Is Microsoft ignoring the desktop again?

[PGHammer]

Until tablets get 32GB of RAM, can use 3DS Max, Adobe After Effects, Visual Studio, and more, they will not replace my desktop.  I fail to see how the desktop is dead.  I also fail to see how "classic apps have been basically the same for years".

 

Right.  Visual Studio 2005 is the EXACT SAME as Visual Studio 2013....right?

 

There were never any new features from Photoshop 5 to Photoshop CC?

And, once again, you are using outlier applications (the high end, which fewer than one-quarter of the Windows userbase even uses) to define the entire userbase.

 

And nobody (least of all me) is saying that the desktop is dead.

 

I'm simply saying that, for the majority of even Windows users, a configuration of even 4 GB of RAM and a recent (not even current) Intel mainstream quad-core is overkill.

 

Photoshop 4 (not even 5) would STILL be overkill for HALF the user-base.

 

While there is still a need for desktop applications, all too many users could, in fact, care less about them.

 

That is, in fact, the biggest ISSUE with desktop applications.

 

All too many desktop-applications are defined by the high-end user - which leaves them absolutely unsuitable for the mainstream.

 

In fact, look at OS X (and Yosemite in particular).  What is the userbase of Yosemite?

 

While you may admire it for being a strictly-desktop OS, it also has less than TEN PERCENT of the Windows userbase - and that is if you include every user of every version of OS X.

 

If you count just Yosemite users, it hasn't even caught the number of Windows 8+ users.

 

Unlike you, I don't want to see Windows become OS X (or Microsoft become Apple).

[xWhiplash]

And, once again, you are using outlier applications (the high end, which fewer than one-quarter of the Windows userbase even uses) to define the entire userbase.

 

And nobody (least of all me) is saying that the desktop is dead.

 

I'm simply saying that, for the majority of even Windows users, a configuration of even 4 GB of RAM and a recent (not even current) Intel mainstream quad-core is overkill.

 

Photoshop 4 (not even 5) would STILL be overkill for HALF the user-base.

 

While there is still a need for desktop applications, all too many users could, in fact, care less about them.

 

That is, in fact, the biggest ISSUE with desktop applications.

 

All too many desktop-applications are defined by the high-end user - which leaves them absolutely unsuitable for the mainstream.

 

In fact, look at OS X (and Yosemite in particular).  What is the userbase of Yosemite?

 

While you may admire it for being a strictly-desktop OS, it also has less than TEN PERCENT of the Windows userbase - and that is if you include every user of every version of OS X.

 

If you count just Yosemite users, it hasn't even caught the number of Windows 8+ users.

 

Unlike you, I don't want to see Windows become OS X (or Microsoft become Apple).

 

They are going to have to.  This One OS to rule them all will not make everyone happy.  Now the tablet folks are getting angry because they are taking the desktop away from small tablets.  8.1 is fine for tablets.  Leave 10 for desktops.  Why does an OS have to fit every single piece of technology?

 

This is why Apple systems are better.  The ONLY reason I use Windows now is for Visual Studio (still the best in development) and gaming.  I prefer OS X for everything else.  I even like OS X for web development (Coda).

[Dot Matrix]

They are going to have to.  This One OS to rule them all will not make everyone happy.  Now the tablet folks are getting angry because they are taking the desktop away from small tablets.  8.1 is fine for tablets.  Leave 10 for desktops.  Why does an OS have to fit every single piece of technology?

Easy - To reduce overhead, open up development, and provide a better end user experience to users. Being able to move from device to device running the same OS, will reduce the need for training as well, and ease transition.

[xWhiplash]

Desktop apps have remained the same, but not in features. Take a look at the Windows 7 desktop, and compare it to Windows 95. They're the same thing. They both have a taskbar, a Start Menu, and launch the same applications. They're both desktops through and through. They were both built solely for mouse input, and continue to run the same resources - and that's where the issue lies. Underneath, very little has changed, and that's what's causing the issues with Microsoft. Underneath, Windows doesn't scale. All of that is changing, and as such the desktop as we knew it, is dead.

