is a small group of people called overclockers.
no i'm not making that up either, they really do exist..
these are the kind of people that actually check and verify what is faster.
rather than just saying it..

I must be the only person on planet earth using a UI system they like on Windows 7.
Because it would seem everyone agreed that it was bad and needed drastic changes.

I hope all desktop icon kids love their win8 bs.
Some of us have gone to extreme painstaking detail to customize the Win 7 OS
and have finally got it to where it was usable only to be told I'm using it wrong.
I'd love a challenge where i can smoke Win8 cheerleaders in productivity.
this i can do the same thing on Win 8 crap is bull !
Against my custom setup ?
Comparing OOBE to OOBE is one thing but not all encompassing

I have a new machine coming in the mail in a few days and i thinks its time
to put some of this Windows 8 FUD to rest.
I'll do some productivity experiments and benchmarking.
FAIRLY !
none of this i'm comparing my old trashed windows 7 install
to a 5 minute old install on a new OS crap.
that 1 single issue alone explains why MOST win8 cheerleaders say Win8 is faster.

Windows 8 is god damn joke and I can and WILL prove it.
with facts based in reality with tangible proof that can be measured
not fanboy fantasy heresy.

I am Not PCyr said,
....

A highly customized Win7 OS? Then it would be a piece of cake for you to customize Win8 to be looking almost as identical to your Win7 machine.

Also those 'overclockers' you speak off.... Already benchmarked Windows 8 and already shown us higher speeds on Windows 8 compared to Windows 7.

I do not think it will be a failure but only time will tell. And for sure MS can come out with win9 fast if they needed to. It seemed like Win7 was out the door really fast after the mess of Vista.

So he's saying Windows 8 is the end of Windows because people are moving away from desktops and laptops to mobile touch devices. But isn't that exactly what Windows 8 is all about; moving Windows into the mobile world?

So on one side you have everyone saying that Windows 8 is the end of Windows because it leaves desktops behind, and then you have this guy saying Windows 8 is the end of Windows because the industry is leaving desktops behind.

Nonsensical CEO is nonsensical...

Stupid or ignorant, not sure which applies.

1) There is value to client side computing, having a local CPU/GPU to offset load from centralized computing has proved to be optimal again and again, even with seemingly unlimited bandwidth and server resources. (Which are two things the world does not have.)

2) Even if 'computing' did move to the cloud with Server side applications fully, can anyone guess what OS the cloud servers would be running?

Microsoft Windows NT Azure

Which is a distributed cloud version of Windows NT and is what MOST of the cloud today is already running on. When companies are developing Server side computing technology they are doing it on Windows Servers and if needed they can seamlessly transfer it to Microsoft Windows Azure.


So the author can't have it both ways, because even if this is the end of client side computing and Windows, it will STILL be Windows running the cloud technologies.

At minimum, a 'thin' Windows side client will always be around, which is effectively what Windows 8 has become in today's hardware terms.


Anyone that believes this crap, go look up Larry Ellison 1995 Network PC, or go look up what Google said several years ago and still are trying to make happen with their ChromeBook crap.

A nice light client that uses online resources is nice, but when you can have a full OS technology in that thin/light client, and capable of using local CPU/GPU/Storage resources, there is no reason not to have the best of both worlds, which is what Windows 8 is doing. It is no longer a heavy OS, in fact it is far lighter than Linux or OS X. WP8 is running Windows 8, Windows RT is Windows 8 running on ARM. Does anyone see Linux or OS X running on this low end of hardware? Nope.

thenetavenger said,
Stupid or ignorant, not sure which applies.

1) There is value to client side computing, having a local CPU/GPU to offset load from centralized computing has proved to be optimal again and again, even with seemingly unlimited bandwidth and server resources. (Which are two things the world does not have.)

2) Even if 'computing' did move to the cloud with Server side applications fully, can anyone guess what OS the cloud servers would be running?

Microsoft Windows NT Azure

Which is a distributed cloud version of Windows NT and is what MOST of the cloud today is already running on. When companies are developing Server side computing technology they are doing it on Windows Servers and if needed they can seamlessly transfer it to Microsoft Windows Azure.


So the author can't have it both ways, because even if this is the end of client side computing and Windows, it will STILL be Windows running the cloud technologies.

At minimum, a 'thin' Windows side client will always be around, which is effectively what Windows 8 has become in today's hardware terms.


