Forbes: Microsoft Is Fast Turning Into A Sideshow

[MorganX]

I agree. They just should have asked themselves why on earth users would want to have a hybrid contraption that can't either be big enough for a desktop and small enough for a tablet, with a touchscreen UI that does not make sense on a desktop, but is included anyway because they want to gamble with user's IQ in the long-term. They completely ignored competition. And they will pay for that.

Microsoft does stupid things, but it's not straight up stupid. I expect as fast as they moved on to Windows 9 and how much chatter there already is about Windows Blue (I mean 8's only been out a couple months) that they are fixing some of it's shortcomings. Any experienced Windows user can see in one or two sessions that Windows 8, while not half-baked, wasn't polished off before release. Hopefully Sinofsky's release will allow internal communication to improve which will ultimately improve all product lines and their interoperability to say the least.

[MistaT40]

So, now it?s clear: Windows 8 did not blow the doors off during the holiday. In context, this tepid launch is just one of a litany of failures fast relegating Microsoft to the status of incidental spectacle in the information technology business.

If Windows 8 is Exhibit A, Exhibit B is Windows Phone 8. Nokia has started discounting recently launched Lumina phones, indicating that they?re not exactly moving like hotcakes. Microsoft makes excuses and says these things take time, but even a fool can tell a torrid introduction from a lukewarm launch.

http://www.forbes.co...nto-a-sideshow/

Won't say $MS is fast turning into a side-show...they are still very relevant today, maybe not to the same degree as when they were at their top in the 90s-early 2K, but sideshow - far from it.

[Luis Mazza]

Microsoft does stupid things, but it's not straight up stupid. I expect as fast as they moved on to Windows 9 and how much chatter there already is about Windows Blue (I mean 8's only been out a couple months) that they are fixing some of it's shortcomings. Any experienced Windows user can see in one or two sessions that Windows 8, while not half-baked, wasn't polished off before release. Hopefully Sinofsky's release will allow internal communication to improve which will ultimately improve all product lines and their interoperability to say the least.

I hope so. At least we can guarantee the desktop side will be strong... Just don't make like the ugly mobile UI... :p

[cluberti]

And that is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. I have a differing opinion, and it'll be interesting to see what actually happens when support for XP dies, and Windows 7 goes into extended support the year after from a business' perspective. As an enterprise consultant in the client and virtualization space, enterprises *are* actually interested in Windows 8, although not at the pace Microsoft wants them to be. They *do* want to replace their iPads with RT and Pro devices that they can manage and potentially lock down, and a surprising number seem to want to do this with most ICs that have low-end requirements as well if that works - which in some large organizations is almost everyone outside of software development and IT.

Again, it'll be interesting to see what this looks like in 3 years. Vista's uptake was primarily driven by the enterprise, and Windows 7 was a good mixture of enterprises and consumers. The jury is still very much out on what the uptake of Windows 8 will be, as there are still many large enterprises that are mostly on XP that are considering the jump to either Windows 7 or Windows 8, and no, the interface changes are not really part of the decision - it's more device compatibility, software compatibility, development headroom for the next 5-7 years, manageability of local and remote devices, security, and cost. Given the cost of the software ends up being a wash (and the software to manage it as well), it comes down to the other questions. AppCompat questions are basically the same between Windows 7 and Windows 8 (minus certain GDI differences, but those are quite rare to have appcompat issues with), security on both is quite good out of the box (one could argue Windows 8 is better with AppContainer sandboxing and 64bit browser containers for the browser sessions), and that leaves device compatibility and cost, and software development issues.

Those are real questions, and organizations that are already considering VDI solutions find that Windows 8 devices (even RT, or maybe even better, RT) accessing those backends are a bit more functional than their Windows 7 brethren, without losing any of the "desktop" environment either.

I don't think we can make any decisions on whether or not businesses or enterprises will like, or will use, Windows 8 until it's been 2-3 years since launch, especially given what will happen to Microsoft's support of it's older products in those 3 years (XP will be unsupported entirely, Vista will be nearing it's end of support life, and Windows 7 will have moved to the "extended" support phase).

