6 ms·

HP brings Windows 7 back 'due to popular demand' as buyers shun Windows 8

59 points by chakalakasp 13y ago

TrainedMonkey 13y ago
I really do not understand why we must have one size fits all operating system in the first place. Some things work better for mobile (metro, ios, android), and some work better for desktop/laptop Windows, OS X, Linux. Why must we try to make them the same? I would argue a set of well defined junction points like Apple did with airplay in order to share content between mobile and desktop segments is a way more elegant solution.
- Innercode 13y ago
  They could have a one sized fits all operating system, however they need to tailor the interface to each type of device. Using a mouse on a "touch" interface is a terrible experience, same as using touch in a mouse environment. I have not tried Windows 8 update, however first impressions have done the damage to Windows 8 already.
  - theg2 13y ago
    I use Win8 daily and have no issue using a mouse or my fingers, actually the mouse is far more accurate and faster so I fail to understand your statement.
    - BlackDeath3 13y ago
      You know what would really help with accuracy? If every tile was screen-sized. How could you possibly miss? Also, the several seconds I've spent trying to open stupid like charms menus and things meant to be swiped with a thumb were not an enjoyable several seconds.
    - WiseWeasel 13y ago
      Swipe gestures are a pain with a mouse, because you need to move the mouse to the right spot, click, drag in the opposite direction and then release, requiring a non-trivial amount of effort; and it just feels wrong when you're expected to do so regularly because you know there has to be a better way (like the way it used to work). Decades of desktop UI design focused on "discoverability" also mean that an unindicated need for a swipe gesture in order to access core functionality is frustratingly non-obvious to people experienced with classic desktop interfaces, and these will tend to be people whose advice is requested in purchasing decisions. Swiping is awesomely natural on a touchscreen, but obviously sub-optimal otherwise. Reliance on a swipe gesture should be avoided in UI design for a mouse/touchpad and keyboard environment, in favor of buttons and menus, and mouse wheel/two-fingered scroll support.
      - deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
      - Amezarak 13y ago
        If swipe gestures even work with the mouse in Windows 8, I didn't know it and it never occurred to me to even try, though now I'm curious to see what happens when I get back on my laptop. I never even considered trying. You don't do swipes if you have a keyboard and mouse in Windows 8, you use your buttons, menus, clicks, and mouse-wheel just as you suggest. Where did you get the idea that the Win8 interface required gestures?
        WiseWeasel 13y ago
        Opening the Charms bar.
        Amezarak 13y ago
        You don't need to swipe, you just move the mouse to the corner of the screen (or use the keyboard shortcut.)
        WiseWeasel 13y ago
        So you can! Well that's embarrassing. Guess I could try using the thing before I stick my foot in my mouth.
  - girvo 13y ago
    8.1 really makes it shine, and is amazingly useful in touch or M/K modes. I find the reactions to Windows 8 fascinating; my girlfriend and grandfather both love it (it was awesome to see the gf use windows side by side for once, rather than just maximise and alt-tab, and she worked out the snap mode on her own -- yes I know it's in Windows 7, but she loves the auto width changes with the slider) and they're not particularly tech savvy. My mother on the other hand is quite adept, and dislikes it. Well, she did, until 8.1, and I configured it to use the desktop as the main interface, and she got used to it. Now she likes it too. Personally, I haven't used Windows in half a decade, so it's interesting to watch the reactions too it. I think they are moving in the right direction, but need to adjust the desktop story a little.
    - michaelwww 13y ago
      Your post sounds like marketing copy to my ears. You have an extraordinarily adept family that Microsoft would probably appreciate hearing about.
      - girvo 13y ago
        *shrugs That's my personal experience. If you want to call me a shill, then say it, rather than insinuate it. Edit: Apologies, that was antagonistic. I was a professional salesperson for 7 years - I sometimes lapse into sales talk when discussing any product. Usually it's things other than Microsoft, and I'm not joking when I say that the last version I used was Vista, but I honestly think 8 is interesting, if unpolished. My family isn't adept other than my mother (she's 41).
