rumour Microsoft blasts PC makers: It's YOUR fault Windows 8 crash landed

[SSSikora]

I just don't get it! It seems as though 99.9%+ of the animosity leveled towards Windows 8 revolves around Metro and the lack of the Start menu. You are NOT REQUIRED to use anything Metro...with the exception of the Start menu, which can easily be gotten around by pinning applications to the desktop or the taskbar. With one of those two options in use the time you need to spend anywhere other than the desktop shrinks to an infinitesimal fraction of 1% of your total computer usage time. That change aside you just use all of your programs the same way you've always been doing! Where is the problem? Someone please explain it to me. I'm not trying to be an jerk here I honestly just don't understand what the major issue is. When you consider the benefits of Windows 8 - faster startup, better security, the *option* for touch computing, and many more it seems as though the tiny bit you arguably may have to give up is insignificant to the benefits.

[PGHammer]

i must admit, i also one of those consumers.

I usualy buy one with FreeDos preinstalled (not any version of windows),

so i can install whatever OS on it & customized according to my liking and crapware free too.

As W8 provides no benefit based on how I use my computer, I opt for non W8 OS.

I went the other way - I replaced 7 with 8, but left the hardware unchanged.

However, in our own ways, both of us are outliers; while you buy prebuilt, you buy specifically with a no-cost OS so you can install your own, while I build/upgrade my own PCs - therefore, I'm impacted far less by *crapware* than the average consumer.

I was referring to the same folks that normally WOULD go into a Carphone Warehouse or Tesco or hhgregg or Best Buy and buy a portable or desktop PC. If they have a solidly working PC at home, they can either keep it exactly as it is, OS and all, or upgrade just the OS - neither choice counts as an OEM sale, while the latter WOULD count as a sale of Windows.

Since the beginning, sales of Windows have been primarily OEM-driven - in fact, Windows 3.x was the first version to be sold retail in ANY quantity, while it took Windows XP to become the first NT-based OS to be sold in volume in retail.

Windows 8 seems to be very much bucking that trend - it is apparently very much upgrade-driven in terms of uptake. And because it's bucking the trend, there's a lot of finger-pointing going on.

[Noir Angel]

I also brought my copy as an upgrade, I simply don't buy OEM machines because I overclock and because I like more control over my hardware.

[Calum Veteran]

I wouldn't believe an accusation by The Register when no proof is provided.

'Rumour' tag added to thread, to remove possible misguidance and the possibility of false accusations being made

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

This needs to be made clear: neither Microsoft or any of their employees have actually said anything openly and officially on the matter.

Our well-placed source said that bad sales combined with PC makers ?ignoring? Microsoft's advice has left Redmond executives fuming.

?Microsoft is very frustrated with major OEMs who didn't build nearly enough touch systems and are now struggling to find parts and ramp up. Microsoft says they provided very specific guidance on what to build,? our insider said.

The Register :x

[PGHammer]

A questionable statement to make to say the least. I do use Windows 8 (with a start replacement and the theme from the RP) but if Windows 8 was an improvement on the desktop front as they claim the lack of tablets would not have mattered. The public are sending a message with the weak sales Windows 8 machines are getting and I hope they're heeded because Windows 8 is a solid OS once you get past the start screen and the butt ugly theme.

Windows 8 is a solid OS period - the problem (for OEMs) is that the hardware requirements (when it gets down to cases) are not merely similar to Windows 7, but identical to Windows 7.

Windows 8 replaced Windows 7 because I can run more applications.games/etc. - at the same time, and on the same hardware - compared to Windows 7.

However, how old IS Windows 7?

How long had Windows 7 been available when Windows 8 launched?

Basically, how old is the Windows 7 hardware base?

Also - and the question has to be asked - what percentage of the entire Windows 7 hardware base is unsuitable for Windows 8 (broken, too little hard drive, too weak GPU, etc.)?

What a lot of us are forgetting is that it isn't JUST Windows 8 vs. Windows 7, it's the Windows 8 OEM hardware vs. the existing hardware base, of which Windows 7 comprises a large number, but likely not the largest number.

There are doubtless some that are standing pat with Windows 7 (or Vista, or Linux, or even XP) - however, others may have simply grabbed a Windows 8 upgrade. Those aren't OEM sales - if anything, they are LOST OEM sales - however, they ARE sales of Windows 8.

We're getting hard data from the OEMs now - and the usual trend (big OEM sales numbers) is NOT there this time. However, 70 million Windows 8 licenses sold to date (and in less than six months) is an all-time record for ANY version of Windows. Given the lack of OEM sales, there's head-scratching and finger-pointing going on.

[TheLegendOfMart]

Increased price never stopped Windows 7.

