Just how many people hate Windows 8?

[PGHammer]

..sticking to the topic, i would have to say a LOT.

i do NOT think this is the case of a vocal minority if it was i would say so..

i also do not think it is the nerd set this is complaining (again stated in first post)

my mom bought a laptop recently that came with windows 8 and she did not like it.

I think the reason she didn't like it was that it felt like un-needed changes.

I have been across the net and back since windows 8 RTM'd and there is NO place on earth i do not see people hating windows 8 !

So i'm getting tired of people trying to pull this oh its just a vocal minority crap.

And i bloody dare any of you to challenge me on that, i can go to dozens of totaly random web sites

and show clearly people are mad and hate it at every kind of site you can imagine not just nerdy windows tech sites.

You know what bothers me even more than any specific feature about windows 8 ?

It's the retarded amount of people that are on a crusade to discredit windows 8 critics.

If you don't like something about you are frequently rendered human garbage and that is NOT right !

I can deal with windows 8 and in time we'll kinda have to but what gets under my skin is the outright lying

and pathetic excuses as to why Windows 8 is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

The only thing that matters is we are honest about the issue.. that's it.

It works the other way as well.

I only started replying when the anti-8 commenters started stating opinions (theirs) as fact.

I have stated, more than once, that anti-8 opinions (and "Bring back the Start menu!" commentaries) aren't an issue for me per se - however, presenting personal opinion as fact I have a great deal of issue with. (In case you haven't noticed, I've even whacked Dot Matrix for some of HIS over-the-top praise of Windows 8 at times - and I use Windows 8 on a desktop that lacks touch support.)

My stated opinions are just that - mine AND opinions. I don't state them as fact - I don't even ask that they be relied on.

I'll present data - however, it's hard to present data to someone that has, in actuality, already closed their mind to new data, including opposing data.

[Noir Angel]

And why is it a *tablet UI* (your words, not mine)? Because it supports touch at all?

Because it was quite clearly designed to be used with touch, KB and mouse support was thrown in as an afterthought and it feels much more clunky than the old system. Touch setups are by their very nature required to be simplistic due to the fact that our fingers aren't as adept for fine manipulation as a keyboard and mouse are. The very things that make Windows 8 work well on touch devices simply makes them feel clunky on a KB and a mouse.

ModernUI doesn't support mice any less than touch - in fact, it supports mice in addition to touch. It is also extensible to support other forms of interaction (the Dragon Voice extension from Nuance - included with Dragon Naturally Speaking - plugs into it - it previously plugged into the standard extension for desktop applications, which it STILL does). Touch didn't replace the keyboard any more than voice interaction did - it's an option, not a requirement.

The fact that it's there doesn't mean that it works well. I know very few people that actually like using it with KB and mouse

If touch support were not as obvious as it is now, chances are most users would, in fact ignore it. (Your own argument, in fact, makes that point.)

Kinda hard to ignore it when it slaps you in the face every time you start your computer, hmmm?

Your issue is that touch support is so attention-calling (for you) that you forget your hardware doesn't support it. That's an opinion - not a fact. How is that the fault of Microsoft?

Microsoft are bastardising their products and you're asking me how it's their fault? hmm yeah, one of those imponderables.

[PGHammer]

Because it was quite clearly designed to be used with touch, KB and mouse support was thrown in as an afterthought and it feels much more clunky than the old system. Touch setups are by their very nature required to be simplistic due to the fact that our fingers aren't as adept for fine manipulation as a keyboard and mouse are. The very things that make Windows 8 work well on touch devices simply makes them feel clunky on a KB and a mouse.

The fact that it's there doesn't mean that it works well. I know very few people that actually like using it with KB and mouse

Kinda hard to ignore it when it slaps you in the face every time you start your computer, hmmm?

Microsoft are bastardising their products and you're asking me how it's their fault? hmm yeah, one of those imponderables.