Anyone that believes this crap, go look up Larry Ellison 1995 Network PC, or go look up what Google said several years ago and still are trying to make happen with their ChromeBook crap.

A nice light client that uses online resources is nice, but when you can have a full OS technology in that thin/light client, and capable of using local CPU/GPU/Storage resources, there is no reason not to have the best of both worlds, which is what Windows 8 is doing. It is no longer a heavy OS, in fact it is far lighter than Linux or OS X. WP8 is running Windows 8, Windows RT is Windows 8 running on ARM. Does anyone see Linux or OS X running on this low end of hardware? Nope.

And Azure is heading toward SMB deployability - and will get there a lot faster than Salesforce.com would like.

Salesforce.com is - right now - a primarily bigger-business/corporate/enterprise/government-targeted platform - they are a VERY poor fit for SMBs due to cost. Windows Azure, on the other hand, is part and parcel of Windows Server. Additional cost for Azure itself - none. Windows Server - Azure and all - can itself be virtualized; if anything, th8 as CPU horsepower goes up.

thenetavenger said,
...

Windows 8 isn't lighter then a light Linux based distro. Was able to install and run Debian to a PII 166mhz. While even though I haven't tried, this machine will be unable to run Windows 8
However it is way more powerfull in comparison to the resources its using compared to any Linux distro.

Clients going back to Thin clients .... tablets/pc/or whatever running any platform will use web based apps where applicable powered by Linux/unix/windows or whatever. Everything else that don't work or not migrated to be web based will run in the environment previously described. This is happening now in large scale. The remote desktops are still Windows desktops running on top of a VMware vSphere, Microsoft Hyper-V, Citrix Xen, Xen, or RedHat/Oracle virtualization host for those applications that aren't or can't be web/cloud based.

It all is heading towards centralization, it always has been for many years. Many servers taking up huge rooms, down to several nowadays and slowly a low powered CPU and screen is all that's required to power a client device.
Once all applications are web based (which most new ones are to be honest), there is little point in spending hundreds for a load of computing power you don't need. If Office 360 doesn't show you that example of the future, you must be blind. In 10 years, I'll be surprised if I'm not using over 50% cloud applications.

Users might bring their own devices ... but they will be running Windows Apps via a Windows Server running something like Remote Desktop Services/Citrix XenDesktop/XenApp/VMware View which are all totally dependent on Windows ... so even if all of the desktops and apps go to the cloud the cloud is still running Windows. Web Based Apps can replace some traditional desktop based apps but not all quite yet.

He's talking about desktop os. What he's talking about is not servers. Also if we were to talk about servers linux based server os distributions powers most web servers. Amazon and googles clouds use linux so windows isnt a dominant power in the server space.

Get rid of PCs in the workplace and replace them with portable take home devices? He's on crack. The adoption of Win8 might be slow but I think PCs (in both windows and mac form) are gonna be around for a while. Man, these people and their predictions. :-o

ugh time to start up a tablet based server farm since windows is dead..... too bad Azure which runs a lot of cloud services for tablets is well windows server, which is still windows with more features enabled...

I can see a lot of companies opting for low cost hardware, or client laptop/pc/tablets to connect to a subscription based cloud mainframe to do work. Whether it be programming, graphics design, or writing documents.

Its basically Onlive for the office.

Guys remember this prediction. Make sure you have it set in your calender to remind you in a year or two so we can destroy him.

Nothing to do here. I wonder why people attack Windows 8 so much. Maybe they're sad because there is not a Metro app that controls the s**t they do in the bathroom.

iMamoru said,
Nothing to do here. I wonder why people attack Windows 8 so much

Because they hate it, its not rocket science

Wow, what a colossally idiotic prediction. How can businesses get rid of PCs if people need to actually get work done. Yeah, when all work in the real corporate can be done by browsing the Internet, tweeting and posting to Facebook, then the PC will probably go by the wayside.

devHead said,
Wow, what a colossally idiotic prediction. How can businesses get rid of PCs if people need to actually get work done. Yeah, when all work in the real corporate can be done by browsing the Internet, tweeting and posting to Facebook, then the PC will probably go by the wayside.

That's not what he is talking about. He is talking about taking your *entire* PC (and all the apps and software on it), and instead of an HDMI cable coming from it, having an Ethernet cable coming from it to your screen. But there is a fallacy here.

Cloud computing can't ever work, because of our current bandwidth limitations. Hell, there are still people using dial up for frak's sake. When I remote into my machines, there's a clear delay between my actions and what shows up on screen.