 

That is like saying every first person shooter since the beginning of video games is exactly the same with the argument being "Carry a gun and run around".  Who cares if Windows 15 still has a task bar, start menu, and the same STYLE of applications?

 

IT WORKS.  I seriously doubt modern apps would be beneficial for high quality content creation software.  There are too many tools to fit in a modern style app.

[Dot Matrix]

IT WORKS. *

* Only on desktops.

[PGHammer]

That is like saying every first person shooter since the beginning of video games is exactly the same with the argument being "Carry a gun and run around".  Who cares if Windows 15 still has a task bar, start menu, and the same STYLE of applications?

 

IT WORKS.  I seriously doubt modern apps would be beneficial for high quality content creation software.  There are too many tools to fit in a modern style app.

Actually, no it doesn't.

 

How does Apple make money?

 

Apple makes money two ways - services (the App Stores and iTunes) and by being the SOLE SOURCE for legal OS X hardware (since they don't charge for the OS itself).

 

Apple actually makes more money from devices than Macs (and that is despite the massive markup on Macs).

 

And they make money on devices with an even greater markup on them than they do on Macs.  (Take a gander at TechSpot's articles on the various Apple devices - Neowin has itself carried several of them.)

 

You may be comfortable with a skewed version of the world - even the IT world; I am not, and cannot afford to be.

 

The folks I support are from all over the map - they are Windows users, Mac users (I also support OS X - from Yosemite back to Leopard, which means I also support PPC-based Macs), and have added supporting Android devices.

 

I actually admit to being an outlier - one thing I make heavy use of is virtualization.  However, to most of the folks I support, virtualization means diddly.  They know it - and, most importantly, I know it.

 

I don't let what I want define what they want - if I did, that would make me a dictator.

 

That is also the difference between Apple and Microsoft.

 

Apple is comfortable in their small (in terms of user-base) OS X niche.  However, look at the population OF that niche - in terms of both users, and even in terms of developers - how many of even the developers write JUST OS X software?  (Xamarin no longer does, for example - they have added Visual Studio (13 and later) to the developer tools supported by Xamarin Studio.  Even iOS game-developer Plarium has taken their iOS-only games to - get this - Android.)

 

You may be comfortable in that niche for now - the question is, as your niche shrinks, will you stay there?

 

I'm an outlier - that I freely admit.  However, even I have a use for mainstream/average-user software at times - I don't let myself get trapped in that outlier niche.

 

That is also why, if anything, Microsoft has not broken desktop software support in Windows.  In fact, if anything, desktop software support has gotten better since 7 - not worse.

 

In fact, I can tell you exactly how many non-game desktop applications have broken in the Windows 10 Technical Previews (all builds - including leaked builds - to date) - none.

 

As in zero.  Not so much as ONE desktop application I use on a daily basis has broken.

 

Number of previous beta or preview versions of Windows to rack up a similar score - three.  Oddly enough, all were of Windows 8.

 

That is better than 7, OR Vista, OR XP, during their respective beta programs - and I was, in fact, in them all.

 

Explain that, sir - if you can.

Edited January 30, 2015 by PGHammer

[timbo_sf2]

They are going to have to.  This One OS to rule them all will not make everyone happy.  Now the tablet folks are getting angry because they are taking the desktop away from small tablets.  8.1 is fine for tablets.  Leave 10 for desktops.  Why does an OS have to fit every single piece of technology?

 

This is why Apple systems are better.  The ONLY reason I use Windows now is for Visual Studio (still the best in development) and gaming.  I prefer OS X for everything else.  I even like OS X for web development (Coda).

For long-term investment I think. Fixing security hole for all device. Pushing update for all device. Saves time and efforts.

[xWhiplash]

Actually, no it doesn't.

 

How does Apple make money?

 

Apple makes money two ways - services (the App Stores and iTunes) and by being the SOLE SOURCE for legal OS X hardware (since they don't charge for the OS itself).

 

Apple actually makes more money from devices than Macs (and that is despite the massive markup on Macs).

 

And they make money on devices with an even greater markup on them than they do on Macs.  (Take a gander at TechSpot's articles on the various Apple devices - Neowin has itself carried several of them.)

