Windows Threshold Technical Preview: It's all about feedback, feedback, feedback

Windows Threshold is getting really darn close to being ready for its public release. With the 30th of September quickly approaching, Microsoft is starting to put the final pieces together to create a release of the build that is ready for public consumption. 

The preview of Threshold is going to be all about feedback. Microsoft wants to collect all sorts of input from the users as to what they like, what they don't like, which features should be changed, added or removed, and anything and everything in between. 

Mary Jo Foley was the first to grab this bit of news and since we had heard the same thing and could add a bit more, we figured we would add some color to the reasoning why they want feedback and what to expect. The short answer to why they are focusing so heavily on user feedback is not just about polishing the experience for user - it's also because the enterprise hates Windows 8.

It's not a big surprise and this is why Threshold will have tons of feedback surveys to make sure that they avoid this issue with the next iteration of Windows. So what will these surveys look like? Well, they appear in large windows and cover a wide range of topics but for this example, we will use searching as a feedback item.

At the top of the survey, it says "Please share your feedback with Microsoft about Searching". Anything related to your search experience can be entered here, whether related to the Start Menu, Cortana or a bunch of other items. The next question asks if you were successful in "Searching" and provides you with Yes, No, or Not Sure. 

You then move down the page to another area where you are asked about the following parameters: 'Ease of Use', 'Valuable to me', 'Enjoyable', 'Is it Fast?' and a couple more general questions as well. You rate these items on a scale of 1 to 5 and then send them off to Microsoft.

Microsoft will be using the telemetry data gathered over the beta cycles of Threshold to help shape the features to exactly what the user needs and more importantly, expects.

The rapid updates that we talked about in a previous post could be part of this as Microsoft very well could send different features to some users to test out. We're still trying to clarify this, but it is also possible that, depending on your feedback, different features may be made available to you to test out. Or, this could dictate which surveys you take too.

Microsoft has made a real effort lately to listen to consumer feedback and has been opening up avenues to discuss new features for some time. So it only makes sense that Windows, a core product for the company, would go down this path too. Even when they announced the return of the Start menu, Terry Myerson said it was based on feedback from users.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows Threshold: Say hello to the notification center

Next Story

HTC has reportedly killed its smartwatch plans

80 Comments

Please Login or Sign Up to post a comment.

The bigger issue (with 8 and later) is that while hardware changes (going back to 7) accelerated (due to decreasing costs for things like touch-screen displays), software support for those changes (in the Windows space) largely wasn't there. It's not that touch-screen displays didn't exist when Windows 7 launched - most of you here at Neowin know better than to make THAT assumption. In fact, how many of you upgraded your OS (from 7 to 8 or later) and found NEW features you didn't even know you had that said upgrade uncovered?

The other side of that, of course, is that how do you learn about a feature you aren't exposed to? The answer to that is quite obvious - you don't. Throw in a pressure to spend less (which ALWAYS exists in enterprises - there is never a pressure to spend MORE in terms of user training in any enterprise environment, even a government environment) and you get resistance to an even greater degree. It's why I brought up a dichotomy between Windows hardware and the OS side - the dichotomy is decidedly there, and because of a deliberate attempt to calcify the software side of Windows, will likely only grow.

Seeing as they're wanting Feedback! How about they start a general Windows uservoice site, and put a link in the OS or something.

Certainly it was not the lack of feedback that made Windows 8 such a disaster. It was Microsofts attitude to completely ignore it but pretending that every decision has been made on feedback or telemetry data. Blatantly lies it is obvious now.
If Mircosoft would change his attitude, I would appreciate it. But looking at Windows Phone I don´t believe this will happen. Still there is no upgrade path from Windows Mobile and Windows Phone 7.x to get data like text messages to a current Windows Phone 8.1 device. The app that pretends to achieve this are a joke as they dont transfer text messages compeltely and if, only text messages received are getting transferred.
This is a complete joke. So hopefully without Sinofsky and Ballmer this is really a new era to listen to customers instead of forcing them into something they don´t want. But I do not yet believe it.