Second, you will NEVER, EVER get me to store personal data in some one else's servers. EVER. I want my stuff local. There's absolutely no reason it needs to be online. None. This douche can say all he wants, but my data is MY data.

Dot Matrix said,

That's not what he is talking about. He is talking about taking your *entire* PC (and all the apps and software on it), and instead of an HDMI cable coming from it, having an Ethernet cable coming from it to your screen. But there is a fallacy here.

Cloud computing can't ever work, because of our current bandwidth limitations. Hell, there are still people using dial up for frak's sake. When I remote into my machines, there's a clear delay between my actions and what shows up on screen.

Second, you will NEVER, EVER get me to store personal data in some one else's servers. EVER. I want my stuff local. There's absolutely no reason it needs to be online. None. This douche can say all he wants, but my data is MY data.


That's why Windows 8 will run perfectly fine on a system without a network connection.
How do you remote your systems? LMI? TV? or similar software? You know the connection goes through a server before reaching the client, then back through a server to you. Adding a HUGE amount of latency/lag.
If you have a straight RDP connection, the latency and lag is almost unnoticeable. And it does not require a big fat connection.
China is moving to broadband, the EU and US are moving to fiber.
And even though people even here in the Netherlands still have dial-up connections, they are not using the latest available OS. I've seen allot of people that had dial-up still running a 9x Windows.

Dot Matrix said,

That's not what he is talking about. He is talking about taking your *entire* PC (and all the apps and software on it), and instead of an HDMI cable coming from it, having an Ethernet cable coming from it to your screen. But there is a fallacy here.

Well, I was referring to his 'unnamed CIO' source who said they're getting rid of PCs. That's just retarded.

He sounds like Apple who says we are in a post-PC era which isn't true at all.
I think Windows 8 is the start to a great new future for Windows actually. =)

Niekess said,
He sounds like Apple who says we are in a post-PC era which isn't true at all.
I think Windows 8 is the start to a great new future for Windows actually. =)

my thoughts exactly, I hate it when people claim it's a post pc world and yet people don't work on nothing other than a pc. Heck a tablet is just a gimmick and nothing more... What Microsoft is doing is actually giving consumer the option for tablet yet allowing them to have the desktop and converging both worlds is what Windows 8 is all about.

nickcruz said,

my thoughts exactly, I hate it when people claim it's a post pc world and yet people don't work on nothing other than a pc. Heck a tablet is just a gimmick and nothing more... What Microsoft is doing is actually giving consumer the option for tablet yet allowing them to have the desktop and converging both worlds is what Windows 8 is all about.

And look at what powers iTunes (the back-end heavy-lifting servers) - here's a surprise; it's not OS X Server. It's actually a combination of clouds running Windows Azure and Amazon EC2 - and mostly Windows Azure at that. Even were bandwidth issues to completely go away across the planet entire (chances of that - zero; if something can be rationed, it WILL be, by someone, if only to preserve an illusion of control), you can no more get rid of Windows than you can unring a bell.

I see more thin client type stuff these days than I see cloud OSes, so as long as Windows licenses are still in demand I'm sure this guy's prediction is wrong.

Dot Matrix said,
Huh? I will never use cloud based operating systems. **** that.

horses for courses. things like webmail will flourish on the web, things like word processing or spreadsheets are doomed to fail in that environment.

No one will ever totally move to the cloud.

Dot Matrix said,
Huh? I will never use cloud based operating systems. **** that.

Smart decision, at least you have some assurance of security with hardware. The cloud? Hardly secure and never will be.

Haven't people been predicting the death of MS and Windows for a very longtime?

"Benioff said he recently talked to an unnamed CIO. He stated, "Her goal is to get rid of all of the PCs. She doesn't see a demand curve from users for PCs.""

I don't get this at all. A move like this will only hurt OEM more than MS; does the cloud have to run on something?

gullygod said,
Haven't people been predicting the death of MS and Windows for a very longtime?

"Benioff said he recently talked to an unnamed CIO. He stated, "Her goal is to get rid of all of the PCs. She doesn't see a demand curve from users for PCs.""

I don't get this at all. A move like this will only hurt OEM more than MS; does the cloud have to run on something?

Only since around 1991 and every year after that. Heck in 1995, Ellison declared Windows dead and Network PCs would take over.

gullygod said,
Haven't people been predicting the death of MS and Windows for a very longtime?

