Windows 8 is the first OS that made me downgrade

[Dot Matrix]

I understand that. But I am talking now that everything requires extra clicks or keyboard shortcuts for the same stuff that we do on win7.

I am not against change but change just for the sake of it it is not a good thing inmho.

I guess like Defcon says they just want it to make it run on tablets and make an OS just for consuming content which I think does it perfectly.

Another silly thing is that they should have put more effort on desktop and desktops apps to make it look more consistent with the metro iconography. I mean look for example at the recycle bin icon :woot: lol

What are you doing in Win8 that requires more clicks?

[BajiRav]

What are you doing in Win8 that requires more clicks?

I am guessing shutdown the computer, apparently that's all people do with their PCs. :p

[FloatingFatMan]

I am guessing shutdown the computer, apparently that's all people do with their PCs. :p

I'm still in 2 minds about W8. I'm getting it, hell, I'm installing it tomorrow (MSDN user), but there are still things about it that irrirate me, the main ones being...

* Cannot specify an installation path for Metro apps (#1 DUMB assed idea of the decade, MS!)

* Locked to the MS store for Metro apps and you have to jump through hoops for metro'd corporate business line apps

* Most of the Metro control panel actually has bugger all functionality; you have to drop to the desktop one most of the time.

* Hiding the Start button. OK, I can get on with the Start screen (actually, I don't but I'm not bitching about it), but actually making the button invisible on the Charms bar was just dumb. There really should be a visual clue as to what to do so that people aren't left confused... The tutorial the included is just garbage.

* Making me install TWO versions of C# 2012 Express if I want to make Desktop and Metro apps. Annoying, and a massive waste of HD space. WHY for gawdsakes? They're just project templates!

[BajiRav]

I'm still in 2 minds about W8. I'm getting it, hell, I'm installing it tomorrow (MSDN user), but there are still things about it that irrirate me, the main ones being...

* Cannot specify an installation path for Metro apps (#1 DUMB assed idea of the decade, MS!)

* Locked to the MS store for Metro apps and you have to jump through hoops for metro'd corporate business line apps

* Most of the Metro control panel actually has bugger all functionality; you have to drop to the desktop one most of the time.

* Hiding the Start button. OK, I can get on with the Start screen (actually, I don't but I'm not bitching about it), but actually making the button invisible on the Charms bar was just dumb. There really should be a visual clue as to what to do so that people aren't left confused... The tutorial the included is just garbage.

* Making me install TWO versions of C# 2012 Express if I want to make Desktop and Metro apps. Annoying, and a massive waste of HD space. WHY for gawdsakes? They're just project templates!

I am getting it through MSDN tomorrow as well (fingers crossed that my work connection works as nicely as it did the last time :D). I am not all praise for everything in Windows 8 but most of my problems are trivial stuff and hence I will be all over with it. I don't have a tablet to use it though so I am always in the desktop control panel. :)

[DeadEndAccount]

I predict Windows 8 will be one of Microsoft's biggest product blunders. Windows Vista will look like a huge success in comparison.

It should have been strictly a phone and tablet OS and had it's own name separate from the desktop versions.

I don't think that is the issue persay but the mixed message about the future of Windows - the impression they're giving is that the desktop is dead and that they'll ram metro down the collective throat of end users whether they like it or not. Now, if they turned around today and said, "no, you've got it all wrong - we're equally developing the Windows Desktop and Metro with no plans to retire the desktop" alot of the issues would be put to rest pretty quickly - we'll accept that they're offering two interfaces and we have a choice but right now throwing around words like 'legacy' a long with the almost exclusive focus on Metro gives at least me the impression that Microsoft is killing off the desktop.

[Anthonyd]

I'm still in 2 minds about W8. I'm getting it, hell, I'm installing it tomorrow (MSDN user), but there are still things about it that irrirate me, the main ones being...

* Cannot specify an installation path for Metro apps (#1 DUMB assed idea of the decade, MS!)

* Locked to the MS store for Metro apps and you have to jump through hoops for metro'd corporate business line apps

* Most of the Metro control panel actually has bugger all functionality; you have to drop to the desktop one most of the time.

* Hiding the Start button. OK, I can get on with the Start screen (actually, I don't but I'm not bitching about it), but actually making the button invisible on the Charms bar was just dumb. There really should be a visual clue as to what to do so that people aren't left confused... The tutorial the included is just garbage.