        michaelwww 13y ago
        I wasn't necessarily saying it was a bad thing. We're all grownups here on HN for the most part. I was just observing that it sounded like that to me. I don't knock salespeople. My old boss used to say that last two groups let go when a company is in trouble are those who make it (engineers like me) and those who sell it. As a long time user of Windows, I'm frustrated, but maybe they're going after new people and they don't have the same expectations as me.
- noveltyaccount 13y ago
  I have an 8" Windows 8.1 device running an Intel Atom CPU. I love it, it's probably my favourite PC to date. I can be at the office editing a document on my keyboard/mouse laptop, save it to skydrive, and it's already there on my 8" for review later. Quick edits on the go are a breeze, since I have the identical MS Office software running in both machines. I can review documentation in a git repository by actually installing git for Windows and cloning the repository. Now I'm not saying I'm going to actually code on an 8" Atom device, far from it. But the fact that I can participate, using the exact same tooling in the exact same manner, as is fitting for the device, is brilliant. The only difference is I use 90% Metro Apps on the 8", and 90% desktop apps on the laptop. It's the plumbing that's one size fits all, and once in a while you cross the boundaries of the UI and it works well enough. You're not giving anything up. You have it all. One size fits all is great, I'm a fan.
anotherbadlogin 13y ago
Because the Windows 8 UI is so bad that even consumers won't accept it. Hidden UI = no UI at all. This peek-a-boo shit has to stop. And "converging" mobile and desktop OSes is exactly backward. What the ascendancy of tablets has shown us is that many people don't need computers. So when someone DOES take the trouble to fire up a computer, it stands to reason that he needs A COMPUTER. That means a real OS, file system, pointing device, and other affordances that provide the precision and power needed for computer-based tasks.
adamors 13y ago
Windows 8 is noticeably faster, has nice improvements all around and it's probably the first Windows that looks aesthetic. People are afraid of change, simple as that.
- robertfw 13y ago
  Windows 8 is the most unusable collection of software I have ever had the misfortune of fighting. It is the worst experience I have ever had with an operating system, coming from experience with dos, windows 3.1-95-xp-vista-7, ubuntu, and arch. The built in apps feel like MVPs. The interactions are unintuitive, and many things that should "just work" smack you in the face time and time again. the whole thing feels like it's been slapped together without any thought for actual usability, and with zero polish. edit: i should note that I have not yet tried the 8.1 update
  - dubfan 13y ago
    I've been using Windows 8 on my desktop PC for some time now (primarily used for gaming and entertainment, not development) and for my purposes it's a clear upgrade over 7. Yes, the Metro apps are terrible but you don't ever need to use them. I spend almost all of my time in the desktop, and the few times I need to use the new Start interface, the workflow is exactly the same as Win7 (press Windows key, start typing program name, hit Enter).
    - BlackDeath3 13y ago
      This sounds like the same, unconvincing argument I always hear about Windows 8. "It's a bit faster, there are some other minor obscure improvements, and if you just ignore all of the crappy new stuff it's not a big deal!" If boot times are a big issue for you, then I get it. For me, they aren't, so I'm inclined to pass on the update. Perhaps it would work great with a Windows Phone or Surface (I'm tempted to try those at some point, so if anybody would like to share their experiences with theirs...), but it doesn't seem like it was designed for a desktop. So why should I put it on my desktop?
kvb 13y ago
Counterpoint: "HP Bringing Back Windows 7 PCs? Not so fast..."[1]. TL;DR: this is a marketing tactic, and HP is actually offering fewer systems with Windows 7 than it was last year. [1] http://www.zdnet.com/hp-bringing-back-windows-7-pcs-not-so-fast-7000025351/ http://www.zdnet.com/hp-bringing-back-windows-7-pcs-not-so-f...