"Benioff said he recently talked to an unnamed CIO. He stated, "Her goal is to get rid of all of the PCs. She doesn't see a demand curve from users for PCs.""

I don't get this at all. A move like this will only hurt OEM more than MS; does the cloud have to run on something?

Yes but MS is becoming irrelevant. CLoud based computing is the future. MS is way behind the curve

gullygod said,
Haven't people been predicting the death of MS and Windows for a very longtime?

"Benioff said he recently talked to an unnamed CIO. He stated, "Her goal is to get rid of all of the PCs. She doesn't see a demand curve from users for PCs.""

I don't get this at all. A move like this will only hurt OEM more than MS; does the cloud have to run on something?

Indeed they have.

I am (once again) reminded of a VERY old axiom that, despite its age, can be truthfully be said about Windows: "The trend is your friend."

Look at just how far Windows has come along in the not even thirty years of existence.

1. It started as a mere operating environment atop MS-DOS. Now it's multiple operating systems - on everything from phones to mainframe-class computers and - literally - everywhere in between.

2. Even if you don't own a PC, Windows is still well-nigh inescapable - it's in automobiles and running transport networks; the only place it isn't - yet - is in avionics. (It's already one place that not even Linux has gone yet - Mars.)

3. As much as Salesforce.com wants to try and play up the cloud, much to their chagrin, Windows has nary a single issue with the cloud - in fact, here's a question I'd like Salesforce.com to try to answer - in what way is Salesforce.com INcompatible with Windows? Windows *itself* - and especially Windows 8 - is cloud-deployable today; all it takes is the same to deploy ANY OS from the cloud - bandwidth.
4. Lastly, Windows Azure RUNS clouds - public, hybrid, and private - today. Cloud computing no more requires Linux than TCP/IP required UNIX fifteen years ago.

ChrisJ1968 said,

Yes but MS is becoming irrelevant. CLoud based computing is the future. MS is way behind the curve

You have got to be kidding or simply have no idea what you are talking about. MS is so behind the curve that Apple is using Azure to run iCloud. It is much easier to set up cloud services than figure how companies can transition and coexist and there is simply no other company on the planet to do it as well (or at all) as MS. Do get informed, eh?

ChrisJ1968 said,

Yes but MS is becoming irrelevant. CLoud based computing is the future. MS is way behind the curve

I don't think you know about the "cloud", otherwise you'd know Microsoft is actually ahead of the curve. Google and Microsoft were probably at the forefront, if anything Apple is very far behind that curve.

BigBoy said,

You have got to be kidding or simply have no idea what you are talking about. MS is so behind the curve that Apple is using Azure to run iCloud. It is much easier to set up cloud services than figure how companies can transition and coexist and there is simply no other company on the planet to do it as well (or at all) as MS. Do get informed, eh?


Add to it that Win8 is quite the cloud based OS.
Allot of what you do on your Windows 8 Desktop... save and unlock your tablet, then you continue exactly where you left off without making any effort.
Or rather, you're later sick of your tablet, need to stay updated on the information. Just check your WP device for info, or to continue your work/game.
Or even on your multimedia device the xbox. (Quite sure it'll get an update aswell for RT based apps, otherwise the next xbox will surely have it )

Might not be the end of Windows, but Win 8 will certainly be a failure (like Vista and ME).

What made Windows such a success was that it was what the people wanted and it gave power to the people.

Windows 8 is a Microsoft "agenda" to push a common OS across different platforms and its like trying to make a rocket ship run on unleaded petrol. Not going to work. Not suitable for the task, but most importantly it will make people feel powerless as they won't be able to use it.

It is a huge mistake, and Microsoft will pay dearly for it. If you have Microsoft shares, sell them now, or you will lose a bucket load of money.

dvb2000 said,
Might not be the end of Windows, but Win 8 will certainly be a failure (like Vista and ME).

What made Windows such a success was that it was what the people wanted and it gave power to the people.

Windows 8 is a Microsoft "agenda" to push a common OS across different platforms and its like trying to make a rocket ship run on unleaded petrol. Not going to work. Not suitable for the task, but most importantly it will make people feel powerless as they won't be able to use it.

It is a huge mistake, and Microsoft will pay dearly for it. If you have Microsoft shares, sell them now, or you will lose a bucket load of money.

I can argue you are wrong, but that would be opinion versus opinion. However, what you assert as the 'reason' for Windows and Microsoft's success and what they are doing with Windows 8 is far from historical, and even a bit clueless.