* Making me install TWO versions of C# 2012 Express if I want to make Desktop and Metro apps. Annoying, and a massive waste of HD space. WHY for gawdsakes? They're just project templates!

*You can specitfy the folder where to install all Metro apps (it's a simple regedit value);

*The final version of VS 2012 should include desktop&metro apps into a single version.

The rest of your points is just missconception/things discussed 10 times already.

[Dashel]

Not strictly true. Quite a lot of people blew a gasket over Windows Vista, too.

I know many weren't happy with the state of UAC and other misc items but I don't know any enthusiast that was at the blowing a gasket level (Many simply turned it off until it had more polish - coupling new features with choice). I don't know anyone that didn't upgrade because of it, even in its rough state. If anything, Win8 is strike three for the group I refer to. Vista/7, while good in many ways, did help ferment the current feelings and MS's trending of late toward a system we have less under the hood access to. If you want my answer that is it in a nutshell, WinRT is locked up tighter than Cupertino.

Vista started the trend that made it a complete PITA to organize your Start Menu compared to XP. Win7, while addressing the usability side for the most part, actually locked those same users out even more. Its simply about control.

You like analogies PG, here is one. Windows was like PC FPS with an innate moddability, but they appear to be moving toward the console FPS model of paid DRC over mods, hence the new lockouts. Ever since XP, its been a gradual movement away from that. Geeks like to tinker, dorks want something that just works.

[CG-88]

I don't think that is the issue persay but the mixed message about the future of Windows - the impression they're giving is that the desktop is dead and that they'll ram metro down the collective throat of end users whether they like it or not. Now, if they turned around today and said, "no, you've got it all wrong - we're equally developing the Windows Desktop and Metro with no plans to retire the desktop" alot of the issues would be put to rest pretty quickly - we'll accept that they're offering two interfaces and we have a choice but right now throwing around words like 'legacy' a long with the almost exclusive focus on Metro gives at least me the impression that Microsoft is killing off the desktop.

I dont think Microsoft are giving the impression that the desktop is dead, they are just offering an alternative to the desktop for touch capabilities and tablets. The main problem is people not accepting the change and assuming that this is the end of the desktop when if they actually thought about it would be an extremely stupid move by Microsoft, I dont think it would be possible tbh.

But if Microsoft came out and said we will always have a desktop mode in Windows OS, OR released a patch to allow people to boot directly to desktop mode this thread would cease to exist.

[Yorak]

There is definitely nothing minimal about Windows 8. It is all bloated, worthless, and useless ****. Not that Windows 7 was minimal, but it could at least be made that way. I don't want the Start Screen. I don't want to see any of those ridiculous looking tiles on my screen. On Windows 7 I have no icons on my desktop. The applications I use are all listed in the Start Menu, neatly tucked away and not in my face. I also open programs via search, and it is very quick. Can I do that with Windows 8? Well, I guess I would have to put application names in a hat and pull one out. Sometimes I will get what I want, but sometimes I will not. Seems unorganized and dysfunctional to me. Oh, and I don't find any of those Metro applications to be useful at all. I will never use them, and I don't want them. I am sure somebody will find a way to disable the Metro interface and go straight to the desktop. Then and only then will I be happy with Windows 8.

[FloatingFatMan]

*You can specitfy the folder where to install all Metro apps (it's a simple regedit value);

*The final version of VS 2012 should include desktop&metro apps into a single version.

The rest of your points is just missconception/things discussed 10 times already.

1. Having to resort to reg editing to do a basic function is unacceptable.

2. Good to hear about VS2012

The rest of my points are not misconception. MS's store IS the only place you can get Metro apps. No sideloading unless you do the corporate hoop jumping. Prove otherwise.

Large amounts of the Metro control panel ARE basically display only, or have very limited functionality compared to the desktop version.

[ShadowMajestic]

And Windows 8 actually requires *fewer* restarts - not more - than even Windows 7. A case in point: reloading the audio drivers (or even installing them for the first time) used to *require* a reboot in Windows 7 (Creative actually has that as the default in the Windows 8 drivers, which are carryover); however, Windows 8 no longer requires it. (That furthers the Windows 7 treatment, in fact, as most driver installs or updates didn't require reboots.)

say what, Windows 7 doesn't need a reboot for audio drivers, neither for video drivers. it does NOT need reboots for general drivers at all anymore (shouldn't need it for any driver installs). its the OEM and manufactures with crappy written drivers that don't use the Windows driver API properly.

