BUILD 2012: Windows 8 off to roaring start...


Recommended Posts

Nice to see a shift in MS approach. Even pirated copies of Windows7 can be upgraded for 40$ (iv tested myself) and you get a very own brand new Windows 8 Pro key. Its a fair price for common home Windows users, finally a realistic price for an upgrade.

FACT: Most people will buy Windows for the first time with this new realistic philosophy, its fantastic to see this new Microsoft rising again for the battle.

Let me be clear that i didnt buy Windows8 for the extra features because personlly i dont see that it does bring anything better than Windows7 but just in case its a cheap and clean upgrade.

windows 7 sold 100 million copies total in 6 months

windows 8 sold 4 million upgrades only in 4 days.

LOL at the delusional people who kept saying nobody wants windows 8.

Death to the desktop. Go Metro

I like Windows 8 even though I have a major complaint with it, but the desktop will never die out. People like myself will always need that level of functionality to do our jobs.

I feel like most of the 4 million is because of the pricing. I know people would have loved Windows 7 because they used it, but did not want to spend what it costs.

Nice to see a shift in MS approach. Even pirated copies of Windows7 can be upgraded for 40$ (iv tested myself) and you get a very own brand new Windows 8 Pro key. Its a fair price for common home Windows users, finally a realistic price for an upgrade.

FACT: Most people will buy Windows for the first time with this new realistic philosophy, its fantastic to see this new Microsoft rising again for the battle.

Let me be clear that i didnt buy Windows8 for the extra features because personlly i dont see that it does bring anything better than Windows7 but just in case its a cheap and clean upgrade.

Yeah its a good price. I wasn't even considering upgrading to win8 at first, but when I saw how cheap it was I was like "well, why not?"

windows 7 sold 100 million copies total in 6 months

windows 8 sold 4 million upgrades only in 4 days.

LOL at the delusional people who kept saying nobody wants windows 8.

Death to the desktop. Go Metro

lol... most of the current metro apps are so basic they are practically useless for desktop users. The classic desktop will be here for quite some time. The metro start screen works well enough as a start menu replacement, but using only metro on the desktop? Not even close to that yet.

Doing 25% better than Mountain Lion:

http://chillopedia.c...ecord-for-os-x/

We'll see how wide the gap gets after a month :) Love this. Suck it, Apple.

Considering OS X only has 20% of the users of Windows 7 alone, you'd could argue that Apple is doing far better.

I bought 2 licence keys. I have it on my laptop. I wasn't too happy with it because Metro is not too user friendly, but then I got Start8 and I got my Start Menu back so I'm pretty happy at the moment. The OS seems to adapt to your use and therefore responds a bit faster the more you use it.

It boots and shuts down waaaay faster than 7, especially on the SSD drive I got on my laptop.

Yeah its a good price. I wasn't even considering upgrading to win8 at first, but when I saw how cheap it was I was like "well, why not?"

lol... most of the current metro apps are so basic they are practically useless for desktop users. The classic desktop will be here for quite some time. The metro start screen works well enough as a start menu replacement, but using only metro on the desktop? Not even close to that yet.

I agree with you. Metro is 100% useless on a desktop enviornment. Thank God for Stardock's Start8.

I agree with you. Metro is 100% useless on a desktop enviornment. Thank God for Stardock's Start8.

Which is my massive complaint with Windows 8. Microsoft should have made their own version of Start 8 and bundled it with the OS to keep EVERYBODY happy.

Which is my massive complaint with Windows 8. Microsoft should have made their own version of Start 8 and bundled it with the OS to keep EVERYBODY happy.

why should microsoft HAVE to leave in so many redundant options? that's the whole point of allowing 3rd party modifications

they had just got rid of start menu redundancy with windows 7 why would they bring it back with windows 8?

why should microsoft HAVE to leave in so many redundant options? that's the whole point of allowing 3rd party modifications

they had just got rid of start menu redundancy with windows 7 why would they bring it back with windows 8?

I do not understand what you mean. Windows 7 had the start menu, didn't it?

So it is okay for Microsoft to give us what some people here call "legacy" desktop mode, but without the "legacy" start menu? How is it a redundant option? You click the Desktop tile, it gives you the desktop start menu. I do not see how that is redundant.

I do not understand what you mean. Windows 7 had the start menu, didn't it?

yes it did, but 7 didn't have the redundant "classic" start menu that was still present in XP and Vista. that's what i'm sayin

yes it did, but 7 didn't have the redundant "classic" start menu that was still present in XP and Vista. that's what i'm sayin

You might say this is because the new style start menu was tested and very well received for two versions prior to removing. Unlike Windows 8 which just throws everything out the door and forces the new UI on you without option.

