8 ms·

Microsoft's Must-Have List for Windows 9

23 points by michaelwww 13y ago

bdfh42 13y ago
A nice rant from John C. Dvorak. First though surely MS have to work out what a Windows PC is for in 2014 and beyond. (I accept their true response would be something like "make money on every PC sold like we always did"). Chromebooks have demonstrated a minimalist PC for our age. Now what value can Windows deliver on top of that? I think that is difficult to answer from a consumer's point of view. There might be a business angle but (for me) it is still not clear.
- kfk 13y ago
  Ms Office, really. Take that away and businesses will move to other OSes. Everybody is tired of the constant poor quality of Microsoft products.
  - commandar 13y ago
    I've made this argument before, but I've always found Microsoft's recent obsession with killing the desktop as hugely harmful to their own business. The fact is, Microsoft has seen this future coming for some time. They got themselves into antitrust trouble for going after Netscape and Java so aggressively in the 90s because they were afraid of OSes becoming commodity software. So, how have they reacted to a world where operating systems are increasingly commodity software? By throwing their competitive advantages in their bread and butter market -- the enterprise -- out the window (no pun intended). Applications have to be rewritten to run on Metro (and thus the cheap RT devices they so desperately want to compete with the iPad), central management of RT devices is not any real improvement over other devices, and whereas in the past they made the mistake of trying to shoehorn a desktop OS onto a touch device (e.g., XP Tablet Edition), now they've gone the complete opposite direction and tried to make a touch-centric interface designed for small screens in a world where 24-27" displays aren't uncommon. While Microsoft needed to do something to stay relevant, they've so badly mismanaged the transition that I think the end result is going to be an acceleration in line of business applications moving to web applications that run anywhere. Again, that's something that's already happening, but the entire W8/RT thing has done Microsoft absolutely no favors.
    - hnalias7 13y ago
      It's funny that a company can be so lost while there are so many technology folks and enthusiast that are clearly laying out the solutions for them. It's going to be very interesting to see what happens to this company over the next 10 years.
      - pmelendez 13y ago
        Except that those "solutions" might not necessarily work either. I had even read on HN people arguing that the solution would be MS to fork android (something that we had seen already) or just stay still and don't do anything (again we had seen that before too) The way I see it, MS started to get lost once they "accomplished" their mission "computer on every desk". At that point they were just like "Now.. what?".
- pmelendez 13y ago
  >"Chromebooks have demonstrated a minimalist PC for our age. Now what value can Windows deliver on top of that?" It depends on your definition for "value" here. For instance, for me "value" would be to create content in a comfortable way even if I am offline. So, since I can't edit a video, develop an app or edit a photo being offline during my commute to work, it is very unlikely that I will get one, and hence they have very limited value "to me".
guidopallemans 13y ago
https://www.readability.com/articles/6w09uyph https://www.readability.com/articles/6w09uyph 1. Fix the file system. The company promised it would develop a database-style file system that would allow for easy and super-fast searches for keywords within the structure of the file. This means it should quickly retrieve every .doc file containing the words "Android OS." The biggest problem with such a file system would be the indexing costs. It is likely that a gigabyte of storage fully indexed as a real database would take 2GB or more in overhead. So what? Terabytes are cheaper than ever. You can always make this sort of file system an option if necessary for the cheapskate who thinks paying more than $300 for a PC is spending too much money. 2. Fix the Networking. How did the Microsoft networking subsystems deteriorate with Windows 7 and above? I have a legacy NAS from Cisco that no OS since Vista can access on my network. There are a few supposed patches that kind of work. Why do I need to patch anything? What's the reason these legacy devices cannot be used anymore? They don't work because nobody wants to write the code to make sure they still work. 3. Bring back the distraction games. What happened to some of the classic games that came with the OS? I'm talking specifically about Spider Solitaire. Where is it? Whatever happened to Pinball, for that matter? 4. Scale everything. This full-screen idiocy must go. I have complained bitterly about the stupidity of full-screen programs from their early pre-Windows 8 conceptualization. Full-screen programs harken back to DOS. Having a bunch of these running and switching from one to the other is nothing more than DOS task switching from 1985. Check the calendar, people. Why isn't everyone in the tech community squawking about this incessantly? Besides praising this lunacy, now some users are giddy about the new "half full screen" mode. It makes you wonder where everyone with a brain went. 5. And finally, put back the real Start menu. Microsoft can simply go buy the Classic Shell code and use that if it wants a good implementation. The reason for the Start menu was for convenience, nothing more. Taking it away was like that "Ribbon" interface—it's a way to impede an efficient use of the product. Why do this? Why encumber the user? Everything just takes longer than it should. Windows 9 will be the end of the road for Microsoft if it keeps digging the same hole to nowhere. Everything the company does now seems to be part of some unspoken weird or secret theory stemming from smartphone UIs. It is all so inappropriate for the desktop computer. Microsoft is simply ruining the industry with this tactic, as we see with PC sales. My suggestions above, if implemented properly, would stem the decline.