Plenty of folks manage to ignore it - with OR without the help of Start8, ClassicShell and the like. (I made plain that I run Windows 8 today on a computer with no touch support at all - a desktop from the age of Vista, in fact. The fact that you specifically can't puts you in a different category than me - you may be a minority, in fact. Please, don't state YOUR opinion as a fact. It's data, but may not necessarily be the case for everyone - it certainly isn't for me, for example.)

If Microsoft followed THAT uber dictum, they would have made it impossible - not merely hard - for their server OS - Windows Server - to be used as a workstation, or even desktop, OS; if anything, they have made it easier. Why are plenty of the OEMs making not just convertible devices, but even tablets and slates? (Samsung's ATIV 7 - formerly the Series 7 - SHIPPED with Windows 7, not Windows 8.)

They wouldn't have put power-saving features in ANY version of Windows to make it portable-computing friendly - let alone Windows 2000 Professional - which was, in case you have forgotten, a WORKSTATION, not desktop and everyday, operating system. (Never mind that a rather large minority of folks - and a near-majority of Neowinians - did indeed use Windows 2000 Professional as a main/everyday operating system - in fact, including me. That certainly wasn't Microsoft's plan for the operating system. Yet plenty of portable-friendly features abounded in the as-shipping *workstation* OS, and even more were added with the Service Packs and updates.)

Basically, what you are suggesting flies utterly in the face of what Windows in general, and Windows NT in particular, has ALWAYS done - it does NOT ignore new ways of using the computer, or new hardware designed FOR such interaction.

And if that isn't enough for you, there is a portion of the law (specifically, the law of the United States, where Microsoft's headquarters is) called the Americans with Disabilities Act (AWDA). Yes - it DOES apply to computer operating systems - it applies to computers in public places (such as libraries) as well. You have to add a lot of both hardware and software to a Windows 7-based PC to make it AWDA-compliant - far more than it would merely upgrading to Windows 8. Why? Because Windows 8 supports AWDA-compliant hardware largely out of the box - which Windows 7 doesn't. (Linux distributions are tackling the issue also - because they have to. Schools and libraries - two of their biggest markets - are faced with the AWDA hurdle in the US - there is a similar hurdle in EU regulation and the laws of most Eurozone nations. Fail to comply, and you - are - blocked.)

Just because YOU can't ignore the more obvious touch aspects doesn't mean that is the same for everyone - some of us manage just fine.

[PGHammer]

Because it was quite clearly designed to be used with touch, KB and mouse support was thrown in as an afterthought and it feels much more clunky than the old system. Touch setups are by their very nature required to be simplistic due to the fact that our fingers aren't as adept for fine manipulation as a keyboard and mouse are. The very things that make Windows 8 work well on touch devices simply makes them feel clunky on a KB and a mouse.

The fact that it's there doesn't mean that it works well. I know very few people that actually like using it with KB and mouse

Kinda hard to ignore it when it slaps you in the face every time you start your computer, hmmm?

Microsoft are bastardising their products and you're asking me how it's their fault? hmm yeah, one of those imponderables.

You do know some - I have zero trouble using ModernUI applications with keyboard and mouse. I don't have touch support on this desktop - which runs Windows 8 today. The data that I have no issue and you do - on similar (not identical) hardware (the commonality is lack of touch support) means we are different in terms of users - and that is, in fact, all it means. It's not impossible - the very fact that I can do it makes that plain. Different does NOT mean impossible.