Different situation, Windows 7 was the much needed/wanted upgrade from the Vista fiasco.

Had Windows 8 not launched at such a cheap rate I doubt you'd be seeing the marketshare you see today, and its only going to nosedive in units sold a month once the price goes back up.

No doubt they will try and spin it by forcing Windows 8 on OEMs as units sold.

[yowanvista]

They should just release a full Desktop version without the crap fullscreen Metro frankenstein garbage instead of forcing it on everyone, that would make things better for customers.

[Dot Matrix]

The Register :x

(Y)

[f0rk_b0mb]

I'm a little weary because this is from The Register, but if this is true, then Microsoft really needs to go back to the drawing board. Acceptence of your mistakes is the first step on the long road to recovery. :laugh:

[xWhiplash]

They should just release a full Desktop version without the crap fullscreen Metro frankenstein garbage instead of forcing it on everyone, that would make things better for customers.

Agreed. Or at least provide some options in the control panel to do what Start8 and the others do:

1. Boot directly to the desktop environment
   
2. Disable the hot corners.
   

I do not care about the start screen vs the start menu. But geez, as often as I restart, it is so annoying to boot into the Start Screen and having ti go to the Desktop right away. The hot corners are also very very very very irritating when you are doing something productive.

Here is the thing, despite those two AND ONLY TWO complaints I have about the OS, I still get slammed by Windows 8 fanatics. Having people say "Oh you just do not know how to use computers then", or "learn how to move your mouse". I mean really, there is NO POSSIBLE way anybody can EVER activate those hot corners by accident? I have said many many times that I actually prefer Windows 8 to Windows 7. So we are not allowed to complain about any product anymore? Let's just get rid of Amazon reviews, rotten tomatoes, and any other review/rating system. A company makes a video game that crashes every 30 minutes? Oh well, it is their product and they can do whatever they want right?

[Stoffel]

For me personally this article is on the spot.

I've upgraded my laptop to Windows 8 but didn't buy any new hardware.

At the moment there is nothing out there that I really like.

It seems that MS and the hardware manufacturers are always out of sync.

Wouldn't the start of Windows 8 been much better if they could have released new ultrabooks and laptops with those new Ive Bridge low power iCore processors from the start?

[Hydl]

Lets not forget, The Register did publish the false study that people who use Internet Explorer have lower IQ's compared to those who use alternative web browsers. http://www.ibtimes.com/aptiquant-confirms-internet-explorer-study-was-hoax-823089 The Register's fanbase ate it up like popcorn, but when it was revealed that the study was a hoax, The Register surprisingly did post an article saying it was fraudulent, but basically also said IE users are dumb anyway, we didn't really need a study to prove that. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/03/internet_explorer_iq_study_hoax/

How can anyone take this so called tech site seriously?

[Scorbing]

So it's the PC manufacturer's fault that Microsoft changed an already fine, beautiful, familiar and working UI for a P.O.S UI with squared blocks that nobody yet understands?

Windows 8 is an epic fail because of YOU Microsoft, not because of PC manufacturers.

[COKid]

Agreed. Or at least provide some options in the control panel to do what Start8 and the others do:

1. Boot directly to the desktop environment
   
2. Disable the hot corners.
   

I do not care about the start screen vs the start menu. But geez, as often as I restart, it is so annoying to boot into the Start Screen and having ti go to the Desktop right away.

Easily solved without paying for a 3rd party fix:

http://www.neowin.ne...op/page__st__15

Post #26. I simply have all the programs I use, about 15, on the desktop. No need for a Start Screen or Start Menu. But to each their own.

Anyway, count me in the group that wishes Microsoft had released 2 separate versions of Windows 8. One for non-touch devices, and one for touch devices. Alas, this will be my last non-touch computer anyway. Life goes on.

[Dot Matrix]

They should just release a full Desktop version without the crap fullscreen Metro frankenstein garbage instead of forcing it on everyone, that would make things better for customers.

That totally eliminates the whole entire purpose of Microsoft's company, and services wide reorganization.

[TheLegendOfMart]

I don't think anyone cares, Ballmer is running the company into the ground anyway.

[Hum]

Microsoft is really going downhill these days. :rolleyes: Sad to watch.

[xWhiplash]

Easily solved without paying for a 3rd party fix:

http://www.neowin.ne...op/page__st__15

Post #26. I simply have all the programs I use, about 15, on the desktop. No need for a Start Screen or Start Menu. But to each their own.

Anyway, count me in the group that wishes Microsoft had released 2 separate versions of Windows 8. One for non-touch devices, and one for touch devices. Alas, this will be my last non-touch computer anyway. Life goes on.