 

You may be comfortable with a skewed version of the world - even the IT world; I am not, and cannot afford to be.

 

The folks I support are from all over the map - they are Windows users, Mac users (I also support OS X - from Yosemite back to Leopard, which means I also support PPC-based Macs), and have added supporting Android devices.

 

I actually admit to being an outlier - one thing I make heavy use of is virtualization.  However, to most of the folks I support, virtualization means diddly.  They know it - and, most importantly, I know it.

 

I don't let what I want define what they want - if I did, that would make me a dictator.

 

That is also the difference between Apple and Microsoft.

 

Apple is comfortable in their small (in terms of user-base) OS X niche.  However, look at the population OF that niche - in terms of both users, and even in terms of developers - how many of even the developers write JUST OS X software?  (Xamarin no longer does, for example - they have added Visual Studio (13 and later) to the developer tools supported by Xamarin Studio.  Even iOS game-developer Plarium has taken their iOS-only games to - get this - Android.)

 

You may be comfortable in that niche for now - the question is, as your niche shrinks, will you stay there?

 

I'm an outlier - that I freely admit.  However, even I have a use for mainstream/average-user software at times - I don't let myself get trapped in that outlier niche.

 

That is also why, if anything, Microsoft has not broken desktop software support in Windows.  In fact, if anything, desktop software support has gotten better since 7 - not worse.

 

In fact, I can tell you exactly how many non-game desktop applications have broken in the Windows 10 Technical Previews (all builds - including leaked builds - to date) - none.

 

As in zero.  Not so much as ONE desktop application I use on a daily basis has broken.

 

Number of previous beta or preview versions of Windows to rack up a similar score - three.  Oddly enough, all were of Windows 8.

 

That is better than 7, OR Vista, OR XP, during their respective beta programs - and I was, in fact, in them all.

 

Explain that, sir - if you can.

 

What are you talking about?  I am not talking about marketshare or how company X makes money.  OS X and Windows desktop are the same in terms of what kind of applications are available.  

 

Do you seriously think we will ever see tablets that can be used for major rendering farms?  Will we ever have modern apps for 3DS Max or Adobe After Effects with plug-in support and use 32GB of RAM?  There are WAY to many features and commands in these applications to make them tablet friendly.  We might get tablet versions of these apps, but they will not perform the exact same commands as the desktop ones do.  

 

So please, explain to me how the desktop is dying?  Where is Visual Studio for tablets?  After Effects tablet edition?  3DS Max or Blender?

 

Who cares if these programs are using mature technology that has existed since Windows 95.  They still get better, they get more features.  If it is the "same old same old" as you keep putting it, why would we ever use Photoshop CC instead of Photoshop 1.0?  Why use Visual Studio 2013 if it is the "same old same old"?

 

How am I in a niche?  How can I POSSIBLY use Visual Studio, Blender, After Effects on something OTHER than a desktop?  I can't......so how is that a niche?  How do I have a skewed vision of the world?  Are there any SERIOUS development modern apps?  What about SERIOUS video production modern apps?  No.  All we get are Angry Birds, Facebook, iMovie-like software (very very very light video editing, not like Premiere or After Effects).

 

So that was my point.  My point was, the desktop is not dying.  That is where you go when you want to use Visual Studio.  Or the Adobe suite.  Or 3D modeling software.  Or games that require the GTX 9xx series and quad cores.  The next several releases of 3DS Max will not be tablet versions.  If they do make one, it will not have 100% of the functionality as the desktop ones do.

[Ian W]

In fact, look at OS X (and Yosemite in particular).  What is the userbase of Yosemite?

 

While you may admire it for being a strictly-desktop OS, it also has less than TEN PERCENT of the Windows userbase - and that is if you include every user of every version of OS X.

 

If you count just Yosemite users, it hasn't even caught the number of Windows 8+ users.

 

Unlike you, I don't want to see Windows become OS X (or Microsoft become Apple).

So was Microsoft like Apple before it released Windows 8, seeing as its operating system was, by and large, a desktop-based OS?

[PGHammer]

So was Microsoft like Apple before it released Windows 8, seeing as its operating system was, by and large, a desktop-based OS?