koyamis said,
Certainly it was not the lack of feedback that made Windows 8 such a disaster. It was Microsofts attitude to completely ignore it but pretending that every decision has been made on feedback or telemetry data. Blatantly lies it is obvious now.
If Mircosoft would change his attitude, I would appreciate it. But looking at Windows Phone I don´t believe this will happen. Still there is no upgrade path from Windows Mobile and Windows Phone 7.x to get data like text messages to a current Windows Phone 8.1 device. The app that pretends to achieve this are a joke as they dont transfer text messages compeltely and if, only text messages received are getting transferred.
This is a complete joke. So hopefully without Sinofsky and Ballmer this is really a new era to listen to customers instead of forcing them into something they don´t want. But I do not yet believe it.

There's no upgrade path since Windows Phone 7/8 wasn't meant to run on legacy devices, and Windows Phone 7 was a stepping stone from Windows Mobile to the current iteration of Windows Phone 8.

Windows Phone 8 features better architectural changes that WP7 devices couldn't handle.

Windows-9, with a selectable UI, will be the real test as to whether Microsoft's new leadership has learned anything from customer feedback.

@Dot Matrix, I think koyamis was talking about data migration when "upgrading" your device, i.e. buying a WP 8.1 device and transferring data from WP7 or WP8 device. There is no easy to completely transfer some data like text messages according to koyamis.

Swapnil Rustagi said,
@Dot Matrix, I think koyamis was talking about data migration when "upgrading" your device, i.e. buying a WP 8.1 device and transferring data from WP7 or WP8 device. There is no easy to completely transfer some data like text messages according to koyamis.

Windows Phone includes text messaging backup. However, it is a new feature.

Alright, MS had also feedback from secret users that no one uses start menu, so what happend to those users. Overall, after horrible mdss win 8, I wont even bother to install any of their bets product and I don't trust this vision less company for anything they say.

My only wish is for my 8" Intel Atom tablet to continue to have the desktop interface. It really makes a great productivity device on the go, paired with a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse.

I heard rumours that the desktop interface would be gone for small tablets... I mean, in that case, I would much rather buy an Android tablet instead!

I'm sure your atom tablet has video out. What happens when a small screen device is connected to a large monitor, keyboard and mouse? I think this makes it necessary to keep the traditional desktop as an option for small screen devices, at least ones that have displayport or HDMI out.

My only wish is for my 8" Intel Atom tablet to continue to have the desktop interface. It really makes a great productivity device on the go, paired with a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse.

I heard rumours that the desktop interface would be gone for small tablets... I mean, in that case, I would much rather buy an Android tablet instead!

LEAKED screenshots please. Or are Neowin no longer allowed to under new T&Cs? If so, goodbye Neowin.

I will be deploying this as a main OS dualbooting with 8.1 on both my machines because of this emphasis on feedback, and I will endeavor to make serious feedback reports, bug reports with memory dumps and information on reproduceability, etc. I will do my part to improve Windows 9.

Almost everyone involved in Windows8 has been "replaced". ;)

Looking at how much Microsoft is listening to feedback now and making changes based on that I think they will not repeat the forced Windows8 approach.

john.smith_2084 said,
They told us Windows 8 was all about feedback and ..... you know the rest

I hope they changed the guy collecting the feedback :-)


Telemetry, telemetry, telemetry, telemetry, telemetry, telemetry, telemetry, telemetry!!!!!!

One hopes that with Sinofsky gone, they'll actually listen to the feedback. 1+ year of Win 8 feedback on the B8 blog, technet, MS forums etc was completely and totally ignored.

"its all about feedback, feedback" haha!! thats funny coming from MS. People complained about lack of Start Menu from day one with windows 8, even months before release, and there still is no start menu, seems like feedback doesn't matter to them. Unless it returns back in 9 now. Oh, you want start menu, pay us for update.

There's a different regime in place, and I feel confident they learned a lot from the previous regimes failures with Windows 8.

Its much more than just the reappearance of the Start Menu. It is the entire Metro-inspired User Interface. Trying to make one UI for all users was a bad idea from the first day.