[Luis Mazza]

And that is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. I have a differing opinion, and it'll be interesting to see what actually happens when support for XP dies, and Windows 7 goes into extended support the year after from a business' perspective. As an enterprise consultant in the client and virtualization space, enterprises *are* actually interested in Windows 8, although not at the pace Microsoft wants them to be. They *do* want to replace their iPads with RT and Pro devices that they can manage and potentially lock down, and a surprising number seem to want to do this with most ICs that have low-end requirements as well if that works - which in some large organizations is almost everyone outside of software development and IT.

Again, it'll be interesting to see what this looks like in 3 years. Vista's uptake was primarily driven by the enterprise, and Windows 7 was a good mixture of enterprises and consumers. The jury is still very much out on what the uptake of Windows 8 will be, as there are still many large enterprises that are mostly on XP that are considering the jump to either Windows 7 or Windows 8, and no, the interface changes are not really part of the decision - it's more device compatibility, software compatibility, development headroom for the next 5-7 years, manageability of local and remote devices, security, and cost. Given the cost of the software ends up being a wash (and the software to manage it as well), it comes down to the other questions. AppCompat questions are basically the same between Windows 7 and Windows 8 (minus certain GDI differences, but those are quite rare to have appcompat issues with), security on both is quite good out of the box (one could argue Windows 8 is better with AppContainer sandboxing and 64bit browser containers for the browser sessions), and that leaves device compatibility and cost, and software development issues.

Those are real questions, and organizations that are already considering VDI solutions find that Windows 8 devices (even RT, or maybe even better, RT) accessing those backends are a bit more functional than their Windows 7 brethren, without losing any of the "desktop" environment either.

I don't think we can make any decisions on whether or not businesses or enterprises will like, or will use, Windows 8 until it's been 2-3 years since launch, especially given what will happen to Microsoft's support of it's older products in those 3 years (XP will be unsupported entirely, Vista will be nearing it's end of support life, and Windows 7 will have moved to the "extended" support phase).

This is one side: the enterprise. Consumers seem to be wanting something else. That is not a small market we're talking about, though. That will hurt Microsoft pretty badly if they ignore it's 'needs'.

[MorganX]

organizations that are already considering VDI solutions

+100

[HawkMan]

And your actual counter arguments are ? or are you just trolling, because then I should report you, but I suppose you have actual counter arguments and just forgot to post them.

[MorganX]

This is one side: the enterprise. Consumers seem to be wanting something else. That is not a small market we're talking about, though. That will hurt Microsoft pretty badly if they ignore it's 'needs'.

This is the conundrum Microsoft is in and why Windows 8 and Surface seem to suffer from dual personality. Is it for a desktop or tablets? All the time or only some of the time? Is it for consumers or the enterprise? Of course MS does enterprise best. But in this BYOD movement, they must do consumer devices well. IT would prefer the more controllable and predictable Windows devices, however, Apple has much more mindshare than market share and the class of users that are typically allowed to or demand access to corporate resources with their own devices still choose iPads, iPhones, and to a lesser degree android devices.

I don't envy the task Microsoft has. Their Windows 8 devices must not become Jacks of all trades, master of none. It will be quite interesting to see what MS does with the Windows Blue increment and Windows 9, and everything in between.

I do think the practice of releasing a product, in whatever condition, then moving the A dev team on to next product while leaving the B team to fix shortcomings is an outdated modus operandi.

[HawkMan]

I agree. They just should have asked themselves why on earth users would want to have a hybrid contraption that can't either be big enough for a desktop and small enough for a tablet, with a touchscreen UI that does not make sense on a desktop, but is included anyway because they want to gamble with user's IQ in the long-term. They completely ignored competition. And they will pay for that.

But it's not a touch screen UI, and it works awesome on a desktop, as I already said, better and more efficient than the start menu.

[Luis Mazza]

But it's not a touch screen UI, and it works awesome on a desktop, as I already said, better and more efficient than the start menu.

Yeah, maybe. Once you have time, patience and curiosity to click every single text and geometry you see on the screen, because there's no way to know WTF is clickable.

Brilliant.