Basically, yes.  And it was already starting to decline, like it or not.

 

Look at the sales of PCs between the period immediately AFTER 7's RTM (and after enterprises made those long-overdue hardware upgrades created by the stall over Vista) and before 8's RTM.  Remember, 8 wasn't out there on new hardware - 7 was.  So how could 8 (which wasn't shipping) be to blame for the dropoff in PC shipments?  Even more telling, the hardware requirements didn't move between 7 and 8 - in fact, they haven't moved YET;  the hardware requirements are absolutely identical.

 

Either the need for new hardware didn't exist (which is my own hypothesis - remember, the hardware requirements stayed flat) or - in addition to the rotten economy, the PC userbase is incredibly shallow-minded (which is what you are basically insinuating).

 

I doubt VERY seriously that the PC userbase is as shallow as you are making them out to be - they aren't THAT dense.  If anything, I think it was the stalled hardware requirements and the poor economy.  Worse (for Microsoft) they did NOT have all those devices to backstop sales of a tough-to-pitch OS (in any economy, let alone a poor one).  During a bad economy - and especially when their current hardware works fine, deciding to NOT spend money - or to spend far less - is incredibly EASY to justify.  (Note that is also when the pickup in tablets, smartphones, etc., took place; iOS and Android - which was the overwhelming majority of what was out there - benefitted right away.  All of that cost less - far less - than any sort of PC - even a portable PC.)  During that same period, even Mac sales took it in the shorts; the Mac shortfalls was counterbalanced by mostly iPad sales - iPhone sales suffered their only decline during that same period.  (The dropoff in Mac sales - which could not in ANY way be influenced by anything Microsoft did - leaves only the economy - and the rotten state thereof - as being the why for an overall dropoff; especially given the decline in iPhone sales.)

 

My hypothesis has more data backing it up, in addition - the current recovery, including that of PC sales.  Yes - PC sales are on the upswing.  Note that it isn't 7 on those PCs - instead, it's that new-paradigm OS, Windows 8.1.  And it's all SORTS of PCs - including traditional desktops and notebooks (sans touch) and AIOs, and various sorts of touch-screen PCs (not JUST tablets and slates, but AIOs, 2-in-1 PCs, etc.).  Sales of the iPhone and iPad went up as well.  Instead, the losing "horse" is Android - buyers moved upmarket as the economy got better.  However, even Windows Phone managed some gains as well.

 

Now look at the overall market today.  Android is being squeezed - between iOS and (of all things) Windows tablets running 8.1.  Unless you have a particular need for an Android tablet (for game or app reasons), a Windows tablet now makes better PRICE sense.  The same applies to iOS - in spades.  (Remember, the iPad is priced above Android tablets - only the app gap has any chance of saving iOS against Windows of any sort - and that gap doesn't apply to either 8.1 (on those low-end tablets now) or to 10 (the upgrade from 8.1).  While 10 won't have a "desktop" on devices with sub-eight-inch displays, do you really need one to run the sort of software common to tablets?  Office (either 365, 2013, or 2016) along with a browser could well be enough.  (Yes - 2013 or 2016 on a tablet.  Remember, these tablets will be running BayTrailT - which is absolutely x86/x64 cross-compatible.  Quad-core BayTrailT is, in fact, shipping today on those same tablets.)  In other words, after disposing of Android - which could become laughably easy if the recovery has ANY staying power - iOS could find itself up against Windows 10, replete with desktop-software compatibility - which it won't lose, despite lacking a desktop.  Who would YOU bet on in such a faceoff - which is looking more and more likely?)

[PGHammer]

What are you talking about?  I am not talking about marketshare or how company X makes money.  OS X and Windows desktop are the same in terms of what kind of applications are available.  

 

Do you seriously think we will ever see tablets that can be used for major rendering farms?  Will we ever have modern apps for 3DS Max or Adobe After Effects with plug-in support and use 32GB of RAM?  There are WAY to many features and commands in these applications to make them tablet friendly.  We might get tablet versions of these apps, but they will not perform the exact same commands as the desktop ones do.  