ModernUI apps MUST be usable with keyboards and mice - simply because touch is not prevalent in terms of desktops - that is a cold reality. (How many developers actually GRASP that reality is a far different question, and perhaps the question the anti-ModernUI crowd should ask instead.) Quite a few NEW ModernUI apps and games (not the lick-and-promise ports from Android and/or iOS, or even some of the ground-up new apps and games) actually get that - MetroTwit and MetroIRC get it, for example - so does Cut the Rope. (Fruit Ninja - which STARTED as a ModernUI game, has been successfully ported to Win32 and to Android.) So it's far from impossible. That is why I blame developers, not Microsoft. Microsoft WOULD be to blame if it were impossible - which is what the punditocracy is claiming. It isn't, as there are successful ModernUI apps that work without touch support at all. What ModernUI has been cursed with is developers that are clueless, and part of the user base that is scared of anything different from what they are used to. Neither Android or iOS are faced with that because they are in-your-face different - if you buy an iOS or Android device, you are making a CONSCIOUS choice to be unbound by the old style. While ModernUI is different, it's not AS in-your-face different as Android or even iOS; that much is certainly part of Microsoft's planning. The anti-ModernUI crowd, however, doesn't want anything different at all. What they REALLY want is Windows 7 Service Pack/Release 2 - as many of Windows 8's underpinnings as possible inside the familiar and unchanged Windows 7 UI. You would have been quite happy had the design of Windows 8 been frozen with build 7954, or even 7989 - the two builds prior to the Developer Preview. If's not as different as Android or iOS - which quite a number of you use on tablets and/or phones; it's different enough to scare the bejeebers out of you because of where it is.

[Noir Angel]

Which is all kind of ironic here, given that you're trying to do precisely what you're accusing everyone else of: Passing your opinions off as fact. The fact that you can use modern UI applications doesn't mean that they're well designed in a non touch environment.

As for the rest: I never said you can't bypass the start screen, but you cannot without third party applications. And given that they have finally screwed those for good in the next coming release, yeah they're trying to force people to use it.

In reality, you're simply adopting the same arrogant ignorance as DM (which is quite funny given your claims to have criticised him) by making the assumption that I dislike Modern UI because I'm afraid of change, and you're also pushing another one of his ignorant fallacies as well: That being new makes it better, and that everyone should adopt it because of it being new. I refuse to use ModernUI because it doesn't fit my needs, I'm happy to accept change when it works properly for me. And given tanking PC sales, slow sales of Windows 8 tablets, and general public opinion it would seem there are more people like me than there are like you. If it were a change for the better people would be quietly adopting it, and a lot of people are not happy.

[PGHammer]

Which is all kind of ironic here, given that you're trying to do precisely what you're accusing everyone else of: Passing your opinions off as fact. The fact that you can use modern UI applications doesn't mean that they're well designed in a non touch environment.

As for the rest: I never said you can't bypass the start screen, but you cannot without third party applications. And given that they have finally screwed those for good in the next coming release, yeah they're trying to force people to use it.

In reality, you're simply adopting the same arrogant ignorance as DM (which is quite funny given your claims to have criticised him) by making the assumption that I dislike Modern UI because I'm afraid of change, and you're also pushing another one of his ignorant fallacies as well: That being new makes it better, and that everyone should adopt it because of it being new. I refuse to use ModernUI because it doesn't fit my needs, I'm happy to accept change when it works properly for me. And given tanking PC sales, slow sales of Windows 8 tablets, and general public opinion it would seem there are more people like me than there are like you. If it were a change for the better people would be quietly adopting it, and a lot of people are not happy.

Some folks will NEVER adopt it by it being too different from what they are used to - that in and of itself isn't the issue. And if you aren't afraid of change (or actively dislike a change in WINDOWS in particular, which IS what I implied) why have you insisted on belittling ModernUI by pigeonholing it as a *phone UI" merely because it supports touch at all? You (in fact, none of the critics of ModernUI) don't make such a criticism of either Android or iOS - and both actually ARE "phone UIs" - in Android's case, it started as a phone-only operating system. Why is only ModernUI deliberately pigeonholed - as opposed to Android or iOS - where such a description would be, in fact, accurate?

All I have done was state - specifically - that there are folks that use ModernUI applications on not just computers without touch support, but desktop computers without touch support - and gave myself as an example. You had stated that it was impossible - not merely difficult. Impossible and difficult are not the same thing. Never mind that I don't find it difficult at all - which is the opposite of your own experiences.

If you have trouble grasping the differences between ModernUI and Windows 7, that is not a problem - either for me OR for Microsoft. Windows 7 hasn't gone away - it will still be supported until at least 2021. However, all that I DO ask is that you not deliberately attack an OS you can't wrap your usage patterns around by making general statements when they apply specifically to you.