But that does not fix #2. I would rather have one application control both, so I can uninstall just one thing if I wanted/needed to. And there are free ones out there that do the same thing. I just prefer Start8 because I have used some of Stardock's software back in the XP days and I think their version is the best is just my personal opinion.

Alas, this will be my last non-touch computer anyway.

Not for me, I will not fill my monitor with fingerprints. Doing graphics, programming, podcasts, and everything like that. I could never use a touch screen.

[HSoft]

Even if the computer manufacturers brought 1000 different great systems to market, in this economy I would doubt that everyone would rush out to buy new hardware just to run windows anyway.

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

So then, nothing has changed in Redmond, It still is never MS's fault...LOL

[theyarecomingforyou]

And nowhere have you said that Windows 8 didn't work for non-touch hardware (specifically keyboards and mice). You basically assumed that because it supported touch that it either supported keyboards and mice poorly or not at all.

I bought Windows 8 and use it as my primary operating system, therefore I didn't "assume" anything. I formed an opinion based on my experiences. I never suggested that Windows 8 doesn't work for non-touch hardware, just that it wasn't optimised for mouse and keyboard as much as it was for touch. The Charm Bar is horrible, especially as you have to use it to shut down your computer by mouse (there are alternative keyboard shortcuts). The hot-corners are irritating, especially when they don't work properly with Aero Snap. And Metro apps use completely different mouse gestures to Aero. As a mouse and keyboard user I find those changes annoying. Is it the end of the world? No. Does it make Windows 8 a bad operating system? No. But I don't like some of the changes.

I just don't get it! It seems as though 99.9%+ of the animosity leveled towards Windows 8 revolves around Metro and the lack of the Start menu. You are NOT REQUIRED to use anything Metro...with the exception of the Start menu, which can easily be gotten around by pinning applications to the desktop or the taskbar.

Nonsense. To add users, change your Start Screen background, change your lock screen or manage your user account you have to use the new Metro 'PC Settings' (the alternative to the Control Panel), and clicking on the network icon brings up a Metro interface element. Shutting down the computer by mouse requires you to use the Charm Bar, which is fiddly and obviously optimised for touch, and many Windows features have been moved to Metro (Solitaire) or default to Metro (Mail, Photos, Videos, Reader, etc). Sure you can avoid most Metro elements but Microsoft tries very hard to force it upon users and you cannot escape entirely.

Personally I think it's great that Microsoft took touch really seriously with Windows 8 but the way the Metro elements were bolted onto the desktop was?quite simply?terrible. And let me repeat, I prefer Windows 8 to Windows 7 and I love some of the new desktop improvements - Storage Spaces, Task Manager, the Explorer Ribbon, file transfer dialogue, cloud accounts, etc. But I can certainly appreciate the frustration many people have using it and some of the changes are completely unnecessary.

[airedwin]

I'm gonna have to agree with Microsoft on this one. Just look at Windows Phone 8. It would not have been successful if Nokia hadn't produced the quality Lumia 920.

If any OEM had produced hardware comparable to an iPad, it would have been successful as well.

Microsoft clearly had a plan for Windows 8 and the OEMs did not stick to it. Microsoft had the same plan for Windows Phone 8 (hero devices, featured devices, marketing, etc etc), Nokia and HTC stuck with it, and they have been succesful.

So it's the PC manufacturer's fault that Microsoft changed an already fine, beautiful, familiar and working UI for a P.O.S UI with squared blocks that nobody yet understands?

Windows 8 is an epic fail because of YOU Microsoft, not because of PC manufacturers.

PC sales were already falling even with Windows 7, because of crap hardware. That is the point.

[Glassed Silver]

I'm gonna have to agree with Microsoft on this one. Just look at Windows Phone 8. It would not have been successful if Nokia hadn't produced the quality Lumia 920.

If any OEM had produced hardware comparable to an iPad, it would have been successful as well.

Microsoft clearly had a plan for Windows 8 and the OEMs did not stick to it. Microsoft had the same plan for Windows Phone 8 (hero devices, featured devices, marketing, etc etc), Nokia and HTC stuck with it, and they have been succesful.

PC sales were already falling even with Windows 7, because of crap hardware. That is the point.

Most of the peeps I know are looking for a new PC when the time is nigh and they don't pick "hero PCs", but PCs that will do what's required.

PCs aren't looked at in the same way smartphones are looked at.

Smartphone = features, has got the apps I need

PC = has OS, is newer than current machine, doesn't cost a fortune = will do the trick; also: Windows anyways= runs my software

Glassed Silver:mac

[syobon999]

Tablet hardware to an operating system nearly dominated by DESKTOP systems?