 

So please, explain to me how the desktop is dying?  Where is Visual Studio for tablets?  After Effects tablet edition?  3DS Max or Blender?

 

Who cares if these programs are using mature technology that has existed since Windows 95.  They still get better, they get more features.  If it is the "same old same old" as you keep putting it, why would we ever use Photoshop CC instead of Photoshop 1.0?  Why use Visual Studio 2013 if it is the "same old same old"?

 

How am I in a niche?  How can I POSSIBLY use Visual Studio, Blender, After Effects on something OTHER than a desktop?  I can't......so how is that a niche?  How do I have a skewed vision of the world?  Are there any SERIOUS development modern apps?  What about SERIOUS video production modern apps?  No.  All we get are Angry Birds, Facebook, iMovie-like software (very very very light video editing, not like Premiere or After Effects).

 

So that was my point.  My point was, the desktop is not dying.  That is where you go when you want to use Visual Studio.  Or the Adobe suite.  Or 3D modeling software.  Or games that require the GTX 9xx series and quad cores.  The next several releases of 3DS Max will not be tablet versions.  If they do make one, it will not have 100% of the functionality as the desktop ones do.

In fact, you could run Visual Studio on a BayTrailT tablet - today. VS 2013 Professional requires a dual-core Intel or AMD-equivalent CPU of 1.6 GHz or faster; the requirements didn't move any with VS 2013 Community or even VS 2015 Professional (the planned successor to VS 2013 Professional); however, I see VS 2015 Community (upgrade from today's VS 2013 Community) filling that role - and especially since it costs exactly zip.  For "garage developers", that could easily be enough - same for students (K-12 or even the first two years of college or technical school).  True - as your projects get bigger, your CPU needs get larger - that is, in fact, the nature of development.  However, even THAT can be worked around - Azure plugs into VS 2013 - including Community - and that is today.  In other words, why reinvent the wheel?  That is, in fact, the entire PURPOSE of VS 2013 Community - it is nothing less than VS 2013 Professional-scale development tools for the planet entire.  Need more power?  Upgrade your hardware; however, that won't require changing-out your development tools.  It's the same theory as BYOPC - change out only what's necessary.  That is the difference between scalability in terms of tools and niche tools (such as Photoshop and 3DS MAX, and - until recently - even SQL Server fell into that category).  Using any of those for "garage" work would be the equivalent of nuking a fly - from orbit.  However, Microsoft has been busy - including making their entire suite of development tools eminently scalable - in both directions.  The trend started in fact over a decade ago - with SQL Server 2003.  It continued with the Express versions of Microsoft's development tools, and went further with VS Community - which replaces the Express development-tools - and is available today - for zilch.

 

And even I never said that the desktop was necessarily DYING - however, I DO see it in danger of becoming a hyperniche environment, due entirely to all too many desktop applications aiming so high that average folks couldn't use most desktop applications.  Who right now - other than Microsoft - is doing ANYTHING about it?  That is, in fact, why I'm upset with the flat pace of development of NEW desktop applications; there is lots of choice out there - for experts.  But what about average folks?  Adobe used to have an entry-level product called Photoshop Elements for average folks - said product is now dead.  The same applies to the video-editing product below Adobe Premiere: that is ALSO quite dead.  The flight of entry-level products for ordinary folks is why I am warning that the desktop is in trouble - I don't want the desktop to become a niche any more than you do!

 However, right now, only Microsoft is actually BUCKING that trend of leaving the average user out to dry - and not just with Windows, either.  The average-user trend is not JUST about the pointing device - it's also about the rest of the software - and desktop application software in particular - that is opened BY that pointing device.

 

In other words, there is FAR more to the Windows desktop environment than the mouse.  (Forest vs. trees.)

[timbo_sf2]

[+Zagadka Subscriber²]

The statistics on market share and such these days aren't fully accurate if they conflate mobile and desktop/laptop figures. Safari has a huge share IF you count iPhones and iPads, for instance. Counting units of mobiles versus desktops does not lead to accurate comparisons. You might as well also count Linux servers and Java-based ticket consoles.