You might say this is because the new style start menu was tested and very well received for two versions prior to removing. Unlike Windows 8 which just throws everything out the door and forces the new UI on you without option.

but you do have option, several to be precise. they may not come directly from Microsoft but they are still there none the less

yes it did, but 7 didn't have the redundant "classic" start menu that was still present in XP and Vista. that's what i'm sayin

The point is Microsoft should have left the Start button there and give us, the users, the option to use it or not, not just remove it because they feel we don't want it or need it anymore. That is typical Apple attitude and very disrespectful to the user. We should always have options. Like the option to boot on either Metro or classic desktop. That too is not an option unless you install Start8 and I think that is ridiculous of Microsoft not to allow us to choose what interface we want to boot Windows with. Not cool.

Metro is a great interface for tablets, but not for a desktop and the Start button should have never been removed.,

The point is Microsoft should have left the Start button there and give us, the users, the option to use it or not, not just remove it because they feel we don't want it or need it anymore. That is typical Apple attitude and very disrespectful to the user. We should always have options. Like the option to boot on either Metro or classic desktop. That too is not an option unless you install Start8 and I think that is ridiculous of Microsoft not to allow us to choose what interface we want to boot Windows with. Not cool.

Metro is a great interface for tablets, but not for a desktop and the Start button should have never been removed.,

what are you talking about, the start button wasn't removed, it just doesn't appear till you move your mouse to the bottom left corner

seriously, all this whining about a "button", that in essence wasn't truly removed

Wait till you see how these numbers change when people start asking for their money back and reverting back to Windows 7.

Most people don't have a clue what Windows 8 is like. So they upgraded because it was cheap. Boasting about $30-$40 upgrade and how you sold 4 million copies of the whole new operating system is pretty sad to be honest.

For that money, Microsoft Windows users who upgrade should be a couple of times higher number than that considering their marketshare.

Wait till you see how these numbers change when people start asking for their money back and reverting back to Windows 7.

Most people don't have a clue what Windows 8 is like. So they upgraded because it was cheap. Boasting about $30-$40 upgrade and how you sold 4 million copies of the whole new operating system is pretty sad to be honest.

For that money, Microsoft Windows users who upgrade should be a couple of times higher number than that considering their marketshare.

The people buying the $40 downloads are going to be tech literate. They know what their getting into.

Worry about the people buying boxed retail or that are getting it bundled with a new PC.

what are you talking about, the start button wasn't removed, it just doesn't appear till you move your mouse to the bottom left corner

seriously, all this whining about a "button", that in essence wasn't truly removed

You must be blind then if you can't see that the Start Button and the Start Menu on the classic desktop is no longer there.

You must be blind then if you can't see that the Start Button and the Start Menu on the classic desktop is no longer there.

Sorry sir, but it is you who is blind. The start button is there, it's just hidden until you move your mouse into the corner... you know just like you did on Windows 7. The start menu is also there, it's just had a radical overhaul. Everything that most people used the old start menu for is replicated on the new start screen. Launching pinned apps, picking apps from an app list, searching for and launching apps, accessing control panel (settings), etc. Anything more technically literate people used to use it for can now be found in other ways. Win key + X for example.

At the end of the day, this is Microsoft's product. Buy it or don't, it's up to you.

Wait till you see how these numbers change when people start asking for their money back and reverting back to Windows 7.

Most people don't have a clue what Windows 8 is like. So they upgraded because it was cheap. Boasting about $30-$40 upgrade and how you sold 4 million copies of the whole new operating system is pretty sad to be honest.

For that money, Microsoft Windows users who upgrade should be a couple of times higher number than that considering their marketshare.

Do you honestly believe what you're saying? It's sounding a bit delusional if you ask me..

Sorry sir, but it is you who is blind. The start button is there, it's just hidden until you move your mouse into the corner... you know just like you did on Windows 7. The start menu is also there, it's just had a radical overhaul. Everything that most people used the old start menu for is replicated on the new start screen. Launching pinned apps, picking apps from an app list, searching for and launching apps, accessing control panel (settings), etc. Anything more technically literate people used to use it for can now be found in other ways. Win key + X for example.

At the end of the day, this is Microsoft's product. Buy it or don't, it's up to you.

The button you are referring to is NOT the Start Button people are used to and, sir, there is NO start button on the classic desktop. The button you are referring to as the Start button, when clicked from the classic desktop, takes you to that ridiculous Metro UI.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. They are seeking a better life too. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!