Five Reasons why Windows 8 will be dead on arrival


Recommended Posts

+deinabog

These doom-and-gloom articles never stop coming whenever a new version of Windows looms on the horizon. Windows 8 will be successful because it will come preinstalled on laptops, desktops, and tablets. Since it will also integrate Xbox Live that means being able to play games across the entire technological ecosystem. That alone has my interest (though I'll be gaming on my PC).

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
patseguin

I just can't for the life of me think of why they are going with this flat ugly looking thing called Metro. Seems like a step back about 20 years.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
FalseAgent

I hope Steam does a Metro Version of their interface..that would be awsome for my gaming PC.

Store-Mockup-v0a.jpg;pv5c93205e873695af

Home-Mockup-v1a.jpg;pv160e9ca4076f2d44

Home-with-AppBar-Mockup-v1a.jpg;pva9f5306bbe1c6d13

Library-Game-v1a.jpg;pvcac5c9020faa823f

Store-Product-mockup-v1a.jpg;pva9e68012f4cb9493

Community-Mockup-v1a.jpg;pv5cb9862c7bd49aa1

These are just mockups, but man, screw all those out there who say 'OMGEEE METRO SUCKS'. Personally, I am SOLD!!!

(yes, even on the desktop)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
rfirth

These are just mockups, but man, screw all those out there who say 'OMGEEE METRO SUCKS'. Personally, I am SOLD!!!

Yep, it's going to be awesome. But we need apps before the start screen becomes useful. Then things will start to fall into place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
+Audioboxer

Metro is the only reason I need... Looks soo ugly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
FalseAgent

Yep, it's going to be awesome. But we need apps before the start screen becomes useful. Then things will start to fall into place.

Fall into place...EXACTLY! That's the beauty of Windows 8 and even Windows Phone. The more stuff you install, the richer the system becomes. Just imagine DropBox hooking into the File Picker in Windows 8 - or a Twitter or FB app hooking into the Share charm - imagine the kind of info the start screen can present you with the moment you turn on your PC; the start screen can only become richer the more apps you install.

There is just nothing like this in Windows 7, and people don't understand that. This is the future of computing! A whole new generation of connected apps are coming to Windows, the kind of apps only we could only dream of in Windows 7. People bashing Metro probably just don't understand what Microsoft is unto here. Instead, all people are talking about is how Metro is a "bunch of square boxes". Come on guys, stop being so superficial, what we see is just the surface.

Like it or not, this is absolutely the direction for Windows. The transition is going to be painful, but at the end, I think it will all be totally worth it.

EDIT: epic 100th post :D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
+Ryster

Metro is the only reason I need... Looks soo ugly.

Yeah, squares and rectangles are soooo ugly. That makes your avatar hideous!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
fenderMarky

I read the same thing for xp, vista (wich is more used than osx), and windows 7. I read also the same thing for xbox, .net ect...

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Calum

windows 8 is just pure poop - sod supporting it in a working buiness enviorment.

Why? You have no idea how well or how badly it may work in a business environment. You also have no idea whether Microsoft will offer something separate for businesses, if the Metro experience doesn't happen to work well for them. Your post assumes to much. Wait and see ;)

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
.Neo

In my eyes the biggest issue with Windows 8 is the fact you now have to worry about two operating systems in one. You'll have to deal with one set of apps that will run inside Metro and the other set still running in the classic desktop environment. I can see this become a big confusing mess for people who aren't as tech savvy as most are here. Especially if you even have two different versions of the same app (Internet Explorer for example). I also wonder to what degree third-party developers can be bothered to even convert their apps to Metro instead of just sticking to the traditional desktop. If they want support older Windows versions too they either have to develop and maintain two distinct different apps (Metro and classic) or just give Metro the finger.

Link to post
Share on other sites
theclueless

i still dont get why people are passing judgment on a consumer preview

Link to post
Share on other sites
.Neo

i still dont get why people are passing judgment on a consumer preview

You actually think the finalized product will be something radically different?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
theclueless

You actually think the finalized product will be something radically different?

no, but different enough to make a difference. anyone remember the bashing on windows whistler?

Link to post
Share on other sites
notuptome2004

In my eyes the biggest issue with Windows 8 is the fact you now have to worry about two operating systems in one. You'll have to deal with one set of apps that will run inside Metro and the other set still running in the classic desktop environment. I can see this become a big confusing mess for people who aren't as tech savvy as most are here. Especially if you even have two different versions of the same app (Internet Explorer for example). I also wonder to what degree third-party developers can be bothered to even convert their apps to Metro instead of just sticking to the traditional desktop. If they want support older Windows versions too they either have to develop and maintain two distinct different apps (Metro and classic) or just give Metro the finger.

ummm Windows 8 is 1 operating system not 2 Windows Metro well the start screen is intergrated at a core level it is windows it is not a layer of software on top of windows it is windows shell it is . Windows start screen and windows desktop are of 1 operating system .