[+Fahim S. MVC]

Honestly, No matter how good the trackpad support is, even the supposed holy grail of the apple pad(that apple users think is so good it's better than any other control method for anything), a trackpad will never be anything but a emergency input when I can't use a mouse. even the best of trackpads aren't half as good as a bad mouse. 

 

At the risk of sounding like 'that guy', I recently became an owner of a Mac, and the touchpad is an absolute revelation - I didn't understand the hype until I spent time with it myself.  I may well be wrong, but I suspect you haven't spent any real time with one.  I wouldn't say that it is better but certainly as good as than even the best mouse I have used.  I suspect my love for it is not because of the accuracy of pointer movement (lots of touch-pads do that well), but the gestures and how well they work (more because of the OS than the hardware).

 

I don't know how Windows 10 is with precision multi-touch touch-pads as I have not been able to try it on a machine that has one, but Windows 8.1 is a very poor experience - poor enough to be the sole reason I dislike Windows laptops (and I genuinely spend a lot of time working on my lap when the use of a mouse is untenable), despite, at least so far, preferring Windows as my OS (over OS X, Chrome OS, and various desktop managers in Linux) - from a touch pad experience point of view, it goes OS X, Chrome OS and then Windows and Linux (about even).

 

They need to get this right in Windows 10, and baked deep into the OS as opposed to a OEM supplied bolt-on.  That and a couple of other things, because I can now say that Windows laptops do suck, I have never had a truly good experience with one.

[ParadiseLost]

You run Photoshop on 2gb RAM tablet? 

 

 

If they sell the tablets with 8gb ram (or more), then you would be able to run Photoshop or AutoCAD on it.

 

Excuse me but you should read the whole thing before replying. I bet you've been wanting to use that GIF for months.

[onewarmslime]

QuoteQuoteQuoteEither the need for new hardware didn't exist (which is my own hypothesis - remember, the hardware requirements stayed flat) or - in addition to the rotten economy, the PC userbase is incredibly shallow-minded (which is what you are basically insinuating).

 

This is probably exactly what happened. I only upgraded from XP last autumn because I saw no reason to do it earlier, even though the machines I was using were 9 and 10 years old.

 

QuoteQuoteQuote

 

This is a pretty meaningless graph cause it implies people threw away their PCs and started using androids instead. not the case. you can't compare cell phones to computers, might as well start counting linux powered routers...

[+Zagadka Subscriber²]

I was considering making this a thread, since it includes feedback a bit different, but meh

 

I want to defend the Start Menu a little. It is like a bush; it can look and work great, but if you don't maintain it, it just goes wild and sprawls. 95% of the time I fix someone's computer, at work or outside, their start menu is a hideous list of every application having its own cascading menu with stupid shortcuts like "manual" and "uninstall" or "visit our website lulz"... and all of that is justifiably horrible and completely unworkable.

 

HOWEVER, if you do maintain it, it works. In a way, this mirrors the library (Documents etc) concept. In theory, it works, but every program handles it differently, so you end up with 5 subfolders in Documents for game settings. I keep my start menu clean, move every program into its group (Office, Coding, Games, Hardware, etc) and delete the junk links, and it quickly becomes a fast and compact way to access any application. The problem is that this uptake is significant. That said, given that you can quickly pull up an Uninstall list, I don't know why you can't similarly quickly access a list of installed programs, grouped. Many Linux interface designs utilize this concept much better than the Start Menu.

 

At its root, the same problem occurs with the Start Screen; junk links and maintenance to keep things ordered. It just feels like Windows lacks a way to accurately list installed applications.

[patseguin Global Moderator]

I could never use a tablet at work for my order entry system or embroidery digitizing software. However, at home, virtually anything I do on the PC i can do on my tablet. Still though, there are things that I undeniably need a desktop for. Using Lightroom, Photoshop, Logic Pro, iTunes, and so on. I don't see any tablets coming close to that kind of productivity in the near future. However, for common use at home like email, web surfing, you tubing, gaming, etc. the tablet is more than sufficient.

[Jarrichvdv]

And WinFS, seriously? WinFS was nothing more than a custom db running on top of ntfs, probably built on SQL. You don't need that, you can already index and search the filesystem just fine. 