[Dot Matrix]

Nobody can really raise their arms for 8 hours to use a touchscreen computer that can be controlled perfectly and effortlessly with a mouse! That's ridiculous. That's why the touchscreen on a desktop IS A TOTAL FAILURE. That's not because it can be done that it should be done.

Whose saying you have to do that? Screens can be tiled and moved to a more ergonomic setup.

This is the conundrum Microsoft is in and why Windows 8 and Surface seem to suffer from dual personality. Is it for a desktop or tablets?

Metro is for both. It works with both, and it ties both together.

[Luis Mazza]

This is the conundrum Microsoft is in and why Windows 8 and Surface seem to suffer from dual personality. Is it for a desktop or tablets? All the time or only some of the time? Is it for consumers or the enterprise? Of course MS does enterprise best. But in this BYOD movement, they must do consumer devices well. IT would prefer the more controllable and predictable Windows devices, however, Apple has much more mindshare than market share and the class of users that are typically allowed to or demand access to corporate resources with their own devices still choose iPads, iPhones, and to a lesser degree android devices.

I don't envy the task Microsoft has. Their Windows 8 devices must not become Jacks of all trades, master of none. It will be quite interesting to see what MS does with the Windows Blue increment and Windows 9, and everything in between.

I do think the practice of releasing a product, in whatever condition, then moving the A dev team on to next product while leaving the B team to fix shortcomings is an outdated modus operandi.

Yes, but if Microsoft loses appeal on the consumer side, then it will make a bad outcome for the company in big business and small business. That is because once you have the consumer market, then you can gradually move towards the business side with the consumer side working fine. Both Apple and Google don't ignore the business... They're just waiting... crawling... and Microsoft knows that. I doubt they aim Windows Phone to be the new Blackberry... It would make them an easy target for competition.

Whose saying you have to do that? Screens can be tiled and moved to a more ergonomic setup.

The tiles are ugly, confusing and I had a hard time resizing them, if I recall, I couldn't actually do that.

Also, there's text everywhere and it is clickable. Well... sometimes. thus, TEXT UI IS RIDICULOUS. That's going against all the studies pointing to icons as the easiest ones to deal with an OS.

[spenser.d]

Windows 8 is a testament to their worry. They would be idiots if they were not worried. Their shareholders are worried. I'm not sure why that's so hard to swallow. RRoD cost them hundreds of millions or more. They survived it, but worried, it's nonsensical to think they were not and are not worried.

Maybe worried is a bad word then. I'd say vigilant, or market aware, but worried? By your definition every company should be worried all the time and that's no way to run a company. It's nonsensical to think that.

[MorganX]

Metro is for both. It works with both, and it ties both together.

The jury is still out on how well it does either. It does provide a more or less common UX, but nothing really ties them (being tablet and desktop) together at this time.

[seta-san]

windows 8 is a huge incentive for corporations to upgrade what ever they haven't already, to windows 7

[MorganX]

Maybe worried is a bad word then. I'd say vigilant, or market aware, but worried? By your definition every company should be worried all the time and that's no way to run a company. It's nonsensical to think that.

I think worried is appropriate. Running a company worried or even paranoid when you're the top dog is the only way to stay the top dog. Shareholders don't really care much about how you got there, only their return. Microsoft has made sizeable investments in emerging markets (tablets and phones) and are bottom feeding in both. And their cash cow, Office, is squarely in Google's sights who is continuously wining and dining decision makers. They're worried. Windows desktop OS is really a non-issue here to be quite honest.

[Luis Mazza]

I think worried is appropriate. Running a company worried or even paranoid when you're the top dog is the only way to stay the top dog. Shareholders don't really care much about how you got there, only their return. Microsoft has made sizeable investments in emerging markets (tablets and phones) and are bottom feeding in both. And their cash cow, Office, is squarely in Google's sights who is continuously wining and dining decision makers. They're worried. Windows desktop OS is really a non-issue here to be quite honest.

That is absolutely true. Steve Ballmer gave an interview for a TV network here in Brazil, I think it was 2008. He said he was worried about Google and the reporter said "But you're the Goliath and Google is just beginning..." and he said "They're Goliath... we want to be David".

[Dot Matrix]

The tiles are ugly, confusing and I had a hard time resizing them, if I recall, I couldn't actually do that.

