• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

    Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

Sign in to follow this  

Five Reasons why Windows 8 will be dead on arrival

Recommended Posts

The_Decimator    38

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?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Ryster    742

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix    7,417

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
~Johnny    397

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ScottKin    11

you are wrong.

Congratulations!

You have won this year's "Neowin's Most Pointless and Unsupported Post".

Who is it, exactly, that is wrong? The OP? The Authors of the original article on ZDNet?

Learn how to post.

--ScottKin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pickypg    304

1. No one needs Windows 8 on the desktop.

No one needs Windows 7 for the exact same reason. Windows 7 is much closer to a service pack of Windows Vista compared to Windows 8.

2. Metro: An ugly, useless interface.

This comes down to taste, as well as how much you have worked with it. People will either learn to love it, or they will learn to hate it.

As someone that loves their Windows Phone, you can guess where I fall on this subject.

3. Where are the Windows 8 Applications?

What customer honestly cares what the next Office will use for its UI? Windows 7 applications will still run on Windows 8 in the meantime using the non-Metro desktop.

4. Vexed Windows developers.

.NET still works. In fact, .NET applications will also run on ARM. If you want to make a Metro application, then you can still use .NET/XAML, and XAML has existed for .NET since .NET 3.0 (late 2006). XAML gives a superior approach to designing applications with MVC, and newer .NET applications should be written using it anyway.

This will not be a challenge for any developers willing to make a brand new app for the Metro architecture. If they're not, then they could still use XAML without making a Metro app, and if they're not making a Metro app, then it does not matter at all.

5. Too little, too late for the smartphone/tablet market

Only the iPad has been successful in the tablet market. Android tablets come and go, and then they go unsupported. Windows 8 will bring a full desktop experience for those that want, or need it. Additionally, it will also bring a tablet-friendly experience for those that want or need that. Finally, bringing the Windows 8 kernel to the phone will allow multiplatform development to quickly deploy applications across each platform (at least iPad and Windows 8, which will quickly become the top two).

Personally, the only thing that I think Microsoft has to be nervous about is Metro. People will either love it or hate it, but everyone that is not techy that I have shown my Windows Phone has loved the smoothness as well as the ease of access to information that they actually care about. And then once techy-people actually use Metro, they will mostly come around to it. The vast majority of people that hate it have clearly never used it, except maybe on an outdated store demo.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Ryster    742

All true pickypg... I like to consider myself a techy... but I am looking forward to Metro and think it has potential. But that potential will only be realised if it's supported by app developers.

I can see the day a year down the line where 90%+ of the stuff I use the PC for is in Metro (or is otherwise fullscreen, like games). Email, web browsing, messaging, basic document editing/spreadsheets, music, video and games. That accounts for 90%+ of the stuff I use the PC for. Once all of that is in metro (which is easily doable), and taking advantage of all the metro enhancements such as unified search, sharing charms, side by side docking, skydrive integration, etc, I think it'll be a big productivity boost for myself and everybody else who has similar usage habits as me.

The remaining 10% of stuff I'm happy to use the classic desktop for. Stuff like web development and a bit of website graphics work. And for that I have a dual monitor setup, so the classic desktop can be on one screen, while Metro remains on the other.

Personally, I'm quite excited. Only time will tell though I guess. One thing I will say though, I expect it to be a fairly nippy and nimble setup... but that might have something to do with the second 60GB SSD I just ordered to pair with the existing one in RAID 0 to give me a super-fast 120GB (or thereabouts) system drive :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplezz    863

I couldn't help but laugh at that video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pickypg    304

All true pickypg... I like to consider myself a techy... but I am looking forward to Metro and think it has potential. But that potential will only be realised if it's supported by app developers.

I don't think that there is any serious concern beyond naysayers that Windows 8 tablets will not catch on with developers, and that will drive Metro applications until it spirals like the iOS market. There is no serious contender to the iPad right now beyond the Kindle Fire, which I personally believe fills a void of people that did not want to spend $500 on an iPad, but still wanted a tablet. Personally, I own an iPad 2 (32 GB), and had I not got it at literally half off, then I would be disappointed with my purchase. For $300, it's a pretty cool device that my girlfriend uses enough to justify the expense. But, had I spent $500 (I wanted the 16 GB, but they had none, so I went for the 32 GB as it was still much less), then I would have been pretty upset.

Granted, I am a developer and I am definitely a techy. I have a smart phone, tablet, laptop and a PC. As such, I am far from the average user, but I want more functionality out of my tablet. Random apps are great, and I love it when I am using them. However, for the vast majority of my needs I want to go to either my laptop, or preferably my PC (dual monitors, like you). With a Windows 8 tablet, and I suspect eventual versions of the iPad, that will change. I will be able to do literally anything that my PC can do, and I have the convenience of going between both modes on the fly.

That's an incredibly attractive option for me. I would be shocked if I ever coded on a tablet with a touch screen, but I could see myself attaching a keyboard and mouse for convenience. I think Apple knows that this is going to hit the iPad big, and I believe that they will finally begin to add the long-rumored touch functionality into OS X for their Mountain Lion release this summer (which is far closer to a Service Pack, similar to Lion from Snow Leopard, than Windows 8; I own a MacBook Pro, so I've seen these updates) just to attempt to steal Windows 8's thunder. However, without significant hardware support, Windows 8 will be big.

Metro is going to hit every Windows 8 user's desktop. Every single one. Imagine that market, and now compare that to the success of the iPad's App Store with their numbers. It's a different game and Windows 8 will succeed simply because of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.