Enterprise doesn't like OS releases more frequent the 4 years or so and only grudgingly that often because they like to start deployments before the 5 year Mainstream support cycle ends. In general Windows 7 still the OS of choice not only because Enterprise doesn't like the Touch centric nature of Windows 8 but because weren't ready to upgrade when Windows 8 launched anyway. With Mainstream support for WIndows 7 ending in January 2015 Enterprise is going to start looking to upgrade in earnest. This is a multi-year process though and will continue throughout the "Extended Support" phase (where MS still provides security updates).
This means unless MS screws something up with Threshold it will likely be the OS Enterprise moves to over the next few years. If they go to yearly releases or some such though Enterprise will again ignore the post Threshold releases no matter how cool the successors are until Threshold nears the end of its Mainstream support. Enterprise can't afford to roll out new OS versions every year or so.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Microsoft actually listening and responding positively to customer feedback is something new for them. It may be an oversimplification; but, if Microsoft thinks that a single UI will be able to handle the wide range of devices and work styles equally well, they haven't been listening and why would they start listening now?

I have a system sitting in the corner ready for an OS. Lets see how it performs on these really old workstations.

This will be pretty interesting. I like how it works on Xbox One. The progress being made is good and shows correlation to actual requests made. I really like Windows 8, and all the improvements in 8.1. 9 should be even better and make it more useful on more devices/setups.

Hoping Cortana is surfaced high in the UI stack .. maybe with option to always listening for "hey cortana". Will be interesting to see if it replaces the speech recognition system currently found in Windows.

I'm going to tell Microsoft what I told them back in the Windows 8 previews: my desktop PC is not a tablet. Let's hope they actually listen this time...

Not really. This is MS asking for lots of feedback, which they also did for Windows 8. There's nothing to indicate that they will actually listen to, and act on the feedback.

Exactly. Taking feedback is one thing, actually changing the product to reflect that feedback is where MS falls down, or certainly did with Win8.

knighthawk said,
Exactly. Taking feedback is one thing, actually changing the product to reflect that feedback is where MS falls down, or certainly did with Win8.

Well, the infallible megalomaniac who thought to know what is right and wrong is gone... so there is hope.

Cosmocronos said,

Well, the infallible megalomaniac who thought to know what is right and wrong is gone... so there is hope.

What are you talking about, Dot Matrix is still here.

So is it pretty much confirmed that Threshold is a new stand-alone version of Windows and not a major update for Windows 8?

Because Microsoft said at the BUILD conference that restoration of the start menu would be a free update for Windows 8.x users.

http://bgr.com/2014/04/02/microsoft-build-conference-news/

DeusProto said,
Because Microsoft said at the BUILD conference that restoration of the start menu would be a free update for Windows 8.x users.

http://bgr.com/2014/04/02/microsoft-build-conference-news/

When W9/next will launch MS could offer the Start Menu, and only that, as an update for W8 users. If, as I suspect and hope, the Start Menu will be integrated in the new Sidebar.... you could either open the wallet and upgrade or settle with Startdock.

As far as I can tell its not an architecture change and more of a UI modification. They are changing the name to 9 to distance itself from the stigma 8 has. That's why I said it should be a free upgrade from existing 8.1 installs.

I'm also thinking about my customers who, against my advice, wanted to make sure they had the latest supported OS from Microsoft. If they have to buy it again....

I'm sure that if its not free there will be huge discounts at launch.

It is the right thing for MS to spend so much time and resources listening and hopefully implementing user suggestions and feedbacks. Half of my app features came from user suggestions. And it is now getting more and more downloads a day.

If Microsoft did listen to user feedback, they certainly haven't responded to it in any meaningful way. So, we don't know--didn't listen at all or listened and ignored.

Maybe I'm wrong here, but the Tech Previews, generally are downloaded by folks like us here on Neowin, and are typically more power users. In general does the average consumer try it out, enough to give feedback. Only reason I ask, is because of the harsh reaction of Windows 8 which was definitely due, but in the end gave it serious negative perception.

wv@gt said,
Maybe I'm wrong here, but the Tech Previews, generally are downloaded by folks like us here on Neowin, and are typically more power users. In general does the average consumer try it out, enough to give feedback. Only reason I ask, is because of the harsh reaction of Windows 8 which was definitely due, but in the end gave it serious negative perception.