Nvidia still forces reboots for its video drivers, while theres no need.

[Dashel]

I dont think Microsoft are giving the impression that the desktop is dead, they are just offering an alternative to the desktop for touch capabilities and tablets. The main problem is people not accepting the change and assuming that this is the end of the desktop when if they actually thought about it would be an extremely stupid move by Microsoft, I dont think it would be possible tbh.

But if Microsoft came out and said we will always have a desktop mode in Windows OS, OR released a patch to allow people to boot directly to desktop mode this thread would cease to exist.

Thats just it, assume for one second that Win9/10 kills the desktop. If you had to use WinRT, fulltime, pretending all the great apps have appeared, would you still want to?

Until they do provide a better vision or way to alleviate the fears of the longevity of, history makes me believe that WinRT will kill Win32 eventually just like with DOS or Win16. If that is the case, then comparing what is still possible in the legacy environment means nothing. If WinRT is to be a true successor and not a second head, it has a very long road to go. And even if its successful, is that the environment you want to support?

PG is still running WinXP shadowzz :p

[DeadEndAccount]

I dont think Microsoft are giving the impression that the desktop is dead, they are just offering an alternative to the desktop for touch capabilities and tablets. The main problem is people not accepting the change and assuming that this is the end of the desktop when if they actually thought about it would be an extremely stupid move by Microsoft, I dont think it would be possible tbh.

But if Microsoft came out and said we will always have a desktop mode in Windows OS, OR released a patch to allow people to boot directly to desktop mode this thread would cease to exist.

But the underlying thrust is that people are annoyed not because of the changes now but the general direction overall based on the impression that the Metro of today is going to go a lot further than merely being an option but something that'll replace the desktop in the future. I know my concerns are primary concerned that we'll be stuck with either Metro or if we don't like it then we have Mac OS X with the soon to be walled garden (coupled with the crappy backwards compatibility that comes with Mac OS X - Compare running an old version of Creative Suite on Windows to the same version on the latest version of Mac OS X to see what I mean). I have to say as a Mac user the whole Windows 8 development has been interesting and tempting me away from the Mac platform after using Mac OS X for a decade - it finally has appeared that Microsoft knows where it wants to go which gives me a lot more confidence about Microsoft's future than Apple's recent moves of throwing professionals and geeks under the bus.

[CG-88]

Thats just it, assume for one second that Win9/10 kills the desktop. If you had to use WinRT, fulltime, pretending all the great apps have appeared, would you still want to?

Until they do provide a better vision or way to alleviate the fears of the longevity of, history makes me believe that WinRT will kill Win32 eventually just like with DOS or Win16. If that is the case, then comparing what is still possible in the legacy environment means nothing. If WinRT is to be a true successor and not a second head, it has a very long road to go. And even if its successful, is that the environment you want to support?

PG is still running WinXP shadowzz :p

Personally, if W9 was solely based around the modern UI or RT environment I would definitely still use it because by that point they would have HAD to figure out a way to fully integrate desktop mode into the RT environment whilst just looking like RT.

***This is my own personal opinion, but yes I would***

BUT if they decided to do that I would understand why so many people would be upset, infact would be disgusted BUT once again this hasnt happened. Alot of the comments in this thread would be suitable for a thread entitled "windows 9 is purely modern UI, no desktop" but in the context of W8 WITH desktop mode I dont get the complaint with modern UI. Just my opinion, I just think people are complaining because they are seeing something different even though the "legacy" of the desktop is still there for everyone to use.

EDIT: Mr Nom Nom's - I get that people are worried about the future of the desktop and the direction microsoft may take the OS BUT I just dont understand why people are already acting like its happened lol

[DeadEndAccount]

EDIT: Mr Nom Nom's - I get that people are worried about the future of the desktop and the direction microsoft may take the OS BUT I just dont understand why people are already acting like its happened lol

Because people plan their hardware purchases - most people I know here want to know that if they're going to settle on a platform, purchase a stack of games and applications that cost over a thousand for the lot, the platform they're settling on is going to be for the long term. I'm lucky in that if I do move from Mac to Windows I can cross grade my Creative Suite to Windows version for a small fee, I've got my games on Steam so that is a non-issue and Microsoft Office is pretty cheap to purchase anyway but I'm sure there are people who have a lot more than I do thus the issue of platform longevity is an important issue.