- 13y ago
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
namlem 13y ago
Am I the only one who hates the old Start Menu? I find it tedious and useless. I'm all for re-adding a start menu, but it should be one that doesn't suck, like the one in Kubuntu. Also absent from this list is an updated console. Windows 8 still uses the old DOS shell. You can't even resize the window past 80 characters. It's embarrassing.
- pixl97 13y ago
  >You can't even resize the window past 80 characters. Or, you can change your defaults... Right click the top bar > Defaults Window Size > Width > 'What ever you want' Oh, and use powershell if you want more.
  - Zardoz84 13y ago
    Windows shells and the cmd.exe are a crap when you compare against anything that you have in GNU/Linux or *BSD. bash, zsh and fish are far better and more intuitive that Powershell. Plus cmd.exe is a joke if you compare against Konsole, Yakuake, eterm, etc....
- FigBug 13y ago
  I think it's terrible as well. I have 2 21" monitors and I need to look for my apps in the bottom left corner of one monitor using tiny icons. It could be improved greatly, and still be in Desktop mode. Yes, the terminal is terrible as well. And the new Powershell can't be easily resized either.
- Pxtl 13y ago
  Microsoft is trying to push Powershell as a replacement for venerable old cmd, but it's not really a good one - Powershell is an attempt to bolt OOP onto the shell language and interop with the .NET framework. The problem is that it's horribly confusing to work with - the syntax is bizarrely inconsistent as you switch back and forth between "commandlets" and .NET methods, and the part of the power of plain text is that it's self-documenting and forces simplicity of API. Powershell allows full OOP, which doesn't map well to the need for things to be simple when doing command-line scripts. Also, the Powershell interface lacks the various tools you'd expect from an OOP IDE that let you learn about the objects/methods/whatever. I do like the absense of the start menu. To me, the big failing of Win8 wasn't replacing the start menu with a fullscreen pseudo-desktop, it was the schizophrenic relationship between the fullscreen pseudo-desktop and the "classic" apps, as well as the bizarre "charms" things and the lack of a conventional taskbar when using fullscreen apps. Desktops and larger notebooks have enough real-estate on the screen for an always-visible task-switcher, and the "Charms" thing is too touch-oriented.
networked 13y ago
Allow me to take this opportunity to address something related to a minor point from the article: >To me an app is a small bit of code for an iPhone to do something cute. Are we going to call the massive SAP suite an "app?" Lately I've been hearing many people complain about "serious" desktop applications being called "apps". Do you think this is a valid complaint? (Myself, I'm not sure; I won't disclose my reasoning right now so as not to skew the conversation from the start.)
- theallan 13y ago
  Interestingly this is something I was thinking about the other day. I was trying to explain to my parents that they wanted to download and run a program on their Windows company - I called it an "app". They were confused as that is the term for things that you install on a smart phone. Like yourself, I'm not sure. It does seem a bit of a disservice to call something as complex as AutoCAD or Photoshop etc by the same term as a stupid fart app. But then, it is an accurate term - they are both applications, so I tend to use it as such.
- natdempk 13y ago
  In my mind, app is simply short for application. I think it has good connotations that come along with it as a result of mobile apps, such as being a single contained package that doesn't interfere with other apps, but we've seen that on OS X for years anyways, so that's hardly something new to desktop computing. There are complex, CPU intensive apps that are developed for tablets to do things like 3D modeling, are those any less of an app than a desktop version of the same thing? Does anyone have a problem with those being called "apps" vs "desktop applications"?
- pdabbadabba 13y ago
  There was a time that I would have agreed that an "app" is, in essence, a minimal application designed to perform a simple, narrowly circumscribed task. The distinction was natural because this was about the level of sophistication of most software that the average user would encounter on a mobile device, all of which were sold through "app stores." (And app stores sold only apps, thus defined.) Since then, however, I have found that the definition has more to do with the purchase/installation process than the functionality of the product itself. The emerging definition that I perceive is that an "app" is something purchased and installed through an "app store." App stores are environments that greatly reduce the normal friction involved with purchasing and installing an application such that this can all be accomplished without leaving the app store interface and without the user's being required to enter any configuration information. (This step, if it is necessary, is typically reserved for when the app is first run.) Uninstallation of an app is similarly streamlined (or, at least, a user expects it to be...). Apps are also not typically conceived of as running in windows. They are presented full-screen with no OS-chrome. This is an obvious hold-over from the demands of the mobile-device environment. An obvious counterpoint is Steam, which would seem to meet all of these criteria. This anomaly is perhaps explainable on the basis that it pre-dates the modern app store and, thus, users' expectations of it are not framed by the mobile environment as they are in other ecosystems. The fact that it typically is used only for PC games helps with this differentiation. It is worth pointing out, though, that Steam does sell non-game software, though to my knowledge it is not terribly successful in doing so. This lack of success might be attributable to its failure, in this capacity, to comply with the symbology of the app/application distinction that users have come to internalize.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