Plenty of power users were telling Microsoft, during the 8 Technical preview "Please for the love of god Microsoft ... NO!... Don't do it"

They didn't listen. Now they are back peddling ..

Edited by warwagon, Sep 5 2014, 2:14pm :

Part of being a good IT pro means that you can empathize with your user base. Something that was clearly lacking from the vocal but inexperienced "I'm the center of the universe" types.

warwagon said,
Just like how during the 8 preview everyone said, no no no no no no... and they ...went a head with it.

In that case, I'm glad they ignored all the no no no no and went ahead with 8's release. Why?

The PC market had been plummeting for a while. Long before 8 ever came onto the scene. I'm an engineer, and in my trade we have a saying. If something doesn't work, don't keep trying the same thing. People who said no no no no wanted MS to make windows 8 exactly like windows 7. If the PC market was plummeting with windows 7 at the helm, what on Earth makes you think release another version of windows 7 will change that?

The reality is MS needed to make a directional change in order to compete with google and crapple. Releasing another version of 7 wouldn't have change anything. They needed to push a change in the MS niche.

People hate change. That's why 8 was so unpopular. But I firmly believe the Modern UX will save the MS echosystem regardless of whether you want to admit it or not.

livingenzyme said,

In that case, I'm glad they ignored all the no no no no and went ahead with 8's release. Why?

The PC market had been plummeting for a while. Long before 8 ever came onto the scene. I'm an engineer, and in my trade we have a saying. If something doesn't work, don't keep trying the same thing. People who said no no no no wanted MS to make windows 8 exactly like windows 7. If the PC market was plummeting with windows 7 at the helm, what on Earth makes you think release another version of windows 7 will change that?

The reality is MS needed to make a directional change in order to compete with google and crapple. Releasing another version of 7 wouldn't have change anything. They needed to push a change in the MS niche.

People hate change. That's why 8 was so unpopular. But I firmly believe the Modern UX will save the MS echosystem regardless of whether you want to admit it or not.

The PC market is slowing for several reasons: people hold on their existing ones longer, no compelling reasons to upgrade if my four years old desktop does what I need.
people dived in the Tablet segment which is slowing its growth as well.
W7 did not sink the market and less than ever W8 resurrected it; the overall spending dynamics have changed: people have less disposable income, they have a greater uncertainty about the future and do not get in wild spending spree.
Oh, and people do not hate changes: offer, never try to impose, something new that the recipients perceive as a step forward and they will jump on it, if it is perceived otherwise... blame yourself not them.

Cosmocronos said,

The PC market is slowing for several reasons: people hold on their existing ones longer, no compelling reasons to upgrade if my four years old desktop does what I need.
people dived in the Tablet segment which is slowing its growth as well.
W7 did not sink the market and less than ever W8 resurrected it; the overall spending dynamics have changed: people have less disposable income, they have a greater uncertainty about the future and do not get in wild spending spree.
Oh, and people do not hate changes: offer, never try to impose, something new that the recipients perceive as a step forward and they will jump on it, if it is perceived otherwise... blame yourself not them.

He's right though, however I think that every version from Vista onwards laid the groundwork for the successor. Without Vista we wouldn't have Windows 7, without Windows 7 we wouldn't have Windows 8 and without Windows 8 we won't have Windows 9.

With Microsoft you have to look long term, I see where they are headed though and that is different interfaces for different devices:

Desktop w/Touchscreen - Modern UI and Desktop
Desktop w/o Touchscreen - Desktop
Laptop/Hybrid w/Touchscreen - Modern UI and Desktop
Laptop w/o Touchscreen - Desktop
Hybrid Tablet e.g. Surface - Modern UI
Tablet - Modern UI

neo158 said,

He's right though, however I think that every version from Vista onwards laid the groundwork for the successor. Without Vista we wouldn't have Windows 7, without Windows 7 we wouldn't have Windows 8 and without Windows 8 we won't have Windows 9.