With every generation of Windows, people like yourself have claimed it would be a failure and was Microsoft pushing their agenda. Go look up the stories on Win95, Win98 especially, Windows 2K, Windows XP, etc.

(I'm not including WindowsME as it was the DOS based Window's team last ditch effort to try and compete with the NT team, and shoved way too much into an OS model that simply could not handle it.)

Vista on the other hand, everyone talks about as a 'failure' yet Microsoft sold more copies of Vista that Apple has sold Macs in the entire history of their company. So a 'bad' OS from Microsoft is equal to all the Macs and copies of OS X sold in the history of Apple combined? That doesn't sound much like a failure.

Additionally, as vendors got their network, video, sound drivers up to task, Vista was solid, demonstrating that it was poor hardware support not poor coding that hindered Vista. Even the ACPI issues were Mainboards that advertised to the OS they had features that were not implemented on the Mainboard.

As for Windows 8 being an 'Agenda', yes it is, just like every version of Windows that came before it was.

In 1992 hardware and 'purists' complained that Windows 3.1 was trying to take over functionality that was NOT NORMALLY what an OS should provide or manage. This once again happened with Windows95 and NT 3.1-4.0. OSes were not supposed to provide higher level driver frameworks for printing, sound, graphics, yet it was the seamless nature of drivers and commonality that made Windows a success for both developers, end users, and MFRs. No longer did people have to worry about what brand Printer they had and if WP or Lotus had a driver for it, no longer did users have to worry if the Windows Application could play sound on their 'Sound Blaster' or Yamaha depending on the applications to have drivers for both, which is where WinG and DirectX stepped in to offer this driver ambiguity for gaming as well, and started the modern PC gaming model. Prior to the Microsoft Agenda, games had to support your brand of sound/video card and/or an emulated and poor performance variation.

Windows is what has shoved the software and hardware industry forward. Even the 'horrible' Vista by shoving out new Networking and Sound and Video subsystems pushed the industry forward with Microsoft's Agenda, and now Windows 7/8 can multi-task GPU threads, manage the GPU, has a faster lighter network stack and provides sound with the lowest latency and lowest level of distortion when resampling/mixing sound of any OS currently being made. It also does all this without the average end user even aware of why 3D applications and GP-GPU doesn't step on each other, nor do they realize that OS X or Linux would come to a crawl if they tried to do 'normal' things they do daily.

As for non-technical agenda, Windows 95 was Microsoft 'forcing' its UI model on everyone and pushing people to a document model, Vista/7 was forcing users to a true GUI model by killing off antiquated control concepts like 'Menus'.

As for why you think this makes Windows 8 a failure is the exact reason I would argue it will not be a failure, as it does 'progress' the industry and users.

I'm sorry you are lost with all the new fancy stuff you don't understand.

thenetavenger said,

OSes were not supposed to provide higher level driver frameworks for printing, sound, graphics, yet it was the seamless nature of drivers and commonality that made Windows a success for both developers, end users, and MFRs. No longer did people have to worry about what brand Printer they had and if WP or Lotus had a driver for it, no longer did users have to worry if the Windows Application could play sound on their 'Sound Blaster' or Yamaha depending on the applications to have drivers for both, which is where WinG and DirectX stepped in to offer this driver ambiguity for gaming as well, and started the modern PC gaming model. Prior to the Microsoft Agenda, games had to support your brand of sound/video card and/or an emulated and poor performance variation.

Oh man, those days of installing a DOS game and having to run setup so you could tell each game individually what kind of hardware you had.

Soundblaster compatible? Or maybe SB16? SB Pro? Gravis Ultrasound?

Oh, you have a gamepad? Cool! Which one? Oh that one? Sorry, no dice.

I like to think games have maintained the complexity with the unnecessarily unfriendly 'graphics settings' panel. It absolutely amazes me that you can't choose a REAL, meaningful 'performance level', and the game dynamically sets demand on your GPU. Whether it's the GPU vendors, the OS, or the game devs themselves, it drives me nuts that dynamic 3D quality vs. system capabilities (much like dynamic video quality vs. changing bandwidth) has never been figured out.

thenetavenger said,

...
Nice explanation. However WinME wasn't as bad as people claim it to be. Or because people that where more tech savvy used Win2000 which was at the time better.
But compared to Win98, WinME was a decent OS. Just remember the first release of Win98 then compare it to how WinME was doing

thenetavenger said,

I can argue you are wrong, but that would be opinion versus opinion. However, what you assert as the 'reason' for Windows and Microsoft's success and what they are doing with Windows 8 is far from historical, and even a bit clueless.