- Maakuth 13y ago
  Isn't it only natural that they sold a lot of Windows 7 PCs last year, as Windows 8 was only recently released?
  - kvb 13y ago
    Sure. The point is, "bringing back" implies that there was a period of time where Windows 7 PCs weren't being offered by HP, which appears not to be the case.
    - bdcravens 13y ago
      I think the idea is that Windows 7 is done, new computers moving forward will have 8. In the same sense that I can't go to a Honda dealership and buy a brand new 2011 Honda Civic. (I could if they have one still in inventory, but they're not getting any new ones)
- AnimalMuppet 13y ago
  But in Microsoft's vision of 2014, the number of systems being offered with Windows 7 should be zero.
  - girvo 13y ago
    What makes you say that? You have always been able to purchase previous versions for a few years after the release of the latest...
    - AnimalMuppet 13y ago
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
kogir 13y ago
Can't "Back by popular demand" refer to the $150 discount on old systems instead of Windows 7 itself? I'm leaning that direction since I associate snowmen with December holidays. Look at the ad itself: http://www.hp.com/country/us/en/hho/welcome.html http://www.hp.com/country/us/en/hho/welcome.html
- TrainedMonkey 13y ago
  That is really standard HP discount. I do not remember ever going to HP website and not receiving $100-$450 discount for something.
- psbp 13y ago
  What? "Customize a NEW HP PC with Windows 7 and save up to $150 instantly"
smegel 13y ago
Who would have thought that shimming a tablet UI onto a non touch PC would be a bad idea...
briholt 13y ago
This article greatly exaggerates. A quick search shows HP offers only 2 Windows-7 laptops, but offers 35 Windows-8x laptops. Similar numbers go for desktops as well. http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/home-office/-/products/Laptops/Laptops http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/home-office/-/products/Lapt...
contactmatts 13y ago
I've been using Windows 8 on my laptop for well over a year, and I quite enjoy it. Especially with Windows 8.1, I just don't see how you can love Windows 7, and at the same time show an extreme displeasure for Windows 8. Have these people even used Windows 8? IMO, the resistance has more to do with bad Microsoft PR and the anti-MS bandwagon, than flaws in the OS.
ChikkaChiChi 13y ago
the cognitive disarray caused by the metro menu is the worst UI innovation since mystery meat navigation. that being said, disabling it in favor of a classic start menu makes Windows 8 on par with 7. This sort of workaround does not make things OK for the average person.
dangrossman 13y ago
The changes between Windows 7 and 8 always seemed terribly minor to me -- a few control panels and settings shifted around as they do every OS update, the start menu became larger and looks a bit different but functions essentially the same (right down to preserving your Program Files hierarchy from Win95 if you scroll down from the tiles screen), but nothing major in the big scheme of things. If Microsoft hadn't made these changes, and in the next few years became completely foreign and irrelevant to the current young generation of consumers who grew up on touch devices that work more like Win8 than Win7, would we be panning them for sticking with "what works" while their consumer base switches to Android/iOS?
- Woben 13y ago
  No - The problem lies in the fact they tried to create a "One size fits all" solution and failed at creating a usable desktop OS. Windows 8 is fine on a phone, it's the desktop that's the problem. (before anyone jumps down my throat, yes you can mod Windows 8 so it's more usable in a desktop environment but that's not the point)
  - gooble_flop 13y ago
    I use Windows 8.1 on a desktop and it's fine even without mods. I can see how Windows 8 might have been a problem for some people, but for the most part 8.1 is 7 with a fullscreen start menu.
    - free652 13y ago
      >for the most part 8.1 is 7 with a fullscreen start menu. And missing the non-full screen start menu. I hate going back to metro interface to launch an app, now I have to create shortcuts on the desktop. I used to simply type an app name in windows 7's launcher.
      - dangrossman 13y ago