[Noir Angel]

Some folks will NEVER adopt it by it being too different from what they are used to - that in and of itself isn't the issue. And if you aren't afraid of change (or actively dislike a change in WINDOWS in particular, which IS what I implied) why have you insisted on belittling ModernUI by pigeonholing it as a *phone UI" merely because it supports touch at all? You (in fact, none of the critics of ModernUI) don't make such a criticism of either Android or iOS - and both actually ARE "phone UIs" - in Android's case, it started as a phone-only operating system. Why is only ModernUI deliberately pigeonholed - as opposed to Android or iOS - where such a description would be, in fact, accurate?

Because I don't use iOS and Android on my desktop, and because Google and Apple don't try to pretend that they're a desktop OS?

If you have trouble grasping the differences between ModernUI and Windows 7, that is not a problem - either for me OR for Microsoft. Windows 7 hasn't gone away - it will still be supported until at least 2021. However, all that I DO ask is that you not deliberately attack an OS you can't wrap your usage patterns around by making general statements when they apply specifically to you.

I understand them, that doesn't however stop them from being tablet UIs that have been slapped onto a desktop products. The consumer reaction to Windows 8 is proving me right, and until it starts selling in the same numbers as Windows 7 and until almost every client I deal with stops complaining about it I'll continue criticising it any damn way I please.

[Order_66]

Nothing changed with Aero peek...did you accidently turn it off on your system?

Also, I don't believe any features were removed from the Desktop.

Many things have been removed, desktop gadgets, glass, start menu, flip 3D etc..

But the most obvious thing that MS removed when they made windows 8 was the user-friendly UI and this is the main reason windows 8 has totally bombed at retail.

[ingramator]

Because I don't use iOS and Android on my desktop, and because Google and Apple don't try to pretend that they're a desktop OS?

Pftt I beg to differ with Apple at least, Google is nothing more than a "technology" company afloat from advertising so we will leave them out of this discussion.

Apple tried and tried to get OSX onto a phone but they failed due to the underpinnings of the OS, instead they kept a similar kernel and wrote iOS pretty much ground up (although there is a lot of shared source code). They wanted people to think that it was the same OS, they emulated as many APIs as they could (which was too time consuming which is why it has taken so long to get to the level of APIs we have in iOS 6 and believed to be why applications weren't available in the early versions of iOS. Heck its even going the other way now, I hear people say that their computer runs iOS and they get apps the same in the "app store". Apple have even started porting half the crap in iOS to OSX like launchpad and the notification center and visa versa with imessage and facetime etc. What everyone wants is a unified OS! One to rule them all. Why you may ask? Development. Being able to write and run an application that will run on a desktop PC, tablet, phone, server or even a friggin fridge for all I care is the multibillion dollar market. Consumer electronics domination. Google, Microsoft, Apple aren't trying to make you feel like you are running a "desktop OS" or a "tablet OS" they are trying to make you feel as if you are running the ONLY the ONE OS. Everything is integrated, everything works together, same UX/UI your content is here and there, all that kind of thing. Microsoft know this is the future and are going to try and colonise this in the long run. Sure is might not be working out all that great in the short term but MS are a long term company, their investment is in 5 years not 5 months. Wouldn't surprise me if Windows Phone was the market dominator by 2018 with a unified Windows experience on every device. Anyway don't for one minute think that Microsoft implementation of the modern UI will be any different then what Apple will try and do and maybe (cringes at chrome OS) Google as well. They will iron out the bugs, problems, feedback now and be the winners of the problem. Lets just wait and see.

[Noir Angel]

Yes, then they realised they screwed up and called a halt to it. Something Microsoft are apparently either too arrogant or too stupid to do.

[typu]

a appreciate what microsoft is trying to do with windows 8 and the rest of their products.

what i simply cannot understand tho is how such a huge company does not manage to get it done better. their own metro apps are unpolished, lack obvious features. that is no way an ideal approach to gain people's minds and hearts. its just sloppy.

but in the end: i do with windows 8 what i did with windows 7. i dont mind that i upgraded. but i admit that i am disappointed by the lack of polishness.