I usually restrain myself from arguing about bullcrap that doesn't have anything to do with me, because I've been getting Windows copies for free, so I don't waste money on software.

What I want to ask you and the rest of the people who defend and like Windows 8 is the following:

How is it OK/normal/useful, to have big tiles and hidden gestures on a non-touch screen on a desktop?
That's the kind of computer I own and I've been installing and removing Windows 8 since around May. I've always been going back to XP or 7. I got used to Windows 8, but the main thing I don't like is where the Shut Down/Restart button is hidden. I can handle using Windows 8, but I think that its desktop design, which is no different than its tablet design is absolutely retarded.

The way I see it:

Microsoft: "Here you go, you nincompoops! This is called Windows 8 and you will use it on all your machines whether you like it or not!"

Saex_Conroy said,

I usually restrain myself from arguing about bullcrap that doesn't have anything to do with me, because I've been getting Windows copies for free, so I don't waste money on software.

What I want to ask you and the rest of the people who defend and like Windows 8 is the following:

How is it OK/normal/useful, to have big tiles and hidden gestures on a non-touch screen on a desktop?
That's the kind of computer I own and I've been installing and removing Windows 8 since around May. I've always been going back to XP or 7. I got used to Windows 8, but the main thing I don't like is where the Shut Down/Restart button is hidden. I can handle using Windows 8, but I think that its desktop design, which is no different than its tablet design is absolutely retarded.

The way I see it:

Microsoft: "Here you go, you nincompoops! This is called Windows 8 and you will use it on all your machines whether you like it or not!"

The shutdown button is not hidden. Depending on your computer, it may be in different locations, but it generally looks like this:

http://0.tqn.com/d/pcsupport/1.../3/-/-/power-button-400.jpg

Enron said,

The shutdown button is not hidden. Depending on your computer, it may be in different locations, but it generally looks like this:

http://0.tqn.com/d/pcsupport/1.../3/-/-/power-button-400.jpg

A wiseguy, huh?

This is what I'm talking about: http://www.c-sharpcorner.com/U...t-shut-down-in-windows8.gif

Either you have a cognitive disorder, or you are just dumb. I don't care, but either answer my question or don't quote me to show me how smart you think you are.

Saex_Conroy said,
A wiseguy, huh?

So if it's something you don't like just make your own tile for shutdown/reboot and be done with it, takes all of a few seconds.

Saex_Conroy said,

Either you have a cognitive disorder, or you are just dumb. I don't care, but either answer my question or don't quote me to show me how smart you think you are.

Thanks for your diagnosis, doctor. I'll help you with the basic functions of your computer in return for your help.

Saex_Conroy said,

A wiseguy, huh?

This is what I'm talking about: http://www.c-sharpcorner.com/U...t-shut-down-in-windows8.gif

Either you have a cognitive disorder, or you are just dumb. I don't care, but either answer my question or don't quote me to show me how smart you think you are.

Why do you people make such a big deal about the damn shut down button? Seriously, how many people use this? It's not even hard to get to, just in a different place and one more click than it was in Windows 7. Who gives a ****?

thenetavenger said,

I can argue you are wrong, but that would be opinion versus opinion. However, what you assert as the 'reason' for Windows and Microsoft's success and what they are doing with Windows 8 is far from historical, and even a bit clueless.

With every generation of Windows, people like yourself have claimed it would be a failure and was Microsoft pushing their agenda. Go look up the stories on Win95, Win98 especially, Windows 2K, Windows XP, etc.

(I'm not including WindowsME as it was the DOS based Window's team last ditch effort to try and compete with the NT team, and shoved way too much into an OS model that simply could not handle it.)

Vista on the other hand, everyone talks about as a 'failure' yet Microsoft sold more copies of Vista that Apple has sold Macs in the entire history of their company. So a 'bad' OS from Microsoft is equal to all the Macs and copies of OS X sold in the history of Apple combined? That doesn't sound much like a failure.

Additionally, as vendors got their network, video, sound drivers up to task, Vista was solid, demonstrating that it was poor hardware support not poor coding that hindered Vista. Even the ACPI issues were Mainboards that advertised to the OS they had features that were not implemented on the Mainboard.