sp332 13y ago
The "miserable counter-productive "ribbon" interface on Microsoft Word" was the result of a lot of actual user testing. I could understand people disliking it just because it was new, but it's been years now... How long does it take people to realize a better interface is more productive? Edit: oh I just noticed it's Dvorak. Never mind.
- commandar 13y ago
  This is pretty much my exact reaction to the article. That was the exact line that gave me pause, then I looked up at the byline and saw Dvorak's name. I do find his pining for the failed WinFS particularly odd, though. It's something that was pretty much intended to back up the kind of anti-desktop model he's complaining about.
  - cwyers 13y ago
    I feel so much better now, I did the same thing. It's such a weird list, too. Doesn't he know about putting more than one app on the screen in Windows 8.1?
  - sp332 13y ago
    The new fs is all about putting your data first. The new UI is all about putting apps first.
- iends 13y ago
  CAN WE GET RID OF ALL CAPS IN MENUS?
  - domador 13y ago
    All caps is yet another poor choice. Microsoft seems to have a knack for deteriorating as many things as it improves in each new version of Office or Windows.
- domador 13y ago
  I've been using the ribbon UI in Office frequently for years, and still find its usability inferior to the old menu system. Aside from its poor usability, I dislike the visual clutter of having all the functions visible all the time. Personally, I'm less productive thanks to the ribbon UI. Well, what do I know... I'm just one data point... probably an outlier.
Mimu 13y ago
6. When you hit the windows button, and then start typing the program you want to launch, DON'T FUCKING SEARCH THE FUCKING INTERNET AND SLOW THE WHOLE PROCESS DOWN. Jesus.
- commandar 13y ago
  I just double checked and I don't have any issue with this in 8.1.
fidotron 13y ago
Rarely would I agree with Dvorak, but his conclusions here aren't too far wrong. If you live with a Chrome OS device and Windows machines rapidly the Windows machines get relegated to "legacy apps only" status (this coming from someone that really doesn't like the overall Google direction). MS need to face the fact they've lost the client war, and focus on their true killer apps of Excel and Exchange. Exchange should be the core of their business, not Windows.
- andrenotgiant 13y ago
  They probably look at Blackberry as a lesson of what happens when a company focuses on Enterprise and not Consumer. Consumers come to work and bug their IT departments to use what they are familiar with, forcing the pure enterprise players into obsolescence.
  - fidotron 13y ago
    That's not quite right, because as long as Exchange plays well with the devices people are using who cares what it's running on? The money is made selling the server anyway. iOS adoption in big companies has been driven, to a large part, by the fact integration with MS servers wasn't so hard. MS have been playing Windows platform lockdown for too long and, with the exception of the Exchange group, forgotten the embrace and extend idea, which currently finds itself at home more in Mountain View.
coldcode 13y ago
Microsoft's Must-Have List for Windows 9: 1. Customers
mark-r 13y ago
He missed a big one: price. It needs to come down. Windows is now much too large a percentage of the PC price.
laurentb 13y ago
jeez., basically this list is all about reverting to the old stuff without really suggesting anything new both UI-wise/UX-wise or the fundamental aspect of what to expect of an OS in 2014/2015....
9999 13y ago
I didn't read the by-line initially, got about two paragraphs in and thought "Jesus, is this by Dvorak?" And it is. And I smiled. I remember howling with laughter at his anti-mac articles more than a decade ago, and this is funny for the same reason. Dvorak has always been utterly incapable of thinking from any perspective other than his own. For example, his hatred of the full screen mode for applications is almost certainly born from being a power user with a multi-monitor setup or a large hi-res display (that's how I see things too, but I also understand that the UI needs to work on things like a Surface or an ultrabook). Oh well, it was fun reading him again anyway. As many other people have pointed out here, the main thing MS needs to fix is the pricing point and the ridiculous number of options. It's an OS, stop with the Ultimate Edition nonsense and just sell one version of it at the lowest price point that works.
- dragontamer 13y ago
  They did. There are two versions of (client-side) Windows 8: Home and Pro. Almost everyone wants the cheaper Home edition. Businesses who want Group Policy and Domain Joining will spend the $50 extra for Pro.
taylodl 13y ago
I haven't read a John C. Dvorak column for ages! We're talking over 10+ years ago - I'd no idea he was still writing. It'd be hilarious to have Dvorak running GNU/Linux at the end of 2014!!!
- michaelwww 13y ago
  I recently started reading him again after a 10 year break and he is crankier than ever and off-base much of the time, but I thought he was right on with this article. It would be really fun if he switched to Linux desktop and started writing about it. He'd be doing a great public service!