[nekrosoft13]

I'm not sure how you come to this conclusion. No one is clamoring for touch on their computers. It's been available for a long time. People barely use Kiosks. Touch on smartphones and tablets isn't there because people a yearning for a more interactive experience with their computing device. It's there because that's the only viable input method for those devices. You can very well have a mobile device if you have to lug around input peripherals. This also limits the devices usability, but people only want quick consumption on mobile devices.

Children do want interactivity in all things. And they find it quite enjoyable to smudge a screen and move things around with their fingers and get snot everywhere.

exactly, the last sentence describes windows 8 users perfectly.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

What everyone wants is a unified OS! One to rule them all. Why you may ask? Development. [...] write and run an application that will run on a desktop PC, tablet, phone, server or even a friggin fridge

I don't think there's any question that developers support a write-once-run-everywhere approach, and it's easy to see why, but users seem to generally prefer custom-tailored experiences for specific form factors (or platforms for that matter). As a general rule, the unmodified UI of a fridge app doesn't work so great on a desktop PC and vice versa. As for the model of your app, that can already be fairly easily transferred between operating systems like iOS and OS X (and obviously between iPhone's and iPad's iOS) due to their mostly identical underpinning in that respect. While it may be a disadvantage for the developer therefore that it is necessary to adapt the UI to each form factor, it actually benefits the user. And obviously, even on the same OS (like iOS) it is actually advantageous to adapt the UI to the form factor, i.e. am I running on a tablet or a phone.

Everything is integrated, everything works together, same UX/UI your content is here and there, all that kind of thing.

Arguably the UI should not be exactly the same between an app running on a fridge and one running on a desktop PC. None of what you mentioned requires a single unified OS though. Nor does a single unified OS imply the things you mentioned. Or even necessarily benefit from that approach. Arguably the integration of Safari running on the Mac with Safari running on the iPod and/or iPhone is actually better than the integration of the two Internet Explorers running on the same OS and machine in either Metro- or Desktop-land.

[xWhiplash]

I don't think there's any question that developers support a write-once-run-everywhere approach, and it's easy to see why, but users seem to generally prefer custom-tailored experiences for specific form factors (or platforms for that matter). As a general rule, the unmodified UI of a fridge app doesn't work so great on a desktop PC and vice versa. As for the model of your app, that can already be fairly easily transferred between operating systems like iOS and OS X (and obviously between iPhone's and iPad's iOS) due to their mostly identical underpinning in that respect. While it may be a disadvantage for the developer therefore that it is necessary to adapt the UI to each form factor, it actually benefits the user.

Arguably the UI should not be exactly the same between an app running on a fridge and one running on a desktop PC. None of what you mentioned requires a single unified OS though. Or even necessarily benefits from that approach. Arguably the integration of Safari running on the Mac with Safari running on the iPod and/or iPhone is actually better than the integration of the two Internet Explorers running on the same OS and machine in either Metro- or Desktop-land.

Agreed. A unified OS will never work. I do not need these specialized apps on my production computer. None of these apps compare to the full versions (like the full Photoshop Extended, After Effects, Visual Studio, and more). Nor do I want those on a tablet. It just cannot work. And those Apps that everybody keeps wanting, like the metro skype app or Angry Birds or some random app, you should not be using those in a work environment. You use the desktop equivalent so you can continue to work if you need to.

Do you think the average Joe Somebody needs a work like environment for their home? No. All we are saying is do not treat your professional market as your lowest priority. Make all of these options in at least the Enterprise edition of Windows 8 so businesses will be happy. Get rid of the Modern UI in the Server edition. I have no idea why it is there. A server admin does not use the computer the same way clients do and even home users do. There is NO POINT at all to have the modern UI in the server edition. NONE.

Also, Apple is doing things the right way. Launchpad is completely optional, and is not thrown in your face. The dock is still visible. The dock does not hide by default (just like you can configure the Taskbar to auto-hide since Windows XP I believe). There are no Hot Corners. To activate the Notification, you have to click an icon at the top right of the screen, it is not a hot corner. You can certainly set up hot corners if you would like. But those types of features need to be optional.