        > I used to simply type an app name in windows 7's launcher Why don't you still do that? That global search has only gotten smarter, it's definitely not been removed. You press the windows key, type 3 letters, hit enter and your app is running before your eyes even register the start screen having briefly appeared and gone. I couldn't imagine going back to desktop shortcuts -- I haven't had to move my hands off the keyboard to launch a program in 7 years.
computerslol 13y ago
I've been using windows 8, and now 8.1, since public release. For me, windows 8 answers a few questions. 1): What do we do when users want to use their fingers instead of a mouse to click buttons made for the (superior) accuracy of a mouse pointer? 2): What do we do when monitor manufacturers sell 4k+ displays and windows applications aren't written to scale up that way? 3): How do we sell users and developers on using desktop applications again (instead of web apps)? I think all three questions are answered well, and users will be less hostile to the changes once enough applications move to Metro, and consumers are buying 4k tablets. At the moment, what I am hearing most is "Why change something that worked so well? Why do I have to learn something new?". The next generation PC hardware will answer that question. I spend all of my time in windows, and I wouldn't want go back to 7. I like the new start screen; I find my applications a lot quicker when all I need to do is hit the windows key and type the name of the app, or file, or whatever I'm looking for. Windows 8 really shines on the surface, where a high DPI screen and touch come together. I use desktop apps on the desktop and mostly ignore metro; but on the surface I prefer metro apps which are more finger friendly and easier to read. I like the new store architecture, and the limitations made on apps written for it. I will have to worry less installing an application from a publisher I don't recognize. I read a lot about the APIs, but I haven't written anything for it yet. I am waiting for metro to be available to enough users to make it cost effective to put effort into it. If I were working at Microsoft right now, I would be shouting at the top of my lungs "Let's put out commercials explaining why Windows 8 is better!". I don't feel Windows 8 is a technological or UI disaster; I feel it's a marketing disaster.
Encosia 13y ago
The Windows 8 (especially post-8.1) pushback baffles me. If you put any effort at all into learning how to use it effectively, the acclimation period is definitely shorter than Win95 or WinXP was. I use it on a desktop machine with two 30" displays and only mouse/keyboard inputs (i.e. no touch). You certainly couldn't pay me $150 to go back to Win7 at this point. I even find that I use Metro apps on my desktop fairly often. I have the live tiles for a few key apps like Mail, Calendar, Weather, Google Voice, and Twitter arranged as a dashboard of key notifications that I care about and flip over from the desktop more often than I thought I would. It's also nice how Metro apps can raise notification toast on the desktop now in 8.1 (and desktop apps like Outlook can also tie into that same system, similar to Growl but built-in). Since I'm on the desktop 95% of the time, that definitely helps bridge the gap between Metro and desktop. I can get a lightweight notification when I get an @mention on Twitter, for example, without leaving TweetDeck running all the time. On my laptop with touch and on my Surface, Win8.1 is far and away better than Win7 could have possibly been. The Metro side of things is great there - especially since both have HiDPI displays and Metro apps . Surprisingly, I still haven't installed Outlook on the laptop because the 8.1 update to the Metro Mail app makes it good enough for my relatively light email use while mobile. Since all of the settings sync across machines automatically, the Mail app was already configured with the six accounts I use regularly as soon as I logged into it, so it was a no-brainer compared to installing Outlook or opening six web apps all the time.
- gooble_flop 13y ago
  From memory XP wasn't well received at first. It just hung around so long that people got really comfortable with it and didn't want to change.
  - ams6110 13y ago
    Because it didn't offer much that Windows 2000 didn't provide?
    - Encosia 13y ago
      I don't know this for a fact, but I think very few people were coming from Win2k to XP. Win2k was relatively niche, even in business, from what I can remember of my experience back then. It was essentially only the people who were running NT 4.0 Workstation before who used Win2k in the interim between that and XP.