Link to post
Share on other sites
bjoswald

99% of this hatred is aimed at the Metrosexual UI. Underneath that, it's the same Windows we know and love. Microsoft just needed a new coat of paint on it (for some reason). I guess they're taking a page out of Apple's book by spreading the OS across all devices at once.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.Xtreme

no, but different enough to make a difference. anyone remember the bashing on windows whistler?

Not much has changed from the Dev Preview to the Customer Preview, so it's a pretty sure bet that we will see even less changed for the RC and final builds.

If Win 8 is really going to be released this year, there is almost zero time for feature development, and only time to test.

Link to post
Share on other sites
hagjohn

Yawn... some of you bitch too much. At least wait till you see somewhat of a final product before you decide.

Link to post
Share on other sites
satukoro

Many of you won't upgrade to Windows 8 simply because the more efficient start menu. The improved performance alone is enough to get me to update.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
xWhiplash

What company will spend millions developing a fully functional (desktop) metro-style application that will only work on ONE operating system (two if you can run it on Windows 7)? As far as I know, Windows XP still has over 40% market share. Windows 8 (desktop) will not go above that for at least a couple of years probably.

To the people that are saying Apple is doing the same thing. No, they are not. They are doing something similar, but they are actually making it look GOOD. They have more than one color for the "tile", they only show icons, and they still have the dock active and usable BY DEFAULT.

As somebody mentioned before, you can upgrade somebody from Windows 95 to Windows 7 and only need to walk them through a little bit. The start button is still at the bottom left on all Windows versions, their clock is still on the bottom right. When somebody gets a Windows 8 desktop computer, how well do you think they will handle it?

Don't get me wrong, metro is VERY nice in the tablet and phone market.......but it should have stayed there. We really will not have decent metro applications for a while with Windows XP, Vista, and 7 adding up to 90% of the Windows Desktop market.

Until the last year or two, and even today to some extent, games are still developed for DirectX 9 to work with Windows XP.

Any person running a business would not be developing a fully functional metro application.

  • We still do not know if it will be a success or not
  • If they focus thousands and thousands of dollars, they are only targeting one operating system (two if Windows 7 can run metro apps which I doubt), which might end up being a failure
  • More money? Develop for Windows XP, Vista, 7, AND 8 (because it can still run desktop applications).

This is why I think the metro idea will be a dud. Yeah we will get a few weather applications, some messenger metro versions, and more little things. But do you honestly see big, BIG developers creating fully functional metro applications at least for several years? I do not.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix

I read the same thing for xp, vista (wich is more used than osx), and windows 7. I read also the same thing for xbox, .net ect...

The very same author of this nonsense has an article on PC World saying the very same thing about Windows 7. The guy's a moron.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seizure1990

The very same author of this nonsense has an article on PC World saying the very same thing about Windows 7. The guy's a moron.

Nope, he's a genius. Do it for every OS that comes out, and then gloat about being right when it finally happens. :p

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
The_Decimator

Let's just remind ourselve's of Vista lol, and note that this WILL be the same fiasco :)

If I understood the video correctly, he was complaining about how his computer didn't meet Vista's system requirements.

Windows 8 has the same system requirements as Windows 7. (Which, admittedly, has the same system requirements as Vista, but one of the reasons Windows 7 did so well is because nowadays computers that meet those requirements aren't as expensive as they were when Vista came out.)

HOW WOULD THIS BE THE SAME FIASCO?!

Link to post
Share on other sites
+Ryster

OMG... first time I've seen that Vista video. What an idiot. He probably tried an over the top upgrade, and then wondered why nothing worked properly.

Every person "in the know" knows that you don't install a new operating system over the top of an old one and expect your system to work flawlessly afterwards. For a start, it doesn't go off and get the Vista drivers for your hardware for you, and the old drivers already on your XP system will at best be unstable on the new Vista OS. One of the reasons Microsoft chose to not allow direct upgrades from XP to Windows 7 I believe.

Also for the record, Windows 8 will be far from dead on arrival. But I guess, time will tell :)

p.s. Anybody know of any good 24" LED touchscreen monitors? I've seen plenty of laptops/tablets etc, but all the major monitor manufacturers seem to have very few, if any touchscreen monitors.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix

Let's just remind ourselve's of Vista lol, and note that this WILL be the same fiasco :)

He bought the OS without checking his machine first?

Jokes on him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
~Johnny

Windows 8 has the same system requirements as Windows 7. (Which, admittedly, has the same system requirements as Vista, but one of the reasons Windows 7 did so well is because nowadays computers that meet those requirements aren't as expensive as they were when Vista came out.)

Technically, Microsoft imposed higher system requirements on 7 than Vista (Vista only "required" 512MB & 800 Mhz, 7 "requires" 1GB & 1 Ghz), despite 7 actually being more RAM & CPU efficient than Vista. That was part of Vista's problem, the spec requirements were just set too low Heck, a lot of the machines sold when Vista was new couldn't even run Aero, despite being branded "Vista capable", and took over 3 minutes to fully boot up and get to the desktop, and that's where a lot of the bad public perception came from.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.