23 points by michaelwww 13y ago

A nice rant from John C. Dvorak. First though surely MS have to work out what a Windows PC is for in 2014 and beyond. (I accept their true response would be something like "make money on every PC sold like we always did"). Chromebooks have demonstrated a minimalist PC for our age. Now what value can Windows deliver on top of that? I think that is difficult to answer from a consumer's point of view. There might be a business angle but (for me) it is still not clear.

kfk 13y ago
Ms Office, really. Take that away and businesses will move to other OSes. Everybody is tired of the constant poor quality of Microsoft products.
- commandar 13y ago
  I've made this argument before, but I've always found Microsoft's recent obsession with killing the desktop as hugely harmful to their own business. The fact is, Microsoft has seen this future coming for some time. They got themselves into antitrust trouble for going after Netscape and Java so aggressively in the 90s because they were afraid of OSes becoming commodity software. So, how have they reacted to a world where operating systems are increasingly commodity software? By throwing their competitive advantages in their bread and butter market -- the enterprise -- out the window (no pun intended). Applications have to be rewritten to run on Metro (and thus the cheap RT devices they so desperately want to compete with the iPad), central management of RT devices is not any real improvement over other devices, and whereas in the past they made the mistake of trying to shoehorn a desktop OS onto a touch device (e.g., XP Tablet Edition), now they've gone the complete opposite direction and tried to make a touch-centric interface designed for small screens in a world where 24-27" displays aren't uncommon. While Microsoft needed to do something to stay relevant, they've so badly mismanaged the transition that I think the end result is going to be an acceleration in line of business applications moving to web applications that run anywhere. Again, that's something that's already happening, but the entire W8/RT thing has done Microsoft absolutely no favors.
  - hnalias7 13y ago
    It's funny that a company can be so lost while there are so many technology folks and enthusiast that are clearly laying out the solutions for them. It's going to be very interesting to see what happens to this company over the next 10 years.
    - pmelendez 13y ago
      Except that those "solutions" might not necessarily work either. I had even read on HN people arguing that the solution would be MS to fork android (something that we had seen already) or just stay still and don't do anything (again we had seen that before too) The way I see it, MS started to get lost once they "accomplished" their mission "computer on every desk". At that point they were just like "Now.. what?".
pmelendez 13y ago
>"Chromebooks have demonstrated a minimalist PC for our age. Now what value can Windows deliver on top of that?" It depends on your definition for "value" here. For instance, for me "value" would be to create content in a comfortable way even if I am offline. So, since I can't edit a video, develop an app or edit a photo being offline during my commute to work, it is very unlikely that I will get one, and hence they have very limited value "to me".