59 points by chakalakasp 13y ago

I really do not understand why we must have one size fits all operating system in the first place. Some things work better for mobile (metro, ios, android), and some work better for desktop/laptop Windows, OS X, Linux. Why must we try to make them the same? I would argue a set of well defined junction points like Apple did with airplay in order to share content between mobile and desktop segments is a way more elegant solution.

Innercode 13y ago
They could have a one sized fits all operating system, however they need to tailor the interface to each type of device. Using a mouse on a "touch" interface is a terrible experience, same as using touch in a mouse environment. I have not tried Windows 8 update, however first impressions have done the damage to Windows 8 already.
- theg2 13y ago
  I use Win8 daily and have no issue using a mouse or my fingers, actually the mouse is far more accurate and faster so I fail to understand your statement.
  - BlackDeath3 13y ago
    You know what would really help with accuracy? If every tile was screen-sized. How could you possibly miss? Also, the several seconds I've spent trying to open stupid like charms menus and things meant to be swiped with a thumb were not an enjoyable several seconds.
  - WiseWeasel 13y ago
    Swipe gestures are a pain with a mouse, because you need to move the mouse to the right spot, click, drag in the opposite direction and then release, requiring a non-trivial amount of effort; and it just feels wrong when you're expected to do so regularly because you know there has to be a better way (like the way it used to work). Decades of desktop UI design focused on "discoverability" also mean that an unindicated need for a swipe gesture in order to access core functionality is frustratingly non-obvious to people experienced with classic desktop interfaces, and these will tend to be people whose advice is requested in purchasing decisions. Swiping is awesomely natural on a touchscreen, but obviously sub-optimal otherwise. Reliance on a swipe gesture should be avoided in UI design for a mouse/touchpad and keyboard environment, in favor of buttons and menus, and mouse wheel/two-fingered scroll support.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - Amezarak 13y ago
      If swipe gestures even work with the mouse in Windows 8, I didn't know it and it never occurred to me to even try, though now I'm curious to see what happens when I get back on my laptop. I never even considered trying. You don't do swipes if you have a keyboard and mouse in Windows 8, you use your buttons, menus, clicks, and mouse-wheel just as you suggest. Where did you get the idea that the Win8 interface required gestures?
      - WiseWeasel 13y ago
        Opening the Charms bar.
      - Amezarak 13y ago
        You don't need to swipe, you just move the mouse to the corner of the screen (or use the keyboard shortcut.)
        WiseWeasel 13y ago
        So you can! Well that's embarrassing. Guess I could try using the thing before I stick my foot in my mouth.
- girvo 13y ago
  8.1 really makes it shine, and is amazingly useful in touch or M/K modes. I find the reactions to Windows 8 fascinating; my girlfriend and grandfather both love it (it was awesome to see the gf use windows side by side for once, rather than just maximise and alt-tab, and she worked out the snap mode on her own -- yes I know it's in Windows 7, but she loves the auto width changes with the slider) and they're not particularly tech savvy. My mother on the other hand is quite adept, and dislikes it. Well, she did, until 8.1, and I configured it to use the desktop as the main interface, and she got used to it. Now she likes it too. Personally, I haven't used Windows in half a decade, so it's interesting to watch the reactions too it. I think they are moving in the right direction, but need to adjust the desktop story a little.
  - michaelwww 13y ago
    Your post sounds like marketing copy to my ears. You have an extraordinarily adept family that Microsoft would probably appreciate hearing about.
    - girvo 13y ago
      *shrugs That's my personal experience. If you want to call me a shill, then say it, rather than insinuate it. Edit: Apologies, that was antagonistic. I was a professional salesperson for 7 years - I sometimes lapse into sales talk when discussing any product. Usually it's things other than Microsoft, and I'm not joking when I say that the last version I used was Vista, but I honestly think 8 is interesting, if unpolished. My family isn't adept other than my mother (she's 41).
      - michaelwww 13y ago
        I wasn't necessarily saying it was a bad thing. We're all grownups here on HN for the most part. I was just observing that it sounded like that to me. I don't knock salespeople. My old boss used to say that last two groups let go when a company is in trouble are those who make it (engineers like me) and those who sell it. As a long time user of Windows, I'm frustrated, but maybe they're going after new people and they don't have the same expectations as me.
noveltyaccount 13y ago
I have an 8" Windows 8.1 device running an Intel Atom CPU. I love it, it's probably my favourite PC to date. I can be at the office editing a document on my keyboard/mouse laptop, save it to skydrive, and it's already there on my 8" for review later. Quick edits on the go are a breeze, since I have the identical MS Office software running in both machines. I can review documentation in a git repository by actually installing git for Windows and cloning the repository. Now I'm not saying I'm going to actually code on an 8" Atom device, far from it. But the fact that I can participate, using the exact same tooling in the exact same manner, as is fitting for the device, is brilliant. The only difference is I use 90% Metro Apps on the 8", and 90% desktop apps on the laptop. It's the plumbing that's one size fits all, and once in a while you cross the boundaries of the UI and it works well enough. You're not giving anything up. You have it all. One size fits all is great, I'm a fan.

anotherbadlogin 13y ago

Because the Windows 8 UI is so bad that even consumers won't accept it. Hidden UI = no UI at all. This peek-a-boo shit has to stop. And "converging" mobile and desktop OSes is exactly backward. What the ascendancy of tablets has shown us is that many people don't need computers. So when someone DOES take the trouble to fire up a computer, it stands to reason that he needs A COMPUTER. That means a real OS, file system, pointing device, and other affordances that provide the precision and power needed for computer-based tasks.

adamors 13y ago

Windows 8 is noticeably faster, has nice improvements all around and it's probably the first Windows that looks aesthetic. People are afraid of change, simple as that.