Lol. Nope. WinFS showed spectacular potential at the time, and to be honest it still does. Saying it's "not necessary" isn't doing it any justice.

[timbo_sf2]

Lol. Nope. WinFS showed spectacular potential at the time, and to be honest it still does. Saying it's "not necessary" isn't doing it any justice.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/why-do-you-want-winfs/

 

Edit: Mary Jo Foley said that Bill Gates was referencing to WinFS when he was asked "product that was never fully developed or released do you wish had made it to market"

[PGHammer]

timbo_sf2 - Windows 10 actually has gotten trackpads right - which is, in fact, partly why I'm horked off.  Considering how long trackpads have been around, why has it taken so long?  Apple HAD to get them right - MacBooks have their logo on them; if MacBooks got them wrong, it was one hundred percent on Apple - and they were in no position to take a big hit in the reputation.

patseguin - it is home users and average users - the folks that are the majority of the Windows userbase - that are becoming woefully underserved by the lack of desktop applications.

There is plenty of desktop-application choice - for professionals and experts; where are the options for the average folks?  (Not everyone started off there; including most of the experts.  How do we create more experts?)

That was the issue in the software-development community - and a long-standing one; now, with software like VS 2013 Community, that has been addressed.  My issue is the lack of similar efforts elsewhere in desktop software - including photo-editing, video editing, audio-editing, etc.  The high end is fine; remember, desktop applications in even Windows 10 are fine.  The bigger issue is the decline in the desktop-application base - and especially for the average folks.

It is average users that are the VAST majority of the desktop-application userbase - and especially in terms of Windows users.  Why throw that userbase away?  However, the high-end won't necessarily care about average users - even if they used to be there.  They are so caught up in their own concerns that thy could care less about software for average folks.  (Yes; I am perfectly willing to admit that it sounds so..."political".  However, looked at realistically, what is the difference between high-end users and top-tier professionals and politicians?)  We're not eating our "seed corn" - we're starving it.  If we want a new generation of photo-editors, video editors, audio editors, etc., using desktop applications, they need lower-end versions of those applications to use.  And if we want the desktop to be appreciated, then that is where those same applications need to be.  Right now, they aren't there.  (They are either dying, already dead, or have moved down to non-desktop form-factors.)

[Jarrichvdv]

http://www.zdnet.com/article/why-do-you-want-winfs/

Fair enough. Seems I was a little off here with my perception of WinFS.

[PGHammer]

And that is why we have a dual-environment Windows - the average-folks applications that used to be in the desktop space are now in the tablet space, and mostly because developers moved them there during the stall.  (Unlike Apple, Microsoft is not willing to throw average users under the niche-OS bus - the same everyday-user applications are leaving OS X - for iOS.  OS X is becoming an even more "niche" OS than it had been - and is THAT ever a hot debate topic in the Apple subReddits!)

[xWhiplash]

And that is why we have a dual-environment Windows - the average-folks applications that used to be in the desktop space are now in the tablet space, and mostly because developers moved them there during the stall.  (Unlike Apple, Microsoft is not willing to throw average users under the niche-OS bus - the same everyday-user applications are leaving OS X - for iOS.  OS X is becoming an even more "niche" OS than it had been - and is THAT ever a hot debate topic in the Apple subReddits!)

 

What are these killer apps that everybody keeps mentioning?  What are these MUST HAVES that do NOT exist in the desktop environment?  I am pretty sure I can use Facebook without needing a Facebook app.  I can use Netflix with a browser.  

 

Again, what is this stall you are referring to?  Even comparing Photoshop CS2 to CC has a huge change in features.  What modern app exists that does NOT exist on the desktop that is OMG SO AMAZING?  Even Angry Birds is on Steam.  Some of the most popular mobile apps are on Steam.  Better games are on Steam and the PC platform.  So how are things "stalled"?  

[PGHammer]

I am referring to software for average people that is not really there on the desktop.  Also, how much IS CS2?  How easy is CS2 for average folks to use?  There IS less average-folks software for the desktop these days - and it's not even Windows desktops alone feeling the lack; it's also on the Apple side of things as well.  That is the bigger problem.