Also, there's text everywhere and it is clickable. Well... sometimes. thus, TEXT UI IS RIDICULOUS. That's going against all the studies pointing to icons as the easiest ones to deal with an OS.

Huh? Confusing? They're straight forward dude. They display snippets of information, how is that confusing? And resizing tiles isn't that hard, just right click the tile, and the option is down at the bottom.

And there's NO CLICKABLE TEXT in Windows 8. None. That's all Windows Phone, and even there there's very little of it.

[Luis Mazza]

Huh? Confusing? They're straight forward dude. They display snippets of information, how is that confusing? And resizing tiles isn't that hard, just right click the tile, and the option is down at the bottom.

And there's NO CLICKABLE TEXT in Windows 8. None. That's all Windows Phone, and even there there's very little of it.

The tiles keep showing whatever they want. What if I only want a damn icon?

There's clickable text, of course... The charm bar, the Personalization are pretty much text.

[Crimson Rain]

This explains it all.. when a company is ran by an idiot like this

There's nothing else to be said and certainly doesn't come as a surprise they are a joke

More of your bull****...somehow I knew I'd see your post among first 5.

[HawkMan]

Yeah, maybe. Once you have time, patience and curiosity to click every single text and geometry you see on the screen, because there's no way to know WTF is clickable.

Brilliant.

Uh what... It's perfectly clear what is clickable, unless you're blind, but then any GUI is confusing.

[Dot Matrix]

The tiles keep showing whatever they want. What if I only want a damn icon?

There's clickable text, of course... The charm bar, the Personalization are pretty much text.

Lol. It's clear you've never used Windows 8, have you? You can turn live tiles off.

And I forgot about the CP. Yes, there's clickable text, but it's still obvious you can click it, just like the clickable text in the Windows 7 CP. But no one will ever complain about that, because Windows 7 is the industry darling.

There's your resizing and live tile options. Simply right click a tile, and you'll see this pop up. You've known how to right click objects for extra options forever now. Windows 8 doesn't change that.

[HawkMan]

The tiles are ugly, confusing and I had a hard time resizing them, if I recall, I couldn't actually do that.

Also, there's text everywhere and it is clickable. Well... sometimes. thus, TEXT UI IS RIDICULOUS. That's going against all the studies pointing to icons as the easiest ones to deal with an OS.

How did you have a problem resizing tiles? Right click, enlarge. If you found that confusing, I hope you never used ANY other Graphical UI

The tiles keep showing whatever they want. What if I only want a damn icon?

There's clickable text, of course... The charm bar, the Personalization are pretty much text.

Right click and turn off the live tile...

Also the charm bar is icons, not text.

The more you pst the more I feel like you have NEVER even tried Windows 8

[Luis Mazza]

Lol. It's clear you've never used Windows 8, have you? You can turn live tiles off.

And I forgot about the CP. Yes, there's clickable text, but it's still obvious you can click it, just like the clickable text in the Windows 7 CP. But no one will ever complain about that, because Windows 7 is the industry darling.

There's your resizing and live tile options. Simply right click a tile, and you'll see this pop up. You've known how to right click objects for extra options forever now. Windows 8 doesn't change that.

'

How did you have a problem resizing tiles? Right click, enlarge. If you found that confusing, I hope you never used ANY other Graphical UI

Right click and turn off the live tile...

Also the charm bar is icons, not text.

The more you pst the more I feel like you have NEVER even tried Windows 8

Yes... I did use Windows 8, but honestly... I'm used to know exactly what I wanted to do and be able to do that. I won't learn the little secrets of Windows 8 because, well... Metro Apps are pretty useless to me. If I want that kind of behavior for a certain app, I'd rather have widgets or websites that do that pretty well. I'm not using a tablet. I'm on a Retina Macbook Pro, and if I want widgets, I can certainly swipe with three fingers to the right and access all the widgets I want. I don't have to deal with another UX made for tablets to do what I want ON A DESKTOP.

Good luck with your frankenstein OS. It is not for me.

[COKid]

Large or small isn't much of a choice for someone with dozens of shortcuts. I wish tiles would be resizable to any size I desire.