[CG-88]

Because people plan their hardware purchases - most people I know here want to know that if they're going to settle on a platform, purchase a stack of games and applications that cost over a thousand for the lot, the platform they're settling on is going to be for the long term. I'm lucky in that if I do move from Mac to Windows I can cross grade my Creative Suite to Windows version for a small fee, I've got my games on Steam so that is a non-issue and Microsoft Office is pretty cheap to purchase anyway but I'm sure there are people who have a lot more than I do thus the issue of platform longevity is an important issue.

Based on that Microsoft for w9 will get rid of the desktop and stick to Modern UI but not keep the actual functionality of the windows desktop. Not going to happen. Think of the vendors that will need to change everything. If Microsoft decide one day to get rid of the desktop completely the modern UI will have to be able to do the exact same thing as the desktop, keeping all functionality and program support but obviously in a different way. I really dont see Microsoft causing such an uproar with there user base or vendors. Can you see a photoshop metro version? No they will have to find a way to keep modern UI and normal desktop applications if they ever decide on a complete bin of desktop.

Yeah people plan there purchases but that has no effect on alot of peoples arguments at the moment. Comments like " I hate windows 8 because they are forcing metro." There the type of comments I was trying to talk about that are acting like its already happened but really they are a click away from windows 7 basically. So someone saying the comment above, then explaining they said it because of future hardware possibilities doesnt make sense.

Alot of the negative feedback is people not wanting to change, not liking change, but if w8 was released as it is now but without modern UI everyone would be in uproad about how they havent changed sweet **** all.

Lose lose situation with the majority of whiners

[Dashel]

CW, Win8 only loads Metro at boot. The uproar is because the desktop has been moved to 'legacy' app status in this release which is generally a signal for its expiration. Just because the button is there today doesn't mean that the fundamental shift isn't happening right now. Thats what I find frustrating, not a single proponent thinks WinRT is a replacement for the Desktop, but they are all (contradictingly) sure of 1) the Desktops guaranteed existence and 2) that the Desktop is dead.

So that remains the question, why do you think the goal is to ever integrate the 'desktop mode' into RT? A single, ubiquitous release that runs on many devices (except for, you know, the devices that make up the new markets - phones/slates), is touch optimized, and has no concept of a file system has little need for the desktop metaphor.

[notuptome2004]

Win RT still has the desktop it is right there in the Start screen it is just ya cant install regular legacy win32 apps well x86 based apps on arm peaople still think or it seems they think winRT is Start screen modern UI only

[deanrock]

say what, Windows 7 doesn't need a reboot for audio drivers, neither for video drivers. it does NOT need reboots for general drivers at all anymore (shouldn't need it for any driver installs). its the OEM and manufactures with crappy written drivers that don't use the Windows driver API properly.

Nvidia still forces reboots for its video drivers, while theres no need.

Don't really know much about drivers, but Windows 7 still needs to reboot for things like software install/uninstall and Windows Updates. Today I installed XP mode and restart was required to use it. :rolleyes:

[deanrock]

CW, Win8 only loads Metro at boot. The uproar is because the desktop has been moved to 'legacy' app status in this release which is generally a signal for its expiration. Just because the button is there today doesn't mean that the fundamental shift isn't happening right now. Thats what I find frustrating, not a single proponent thinks WinRT is a replacement for the Desktop, but they are all (contradictingly) sure of 1) the Desktops guaranteed existence and 2) that the Desktop is dead.

You really think MS want to dig their own grave? WinRT is not and cannot be a replacement for the Desktop from productivity standpoint. It can easily compete with iPad and as a media center, but that's about it.

[PGHammer]

An excellent point, and it's something that the Windows 8 evangelists in this thread have never addressed.

I most certainly DID address it, and more than once. I even devoted a thread to it (The Real Reason Behind the FUD About Windows 8).

The very reason I *created* that particular thread is BECAUSE of all the hatred and vitriol spoken by critics - most of whom barely gave an honest effort to using the OS.

UAC was, in fact, a major lightning rod in Vista; however, the IHV's treatment of Vista was nearly as bad. (Not only was UAC not an issue for me personally, neither was Vista - which was, in fact, both my last bare-metal x32 OS and my first x64 OS (I lateraled from x32 to x64 during the wait for the first public beta of Windows 7). With XP, it was the *Fisher Price* UI (even though other than that it was no different than Windows 2000 Professional, which I was running as my OS at both home and at work).