guidopallemans 13y ago

https://www.readability.com/articles/6w09uyph https://www.readability.com/articles/6w09uyph 1. Fix the file system. The company promised it would develop a database-style file system that would allow for easy and super-fast searches for keywords within the structure of the file. This means it should quickly retrieve every .doc file containing the words "Android OS." The biggest problem with such a file system would be the indexing costs. It is likely that a gigabyte of storage fully indexed as a real database would take 2GB or more in overhead. So what? Terabytes are cheaper than ever. You can always make this sort of file system an option if necessary for the cheapskate who thinks paying more than $300 for a PC is spending too much money. 2. Fix the Networking. How did the Microsoft networking subsystems deteriorate with Windows 7 and above? I have a legacy NAS from Cisco that no OS since Vista can access on my network. There are a few supposed patches that kind of work. Why do I need to patch anything? What's the reason these legacy devices cannot be used anymore? They don't work because nobody wants to write the code to make sure they still work. 3. Bring back the distraction games. What happened to some of the classic games that came with the OS? I'm talking specifically about Spider Solitaire. Where is it? Whatever happened to Pinball, for that matter? 4. Scale everything. This full-screen idiocy must go. I have complained bitterly about the stupidity of full-screen programs from their early pre-Windows 8 conceptualization. Full-screen programs harken back to DOS. Having a bunch of these running and switching from one to the other is nothing more than DOS task switching from 1985. Check the calendar, people. Why isn't everyone in the tech community squawking about this incessantly? Besides praising this lunacy, now some users are giddy about the new "half full screen" mode. It makes you wonder where everyone with a brain went. 5. And finally, put back the real Start menu. Microsoft can simply go buy the Classic Shell code and use that if it wants a good implementation. The reason for the Start menu was for convenience, nothing more. Taking it away was like that "Ribbon" interface—it's a way to impede an efficient use of the product. Why do this? Why encumber the user? Everything just takes longer than it should. Windows 9 will be the end of the road for Microsoft if it keeps digging the same hole to nowhere. Everything the company does now seems to be part of some unspoken weird or secret theory stemming from smartphone UIs. It is all so inappropriate for the desktop computer. Microsoft is simply ruining the industry with this tactic, as we see with PC sales. My suggestions above, if implemented properly, would stem the decline.

13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

namlem 13y ago

Am I the only one who hates the old Start Menu? I find it tedious and useless. I'm all for re-adding a start menu, but it should be one that doesn't suck, like the one in Kubuntu. Also absent from this list is an updated console. Windows 8 still uses the old DOS shell. You can't even resize the window past 80 characters. It's embarrassing.