As I have said, I do not hate Windows 8. They are making a giant mess though. The NEED to do the following things to make a lot of people very happy.

1. Boot to desktop - Unless it has changed, this is still coming in Blue / 8.1
   
2. Start Button in order to make support easier - Unless it has changed, this is still coming in Blue / 8.1
   
3. Ability to completely disable the hot corners while in the desktop environment.
   

That list above is the only reason I use Start 8. I do not care about the start menu, but it gives me those three features that I need in order to use Windows 8 in an enjoyable way.

[MorganX]

I don't care what anyone says, or what merits any argument pro or con has. If that 27" Aluminum iMac were running Windows 8 natively, with upgradeable CPU & Video, it would be selling like hotcakes. Touchscreen even moreso.

[+Warwagon MVC]

I really don't like the fact that people say that the reason we don't like windows 8 is because "WE ARE AFRAID OF CHANGE" .. uh, no that's not it at all. I love new stuff, I love change, I just don't like an ugly, unintuitive mess.

[Rickkins]

exactly, the last sentence describes windows 8 users perfectly.

Er, I believe you mean "metro" users....

[Jose_49]

40 pages already?!

People like the flame :p

[deck]

With Start8 I am able to get the best of Win8 and keep the areas that I liked from Win7. One can argue that one should not have to pay for a feature like the Start menu, but I don't really care anymore.

[Growled Member]

^ Just use what works for you. :)

[DeadEndAccount]

It doesn't MATTER why they don't like it.. Damn.. If someone doesn't like just because it has the number "8" in it.. SO BE IT lol

Who cares if there reasons don't make sense to you.. it is them that is using it..

Why does it matter to you for people to like it?

It does matter or otherwise the whole discussion that is taking place is completely pointless; as a reader if I can't understand why you dislike something then it leaves me frustrated unable to comprehend what issues you have which then goes back to why you're even posting your opinion here in the first place; are you trolling to get a rise out of people or are you interested in a discussion and hearing what other people have to say on the topic?

[Torolol]

Dot, please explain to me the many uses touch has on the desktop. I prefer to sit farther away than arms distance from my monitors. I cannot imaging how holding up my hand is MORE or even AS productive as a mouse is. Not to mention, after a few minutes my arm gets tired.

There is no way in hell I am ever going to use touch (in the way you are thinking) on the desktop. There is no way you can play really intense games with a touch screen. If you are playing an FPS, your arm alone will obstruct your view. Not to mention using keyboard for WASD and having your hand up for the camera controls....not going to happen. There is no way I will be putting my arms up in the air to do precise copy/paste operations or selecting some text (while programming perhaps). There is no way I will be putting my arms up in the air for my graphics work. Smudgy monitor + intense graphics work is not a good idea.

I am more productive with a mouse. Touch is not going to replace it. Hardcore gamers will never accept it. Most graphics designers will not accept it. They have WACOM tablets in a nice writing position, not vertically.

Touch will never be preferred for productivity. It just will not happen. Maybe it is cool to use touch with Angry Birds, but not for several hours of real productivity.

yes, Windows Design Team probably never thought about your points, when they decided to shove the touch interface to desktop masses.

its no wonder many consider this halfassed product.

Perhaps it can be traced when the team want to re-imagined windows, somewhere in the process they (accidentaly?) end up re-imagining the consumers too.

But as imagination of consumers =/= facts of what consumers really are, we have this situation right now.

[bradsday]

Today I was setting up a windows 8 machine for someone and i created some instructions on notepad how to create a system image on WIndows 8 once they got the machine all setup how they like it. On every version previous to windows 8 they would just read the instructions on one side of the screen and then do them on the other. On windows 8 she had to keep going back and forth because as soon as she hit the windows key the instructions got covered it. It was quite annoying.

Control + P

[Torolol]

Control + P

do you realize that not everyone have printer right?

[bradsday]

do you realize that not everyone have printer right?

Take it down, Sparky. It was a joke. But seriously, if someone is creating a system image, they probably have a printer. Just saying.