The target for the vitriol has merely changed - this time, it's more about what's missing - the Start menu.

On the one hand, we (as computer users) have complained about things being *meh* - too staid and boring. However, any attempt to shake things up is attacked BECAUSE it shakes things up. (It's not even unique to Windows 8 this time,; look at the whacking that Apple is taking over Mountain Lion and iOS 6.)

As much as users complain about dull and boring, given their druthers, all too many PREFER dull and boring. (The reality of the crappy economy merely gives the unchangers more ammunition.)

[Calum Veteran]

[. . .]

not a single proponent thinks WinRT is a replacement for the Desktop, but they are all (contradictingly) sure of 1) the Desktops guaranteed existence and 2) that the Desktop is dead.

[. . .]

I reckon the new experience could well have potential to fully replace the "old" experience. I probably won't be entirely sure until I see a WinRT version of Photostop, Visual Studio, and some other more complex programs, but it might be possible (I haven't yet thought it through fully) :)

[+Fahim S. MVC]

I most certainly DID address it, and more than once. I even devoted a thread to it (The Real Reason Behind the FUD About Windows 8).

The very reason I *created* that particular thread is BECAUSE of all the hatred and vitriol spoken by critics - most of whom barely gave an honest effort to using the OS.

UAC was, in fact, a major lightning rod in Vista; however, the IHV's treatment of Vista was nearly as bad. (Not only was UAC not an issue for me personally, neither was Vista - which was, in fact, both my last bare-metal x32 OS and my first x64 OS (I lateraled from x32 to x64 during the wait for the first public beta of Windows 7). With XP, it was the *Fisher Price* UI (even though other than that it was no different than Windows 2000 Professional, which I was running as my OS at both home and at work).

The target for the vitriol has merely changed - this time, it's more about what's missing - the Start menu.

On the one hand, we (as computer users) have complained about things being *meh* - too staid and boring. However, any attempt to shake things up is attacked BECAUSE it shakes things up. (It's not even unique to Windows 8 this time,; look at the whacking that Apple is taking over Mountain Lion and iOS 6.)

As much as users complain about dull and boring, given their druthers, all too many PREFER dull and boring. (The reality of the crappy economy merely gives the unchangers more ammunition.)

This!

Those that are saying, they'll fix it in 9 - well UAC was never removed in 7. All that was done was the streamlining of UAC to improve the user experience.

Not that 8 is perfect, I personally wish they had left the start button - but it's not the end of the world that it's gone. Onwards we go.

[PGHammer]

I'm a bit drunk and I have no idea what your references mean. What do you mean that no one is willing to move forward and those that try are punished? If you are saying its an economic condition, then there is nothing that leads me to believe that RT and deployment costs will be anywhere close to combat your fear of Android.

I still say that institutional percentage is always there Baji, but that isn't the group I'm referring to. This is a new breed of disgruntlement with the platform from the enthusiast MS sector - their core advocates.

Because said core advocates are afraid - it's an emotional (not logical) reaction.

Nobody at Microsoft has said that desktop applications OR gaming are doomed - and neither have any of us that have praised Windows 8 (not even Dot Matrix).

Except for applications and utilities that have been mooted by core-OS features (ImgBurn, VirtualCloneDrive, and Diskeeper all got mooted), I've brought over my entire Win32 application and gaming mix. Not some, or most, but *all*.

Amazingly, that is something I was NOT able to do when upgrading from Vista to 7 (both x64).

I also stated, quite plainly, that I was a major skeptic going into using the Developer Preview (which I ran strictly in a dual-boot configuration because of my concern over the radical UI).

With the Consumer Preview, my epiphany was confirmed - my fears were, in fact, so overblown as to be laughable.

Despite my own reports (and those of others) about desktop-application and game performance in the Consumer Preview (and the Release Preview, despite some regressions; none of which resulted in major issues), the fear has not merely lessened, but has, if anything, intensified. Even most of the critics themselves admit that it's not application performance (or even game performance) that is at issue - it's still fear that if the Modern UI gets a toehold, let alone a foothold, that their beloved desktop is screwed.

Fear is an emotion, and is still utterly immune to logic OR reason; if it weren't there would be little need for conflict over anything, let alone war.

[WinMunkee]

I feel the charms bar is great. It ensures all devices running Windows 8 have the same functionality. In theory this helps from a tech support stand point. Obviously it will suck at first, but when people start getting the hang of things it will become second nature.