pixl97 13y ago
>You can't even resize the window past 80 characters. Or, you can change your defaults... Right click the top bar > Defaults Window Size > Width > 'What ever you want' Oh, and use powershell if you want more.
- Zardoz84 13y ago
  Windows shells and the cmd.exe are a crap when you compare against anything that you have in GNU/Linux or *BSD. bash, zsh and fish are far better and more intuitive that Powershell. Plus cmd.exe is a joke if you compare against Konsole, Yakuake, eterm, etc....
FigBug 13y ago
I think it's terrible as well. I have 2 21" monitors and I need to look for my apps in the bottom left corner of one monitor using tiny icons. It could be improved greatly, and still be in Desktop mode. Yes, the terminal is terrible as well. And the new Powershell can't be easily resized either.
Pxtl 13y ago
Microsoft is trying to push Powershell as a replacement for venerable old cmd, but it's not really a good one - Powershell is an attempt to bolt OOP onto the shell language and interop with the .NET framework. The problem is that it's horribly confusing to work with - the syntax is bizarrely inconsistent as you switch back and forth between "commandlets" and .NET methods, and the part of the power of plain text is that it's self-documenting and forces simplicity of API. Powershell allows full OOP, which doesn't map well to the need for things to be simple when doing command-line scripts. Also, the Powershell interface lacks the various tools you'd expect from an OOP IDE that let you learn about the objects/methods/whatever. I do like the absense of the start menu. To me, the big failing of Win8 wasn't replacing the start menu with a fullscreen pseudo-desktop, it was the schizophrenic relationship between the fullscreen pseudo-desktop and the "classic" apps, as well as the bizarre "charms" things and the lack of a conventional taskbar when using fullscreen apps. Desktops and larger notebooks have enough real-estate on the screen for an always-visible task-switcher, and the "Charms" thing is too touch-oriented.

networked 13y ago

Allow me to take this opportunity to address something related to a minor point from the article: >To me an app is a small bit of code for an iPhone to do something cute. Are we going to call the massive SAP suite an "app?" Lately I've been hearing many people complain about "serious" desktop applications being called "apps". Do you think this is a valid complaint? (Myself, I'm not sure; I won't disclose my reasoning right now so as not to skew the conversation from the start.)

theallan 13y ago
Interestingly this is something I was thinking about the other day. I was trying to explain to my parents that they wanted to download and run a program on their Windows company - I called it an "app". They were confused as that is the term for things that you install on a smart phone. Like yourself, I'm not sure. It does seem a bit of a disservice to call something as complex as AutoCAD or Photoshop etc by the same term as a stupid fart app. But then, it is an accurate term - they are both applications, so I tend to use it as such.
natdempk 13y ago
In my mind, app is simply short for application. I think it has good connotations that come along with it as a result of mobile apps, such as being a single contained package that doesn't interfere with other apps, but we've seen that on OS X for years anyways, so that's hardly something new to desktop computing. There are complex, CPU intensive apps that are developed for tablets to do things like 3D modeling, are those any less of an app than a desktop version of the same thing? Does anyone have a problem with those being called "apps" vs "desktop applications"?
pdabbadabba 13y ago
There was a time that I would have agreed that an "app" is, in essence, a minimal application designed to perform a simple, narrowly circumscribed task. The distinction was natural because this was about the level of sophistication of most software that the average user would encounter on a mobile device, all of which were sold through "app stores." (And app stores sold only apps, thus defined.) Since then, however, I have found that the definition has more to do with the purchase/installation process than the functionality of the product itself. The emerging definition that I perceive is that an "app" is something purchased and installed through an "app store." App stores are environments that greatly reduce the normal friction involved with purchasing and installing an application such that this can all be accomplished without leaving the app store interface and without the user's being required to enter any configuration information. (This step, if it is necessary, is typically reserved for when the app is first run.) Uninstallation of an app is similarly streamlined (or, at least, a user expects it to be...). Apps are also not typically conceived of as running in windows. They are presented full-screen with no OS-chrome. This is an obvious hold-over from the demands of the mobile-device environment. An obvious counterpoint is Steam, which would seem to meet all of these criteria. This anomaly is perhaps explainable on the basis that it pre-dates the modern app store and, thus, users' expectations of it are not framed by the mobile environment as they are in other ecosystems. The fact that it typically is used only for PC games helps with this differentiation. It is worth pointing out, though, that Steam does sell non-game software, though to my knowledge it is not terribly successful in doing so. This lack of success might be attributable to its failure, in this capacity, to comply with the symbology of the app/application distinction that users have come to internalize.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

sp332 13y ago

The "miserable counter-productive "ribbon" interface on Microsoft Word" was the result of a lot of actual user testing. I could understand people disliking it just because it was new, but it's been years now... How long does it take people to realize a better interface is more productive? Edit: oh I just noticed it's Dvorak. Never mind.