With Microsoft you have to look long term, I see where they are headed though and that is different interfaces for different devices:

Desktop w/Touchscreen - Modern UI and Desktop
Desktop w/o Touchscreen - Desktop
Laptop/Hybrid w/Touchscreen - Modern UI and Desktop
Laptop w/o Touchscreen - Desktop
Hybrid Tablet e.g. Surface - Modern UI
Tablet - Modern UI

Personally I disagree with the idea to dictate to users what interface they should use, offer them one as predefined based on the device could be all right but dictate it would be the perfect receipt for disaster.
I use a desktop with three screens and no touch, still sometimes I use Modern apps and the Start screen. I use a Tablet PC since the first devices of such kind, I bought a Toshiba 3505, were launched and I never considered a Slate format, always and only Convertible ones. Right now I replaced my Lenovo Helix with a I7 Surface 3 and I use both Metro and Desktop interfaces; either one alone would not fit my needs.
The main factor is that when your audience is more than one billion users there is no way to engineer a solution that fit them all no matter how elaborated and sophisticated parameters you could use are; as I said above offer a predefined interface based on the device while allowing the user to modify it to fit personal preferences is the safest and the most likely strategy to be successful.

Cosmocronos said,

Personally I disagree with the idea to dictate to users what interface they should use, offer them one as predefined based on the device could be all right but dictate it would be the perfect receipt for disaster.
I use a desktop with three screens and no touch, still sometimes I use Modern apps and the Start screen. I use a Tablet PC since the first devices of such kind, I bought a Toshiba 3505, were launched and I never considered a Slate format, always and only Convertible ones. Right now I replaced my Lenovo Helix with a I7 Surface 3 and I use both Metro and Desktop interfaces; either one alone would not fit my needs.

I agree, which is why I really hope to get a chance to provide feed back on the ARM version of Threshold and tell them to not only keep the desktop, but to open it up to developers and allow modern UI apps in window mode just like in x86 Threshold. Don't make it a dumbed down phone OS with only modern ui stuck in full screen.

warwagon said,
And now they are reversing most of those decisions because it turned out people hated them as predicted.

Nope, they haven't reversed anything. They've improved the experience based on user input. And that's exactly what they're suppose to do.

Again, the PC market was a sinking ship. MS needed to make a long term directional change immediately to avert disaster.

I ask again. If the PC market was sinking long before windows 8 came out, what on Earth makes you think another version of windows 7 would have changed anything?

Cosmocronos said,

Personally I disagree with the idea to dictate to users what interface they should use, offer them one as predefined based on the device could be all right but dictate it would be the perfect receipt for disaster.


But that's just it. They did give people a choice. I started using windows 8 from day one and it took me no time at all to get used to it. I mainly stayed on the metro (modern) screen on my tablets and the desktop on my desktop. With my laptop that I traveled with, I switched back and forth between the 2.

You and many others make it sound like MS killed off the desktop.

And I don't understand the hate people have for touch on their work devices. Every time this subject came up, some people always bring up the conspiracy theory that MS has a gestapo squad going door to door taking people's mouse and keyboard away. It's been annoying me since day one when the first tech reviews started accusing MS of forcing everyone to ditch their keyboards and mice. What's wrong with having a 3rd way of interacting with your computer? Did the invention of the mouse kill the keyboard? Why on Earth do people think touch will kill off the mouse or keyboard?

In short, the choices were always there. The only explanation I can come up with to why people pretend like the desktop is dead in 8 even though it's right there in front of them is they actually hate choice.

I would say that W 8.1 is by far more flexible and offer more choices than W8.
And yes, of course the desktop was still there; how, just to make an example, were users supposed to run their programs without it?
BTW I never implied, less than ever stated, that MS killed off the desktop; my point is that when launched W8 did not allow people to tailor the experience in the way that best fitted them. Again something that in W8.1 and forward is being corrected.