As for Windows 8 being an 'Agenda', yes it is, just like every version of Windows that came before it was.

In 1992 hardware and 'purists' complained that Windows 3.1 was trying to take over functionality that was NOT NORMALLY what an OS should provide or manage. This once again happened with Windows95 and NT 3.1-4.0. OSes were not supposed to provide higher level driver frameworks for printing, sound, graphics, yet it was the seamless nature of drivers and commonality that made Windows a success for both developers, end users, and MFRs. No longer did people have to worry about what brand Printer they had and if WP or Lotus had a driver for it, no longer did users have to worry if the Windows Application could play sound on their 'Sound Blaster' or Yamaha depending on the applications to have drivers for both, which is where WinG and DirectX stepped in to offer this driver ambiguity for gaming as well, and started the modern PC gaming model. Prior to the Microsoft Agenda, games had to support your brand of sound/video card and/or an emulated and poor performance variation.

Windows is what has shoved the software and hardware industry forward. Even the 'horrible' Vista by shoving out new Networking and Sound and Video subsystems pushed the industry forward with Microsoft's Agenda, and now Windows 7/8 can multi-task GPU threads, manage the GPU, has a faster lighter network stack and provides sound with the lowest latency and lowest level of distortion when resampling/mixing sound of any OS currently being made. It also does all this without the average end user even aware of why 3D applications and GP-GPU doesn't step on each other, nor do they realize that OS X or Linux would come to a crawl if they tried to do 'normal' things they do daily.

As for non-technical agenda, Windows 95 was Microsoft 'forcing' its UI model on everyone and pushing people to a document model, Vista/7 was forcing users to a true GUI model by killing off antiquated control concepts like 'Menus'.

As for why you think this makes Windows 8 a failure is the exact reason I would argue it will not be a failure, as it does 'progress' the industry and users.

I'm sorry you are lost with all the new fancy stuff you don't understand.

Wow. This.

mrp04 said,

Why do you people make such a big deal about the damn shut down button? Seriously, how many people use this? It's not even hard to get to, just in a different place and one more click than it was in Windows 7. Who gives a ****?

Because we are used to doing things one way. The old way is more robust meaning 1 less click in this instance. Why would I want to add steps the use of computers is supposed to simplify my tasks not add a new learning curve. I thing Win8 is great for touch, but terrible for a desktop. I would not be upset if they gave us a Metro shut off switch, but they want us to use Metro 90 percent of the time so they can move into an Apple like software control scheme.

Meaning all software will have to some from the microsoft store. I dont want that I like getting 3rd party software directly from the vendor. Try using a surface. When you find out you cant install Opera the good old fashioned way and a "metro" version does not exist that is the fututer of windows. They want a locked down completely closed and dominated OS by them. No other software period. I want to stay free and get software from where I want. sure they will say that it is more secure to get it from them, but I am an adult and an IT major I can make my own software decisions. Windows 8 will be a vista and 9 is where we will get back a decent OS.

Truthfully the BS they added in 8 they could have put out a patch for 7 and been doen with it, but typical MS fashion they want a buck for something most people do not want.

goreala said,

Because we are used to doing things one way. The old way is more robust meaning 1 less click in this instance. Why would I want to add steps the use of computers is supposed to simplify my tasks not add a new learning curve. I thing Win8 is great for touch, but terrible for a desktop. I would not be upset if they gave us a Metro shut off switch, but they want us to use Metro 90 percent of the time so they can move into an Apple like software control scheme.

Meaning all software will have to some from the microsoft store. I dont want that I like getting 3rd party software directly from the vendor. Try using a surface. When you find out you cant install Opera the good old fashioned way and a "metro" version does not exist that is the fututer of windows. They want a locked down completely closed and dominated OS by them. No other software period. I want to stay free and get software from where I want. sure they will say that it is more secure to get it from them, but I am an adult and an IT major I can make my own software decisions. Windows 8 will be a vista and 9 is where we will get back a decent OS.

Truthfully the BS they added in 8 they could have put out a patch for 7 and been doen with it, but typical MS fashion they want a buck for something most people do not want.

I really am surprised at all the people that call themselves "IT" guys yet can't handle change. Leave that for the users.

I cant say I've used the shut down button on Windows 8 yet. I havent shut down my computer since I upgraded. The Windows Store might be there but it won't stop you from installing non-Windows Store software. Look at OS X, it has an App Store, but you're not tied to it.