robertfw 13y ago
Windows 8 is the most unusable collection of software I have ever had the misfortune of fighting. It is the worst experience I have ever had with an operating system, coming from experience with dos, windows 3.1-95-xp-vista-7, ubuntu, and arch. The built in apps feel like MVPs. The interactions are unintuitive, and many things that should "just work" smack you in the face time and time again. the whole thing feels like it's been slapped together without any thought for actual usability, and with zero polish. edit: i should note that I have not yet tried the 8.1 update
- dubfan 13y ago
  I've been using Windows 8 on my desktop PC for some time now (primarily used for gaming and entertainment, not development) and for my purposes it's a clear upgrade over 7. Yes, the Metro apps are terrible but you don't ever need to use them. I spend almost all of my time in the desktop, and the few times I need to use the new Start interface, the workflow is exactly the same as Win7 (press Windows key, start typing program name, hit Enter).
  - BlackDeath3 13y ago
    This sounds like the same, unconvincing argument I always hear about Windows 8. "It's a bit faster, there are some other minor obscure improvements, and if you just ignore all of the crappy new stuff it's not a big deal!" If boot times are a big issue for you, then I get it. For me, they aren't, so I'm inclined to pass on the update. Perhaps it would work great with a Windows Phone or Surface (I'm tempted to try those at some point, so if anybody would like to share their experiences with theirs...), but it doesn't seem like it was designed for a desktop. So why should I put it on my desktop?

kvb 13y ago

Counterpoint: "HP Bringing Back Windows 7 PCs? Not so fast..."[1]. TL;DR: this is a marketing tactic, and HP is actually offering fewer systems with Windows 7 than it was last year. [1] http://www.zdnet.com/hp-bringing-back-windows-7-pcs-not-so-fast-7000025351/ http://www.zdnet.com/hp-bringing-back-windows-7-pcs-not-so-f...

Maakuth 13y ago
Isn't it only natural that they sold a lot of Windows 7 PCs last year, as Windows 8 was only recently released?
- kvb 13y ago
  Sure. The point is, "bringing back" implies that there was a period of time where Windows 7 PCs weren't being offered by HP, which appears not to be the case.
  - bdcravens 13y ago
    I think the idea is that Windows 7 is done, new computers moving forward will have 8. In the same sense that I can't go to a Honda dealership and buy a brand new 2011 Honda Civic. (I could if they have one still in inventory, but they're not getting any new ones)
AnimalMuppet 13y ago
But in Microsoft's vision of 2014, the number of systems being offered with Windows 7 should be zero.
- girvo 13y ago
  What makes you say that? You have always been able to purchase previous versions for a few years after the release of the latest...
  - AnimalMuppet 13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

kogir 13y ago

Can't "Back by popular demand" refer to the $150 discount on old systems instead of Windows 7 itself? I'm leaning that direction since I associate snowmen with December holidays. Look at the ad itself: http://www.hp.com/country/us/en/hho/welcome.html http://www.hp.com/country/us/en/hho/welcome.html

TrainedMonkey 13y ago
That is really standard HP discount. I do not remember ever going to HP website and not receiving $100-$450 discount for something.
psbp 13y ago
What? "Customize a NEW HP PC with Windows 7 and save up to $150 instantly"

smegel 13y ago

Who would have thought that shimming a tablet UI onto a non touch PC would be a bad idea...

briholt 13y ago

This article greatly exaggerates. A quick search shows HP offers only 2 Windows-7 laptops, but offers 35 Windows-8x laptops. Similar numbers go for desktops as well. http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/home-office/-/products/Laptops/Laptops http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/home-office/-/products/Lapt...

contactmatts 13y ago

I've been using Windows 8 on my laptop for well over a year, and I quite enjoy it. Especially with Windows 8.1, I just don't see how you can love Windows 7, and at the same time show an extreme displeasure for Windows 8. Have these people even used Windows 8? IMO, the resistance has more to do with bad Microsoft PR and the anti-MS bandwagon, than flaws in the OS.

ChikkaChiChi 13y ago

the cognitive disarray caused by the metro menu is the worst UI innovation since mystery meat navigation. that being said, disabling it in favor of a classic start menu makes Windows 8 on par with 7. This sort of workaround does not make things OK for the average person.

dangrossman 13y ago

The changes between Windows 7 and 8 always seemed terribly minor to me -- a few control panels and settings shifted around as they do every OS update, the start menu became larger and looks a bit different but functions essentially the same (right down to preserving your Program Files hierarchy from Win95 if you scroll down from the tiles screen), but nothing major in the big scheme of things. If Microsoft hadn't made these changes, and in the next few years became completely foreign and irrelevant to the current young generation of consumers who grew up on touch devices that work more like Win8 than Win7, would we be panning them for sticking with "what works" while their consumer base switches to Android/iOS?