Two separate UIs in Windows-9 would certainly solve so many, if not all, of Windows-8's shortcomings. One UI for desktops (think Windows-7) and one UI for touch-centric devices (think Windows-8). What is so difficult about that?

TsarNikky said,
Two separate UIs in Windows-9 would certainly solve so many, if not all, of Windows-8's shortcomings. One UI for desktops (think Windows-7) and one UI for touch-centric devices (think Windows-8). What is so difficult about that?

You are describing windows 8.1.

domboy said,

I agree, which is why I really hope to get a chance to provide feed back on the ARM version of Threshold and tell them to not only keep the desktop, but to open it up to developers and allow modern UI apps in window mode just like in x86 Threshold. Don't make it a dumbed down phone OS with only modern ui stuck in full screen.

Why would you NEED the desktop on ARM, the desktop on RT just caused confusion between what Surface and Surface Pro offered to the average consumer who doesn't care what architecture runs underneath.

It's only power users who want an ARM based Desktop only tablet and MS won't cater to such a niche market. The desktop NEEDS to go on ARM as it's not needed, you don't see an iPad with the Mac OS desktop, do you?

livingenzyme said,

You are describing windows 8.1.

That wasn't the case though, all Windows 8.1 did was enforce different defaults based on the device being used.

Cosmocronos said,

Personally I disagree with the idea to dictate to users what interface they should use, offer them one as predefined based on the device could be all right but dictate it would be the perfect receipt for disaster.
I use a desktop with three screens and no touch, still sometimes I use Modern apps and the Start screen. I use a Tablet PC since the first devices of such kind, I bought a Toshiba 3505, were launched and I never considered a Slate format, always and only Convertible ones. Right now I replaced my Lenovo Helix with a I7 Surface 3 and I use both Metro and Desktop interfaces; either one alone would not fit my needs.
The main factor is that when your audience is more than one billion users there is no way to engineer a solution that fit them all no matter how elaborated and sophisticated parameters you could use are; as I said above offer a predefined interface based on the device while allowing the user to modify it to fit personal preferences is the safest and the most likely strategy to be successful.

That list I provided with what I think the different classes of devices should use should be exactly what MS provide, obviously they should provide a way for people on non RT based devices to change the defaults.

neo158 said,

Why would you NEED the desktop on ARM, the desktop on RT just caused confusion between what Surface and Surface Pro offered to the average consumer who doesn't care what architecture runs underneath.

It's only power users who want an ARM based Desktop only tablet and MS won't cater to such a niche market. The desktop NEEDS to go on ARM as it's not needed, you don't see an iPad with the Mac OS desktop, do you?

1. Maybe I am a power user?
2. I don't want a "desktop-only tablet" as you put it, but I don't want a modern UI only "tablet" either. I want my convertible device (which happens to have an ARM cpu inside) to have both the power-user/productivity UI (desktop) and the simple user UI (modern ui). Is it really that hard to understand? The iPad is a bad comparison as it runs a mobile OS. Windows RT in its current form is pretty much Windows 8 for ARM, NOT a phone OS.

On top of that, it's more than just the UI that an unlocked desktop would be most desirable to have on ARM machines... as it stands today the desktop is where most of the powerful APIs still live. IF you want ANYTHING outside of simple sandboxed apps, you need an unlocked desktop. For example:
- want third party browsers (chrome, firefox etc)? You need the desktop.
- want third party VPN clients? Need the desktop.
- want software such as Java and other runtime environments? Need the desktop.

Those are just the things I can think of off the top of my head. Maybe all of this will change with threshold (improvements to the WinRT API), but why can't Windows on ARM be a full-blown OS just like Windows 8 (and 9) instead of a stripped-down phone OS? THAT is my whole point.

Edited by domboy, Sep 8 2014, 7:14pm :

domboy said,

1. Maybe I am a power user?
2. I don't want a "desktop-only tablet" as you put it, but I don't want a modern UI only "tablet" either. I want my convertible device (which happens to have an ARM cpu inside) to have both the power-user/productivity UI (desktop) and the simple user UI (modern ui). Is it really that hard to understand? The iPad is a bad comparison as it runs a mobile OS. Windows RT in its current form is pretty much Windows 8 for ARM, NOT a phone OS.