commandar 13y ago
This is pretty much my exact reaction to the article. That was the exact line that gave me pause, then I looked up at the byline and saw Dvorak's name. I do find his pining for the failed WinFS particularly odd, though. It's something that was pretty much intended to back up the kind of anti-desktop model he's complaining about.
- cwyers 13y ago
  I feel so much better now, I did the same thing. It's such a weird list, too. Doesn't he know about putting more than one app on the screen in Windows 8.1?
- sp332 13y ago
  The new fs is all about putting your data first. The new UI is all about putting apps first.
iends 13y ago
CAN WE GET RID OF ALL CAPS IN MENUS?
- domador 13y ago
  All caps is yet another poor choice. Microsoft seems to have a knack for deteriorating as many things as it improves in each new version of Office or Windows.
domador 13y ago
I've been using the ribbon UI in Office frequently for years, and still find its usability inferior to the old menu system. Aside from its poor usability, I dislike the visual clutter of having all the functions visible all the time. Personally, I'm less productive thanks to the ribbon UI. Well, what do I know... I'm just one data point... probably an outlier.

Mimu 13y ago

6. When you hit the windows button, and then start typing the program you want to launch, DON'T FUCKING SEARCH THE FUCKING INTERNET AND SLOW THE WHOLE PROCESS DOWN. Jesus.

commandar 13y ago
I just double checked and I don't have any issue with this in 8.1.

fidotron 13y ago

Rarely would I agree with Dvorak, but his conclusions here aren't too far wrong. If you live with a Chrome OS device and Windows machines rapidly the Windows machines get relegated to "legacy apps only" status (this coming from someone that really doesn't like the overall Google direction). MS need to face the fact they've lost the client war, and focus on their true killer apps of Excel and Exchange. Exchange should be the core of their business, not Windows.

andrenotgiant 13y ago
They probably look at Blackberry as a lesson of what happens when a company focuses on Enterprise and not Consumer. Consumers come to work and bug their IT departments to use what they are familiar with, forcing the pure enterprise players into obsolescence.
- fidotron 13y ago
  That's not quite right, because as long as Exchange plays well with the devices people are using who cares what it's running on? The money is made selling the server anyway. iOS adoption in big companies has been driven, to a large part, by the fact integration with MS servers wasn't so hard. MS have been playing Windows platform lockdown for too long and, with the exception of the Exchange group, forgotten the embrace and extend idea, which currently finds itself at home more in Mountain View.

coldcode 13y ago

Microsoft's Must-Have List for Windows 9: 1. Customers

mark-r 13y ago

He missed a big one: price. It needs to come down. Windows is now much too large a percentage of the PC price.

laurentb 13y ago

jeez., basically this list is all about reverting to the old stuff without really suggesting anything new both UI-wise/UX-wise or the fundamental aspect of what to expect of an OS in 2014/2015....

9999 13y ago

I didn't read the by-line initially, got about two paragraphs in and thought "Jesus, is this by Dvorak?" And it is. And I smiled. I remember howling with laughter at his anti-mac articles more than a decade ago, and this is funny for the same reason. Dvorak has always been utterly incapable of thinking from any perspective other than his own. For example, his hatred of the full screen mode for applications is almost certainly born from being a power user with a multi-monitor setup or a large hi-res display (that's how I see things too, but I also understand that the UI needs to work on things like a Surface or an ultrabook). Oh well, it was fun reading him again anyway. As many other people have pointed out here, the main thing MS needs to fix is the pricing point and the ridiculous number of options. It's an OS, stop with the Ultimate Edition nonsense and just sell one version of it at the lowest price point that works.

dragontamer 13y ago
They did. There are two versions of (client-side) Windows 8: Home and Pro. Almost everyone wants the cheaper Home edition. Businesses who want Group Policy and Domain Joining will spend the $50 extra for Pro.

taylodl 13y ago

I haven't read a John C. Dvorak column for ages! We're talking over 10+ years ago - I'd no idea he was still writing. It'd be hilarious to have Dvorak running GNU/Linux at the end of 2014!!!

michaelwww 13y ago
I recently started reading him again after a 10 year break and he is crankier than ever and off-base much of the time, but I thought he was right on with this article. It would be really fun if he switched to Linux desktop and started writing about it. He'd be doing a great public service!