Woben 13y ago
No - The problem lies in the fact they tried to create a "One size fits all" solution and failed at creating a usable desktop OS. Windows 8 is fine on a phone, it's the desktop that's the problem. (before anyone jumps down my throat, yes you can mod Windows 8 so it's more usable in a desktop environment but that's not the point)
- gooble_flop 13y ago
  I use Windows 8.1 on a desktop and it's fine even without mods. I can see how Windows 8 might have been a problem for some people, but for the most part 8.1 is 7 with a fullscreen start menu.
  - free652 13y ago
    >for the most part 8.1 is 7 with a fullscreen start menu. And missing the non-full screen start menu. I hate going back to metro interface to launch an app, now I have to create shortcuts on the desktop. I used to simply type an app name in windows 7's launcher.
    - dangrossman 13y ago
      > I used to simply type an app name in windows 7's launcher Why don't you still do that? That global search has only gotten smarter, it's definitely not been removed. You press the windows key, type 3 letters, hit enter and your app is running before your eyes even register the start screen having briefly appeared and gone. I couldn't imagine going back to desktop shortcuts -- I haven't had to move my hands off the keyboard to launch a program in 7 years.

computerslol 13y ago

I've been using windows 8, and now 8.1, since public release. For me, windows 8 answers a few questions. 1): What do we do when users want to use their fingers instead of a mouse to click buttons made for the (superior) accuracy of a mouse pointer? 2): What do we do when monitor manufacturers sell 4k+ displays and windows applications aren't written to scale up that way? 3): How do we sell users and developers on using desktop applications again (instead of web apps)? I think all three questions are answered well, and users will be less hostile to the changes once enough applications move to Metro, and consumers are buying 4k tablets. At the moment, what I am hearing most is "Why change something that worked so well? Why do I have to learn something new?". The next generation PC hardware will answer that question. I spend all of my time in windows, and I wouldn't want go back to 7. I like the new start screen; I find my applications a lot quicker when all I need to do is hit the windows key and type the name of the app, or file, or whatever I'm looking for. Windows 8 really shines on the surface, where a high DPI screen and touch come together. I use desktop apps on the desktop and mostly ignore metro; but on the surface I prefer metro apps which are more finger friendly and easier to read. I like the new store architecture, and the limitations made on apps written for it. I will have to worry less installing an application from a publisher I don't recognize. I read a lot about the APIs, but I haven't written anything for it yet. I am waiting for metro to be available to enough users to make it cost effective to put effort into it. If I were working at Microsoft right now, I would be shouting at the top of my lungs "Let's put out commercials explaining why Windows 8 is better!". I don't feel Windows 8 is a technological or UI disaster; I feel it's a marketing disaster.

Encosia 13y ago

The Windows 8 (especially post-8.1) pushback baffles me. If you put any effort at all into learning how to use it effectively, the acclimation period is definitely shorter than Win95 or WinXP was. I use it on a desktop machine with two 30" displays and only mouse/keyboard inputs (i.e. no touch). You certainly couldn't pay me $150 to go back to Win7 at this point. I even find that I use Metro apps on my desktop fairly often. I have the live tiles for a few key apps like Mail, Calendar, Weather, Google Voice, and Twitter arranged as a dashboard of key notifications that I care about and flip over from the desktop more often than I thought I would. It's also nice how Metro apps can raise notification toast on the desktop now in 8.1 (and desktop apps like Outlook can also tie into that same system, similar to Growl but built-in). Since I'm on the desktop 95% of the time, that definitely helps bridge the gap between Metro and desktop. I can get a lightweight notification when I get an @mention on Twitter, for example, without leaving TweetDeck running all the time. On my laptop with touch and on my Surface, Win8.1 is far and away better than Win7 could have possibly been. The Metro side of things is great there - especially since both have HiDPI displays and Metro apps . Surprisingly, I still haven't installed Outlook on the laptop because the 8.1 update to the Metro Mail app makes it good enough for my relatively light email use while mobile. Since all of the settings sync across machines automatically, the Mail app was already configured with the six accounts I use regularly as soon as I logged into it, so it was a no-brainer compared to installing Outlook or opening six web apps all the time.

gooble_flop 13y ago
From memory XP wasn't well received at first. It just hung around so long that people got really comfortable with it and didn't want to change.
- ams6110 13y ago
  Because it didn't offer much that Windows 2000 didn't provide?
  - Encosia 13y ago
    I don't know this for a fact, but I think very few people were coming from Win2k to XP. Win2k was relatively niche, even in business, from what I can remember of my experience back then. It was essentially only the people who were running NT 4.0 Workstation before who used Win2k in the interim between that and XP.