On top of that, it's more than just the UI that an unlocked desktop would be most desirable to have on ARM machines... as it stands today the desktop is where most of the powerful APIs still live. IF you want ANYTHING outside of simple sandboxed apps, you need an unlocked desktop. For example:
- want third party browsers (chrome, firefox etc)? You need the desktop.
- want third party VPN clients? Need the desktop.
- want software such as Java and other runtime environments? Need the desktop.

Those are just the things I can think of off the top of my head. Maybe all of this will change with threshold (improvements to the WinRT API), but why can't Windows on ARM be a full-blown OS just like Windows 8 (and 9) instead of a stripped-down phone OS? THAT is my whole point.

How many of those applications are compiled for use on ARM without being a phone version? That's right, none because there's no need for an ARM desktop version.

WP proves that a VPN doesn't NEED a desktop version to work, Windows RT even has VPN capabilities built in. Java would only slow down and rapidly drain the battery on an ARM based tablet anyway, that's without even considering the security issues surrounding Java that would negate one of the reasons for an ARM processor.

Why can't it be a full blown OS? Because it would create confusion among average consumers. Remember, it's not just those of us on here that use tablets, if Windows on ARM was a full blown OS I can just see all the "I can't run (insert any desktop application here) on my Windows RT tablet" comments from non power users. If you require a "full-blown OS" then you should have opted for Surface Pro.

The desktop on RT needs to go, permanently!!!

Edited by neo158, Sep 8 2014, 7:07pm :

neo158 said,

How many of those applications are compiled for use on ARM without being a phone version? That's right, none because there's no need for an ARM desktop version.

There are already plenty of open-source desktop applications compiled for ARM. Because they're not need of course and people were just wasting their time of course:

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2092348

There would be even more if Microsoft provided an official way for users to change the signing restriction (unlock the desktop) in Windows RT. Third party developers could and would re-compile applications for it.

neo158 said,

WP proves that a VPN doesn't NEED a desktop version to work, Windows RT even has VPN capabilities built in.

Yeah, if you're lucky enough to have a workplace that still uses an IPSec VPN. SSL VPN? Out of luck... which is one of the biggest complaints/requested features about Windows RT and a complete dead end with the locked desktop APIs. Microsoft cannot write a universal SSL client... third-party application required.

neo158 said,

Java would only slow down and rapidly drain the battery on an ARM based tablet anyway, that's without even considering the security issues surrounding Java that would negate one of the reasons for an ARM processor.

I would like the option to decide that for myself thank you very much. You know what Java would unlock? Minecraft. No re-development needed... yet another much-requested application that sees zero chance of a store version when every x86 windows device out there doesn't need it.

neo158 said,

Why can't it be a full blown OS? Because it would create confusion among average consumers. Remember, it's not just those of us on here that use tablets, if Windows on ARM was a full blown OS I can just see all the "I can't run (insert any desktop application here) on my Windows RT tablet" comments from non power users. If you require a "full-blown OS" then you should have opted for Surface Pro.

It's too late for that, people already want to. Taking the desktop away isn't the answer, allowing developers to release ARM versions of applications etc is. We already have to advise users between x86 and x86_64, why not ARM? Store apps already list all three, why not for desktop apps too? Especially if the store starts being a hub for desktop apps at some point.

And the whole "buy a Pro" canned response is a great example of bad customer service, which is exactly what Microsoft has been doing. No, you don't tell people to go buy a Pro. You improve your product based on customer feedback.

neo158 said,

The desktop on RT needs to go, permanently!!!

Basically you want it to be a phone OS. I don't. So please speak for yourself only. Just because you have no use for the desktop on ARM means nothing in regards to the next person.

Edited by domboy, Sep 8 2014, 8:08pm :

the comment edit bug still isn't fixed? Meh! I think everyone should edit their comment once! :)

Edited by warwagon, Sep 5 2014, 2:09pm :

Max Norris said,
Considering the changes that are already in place, think they learned that lesson.

You think they will listen this time?