6 ms·

So basically what is say is Windows 8 sucks take it off the table anything else goes. I'm quite certain most people would agree with that statement.

by Fuxy 12y ago

Pwntastic 12y ago
This doesn't contribute anything worthwhile to the discussion.
- xiaq 12y ago
  The GP has actually grabbed some of my sentiment. I doubt that it's just an outright expression of the frustration over Windows 8 from the government people as customers and doesn't have much conspiracy behind it, which the tone of Reuters seems to imply.
- superduper33 12y ago
  Your face doesn't contribute anything worthwhile to the discussion.
danudey 12y ago
The 'worst' part is that Windows 8 is actually fine, except for the extremely superficial differences. Given the many options for reverting Windows 8 to essentially a faster Windows 7 but with a new UI, Microsoft has really shot itself in the foot. If MS provided a group policy toggle to essentially say 'force Windows Classic mode', enterprises would have a lot less reluctance (beyond the normal reluctance that IT has to anything new, which is to get the enterprise's infrastructure into a state of balance and then not touch it for ten years).
- yuhong 12y ago
  Ah: http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1081755-do-you-like-or-hate-windows-8/?view=findpost&p=595048551 http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1081755-do-you-like-or-hat...
  - Dylan16807 12y ago
    So this is a post saying that they removed the start menu because they didn't want to update it a bit? It's not really relevant to a "force windows classic" mode because the listed bugs are mostly interactions with new features. The claim that they would have had to sacrifice significant other features is a strawman. And they're doing the work anyway for the next service pack, apparently...
    - BrandonLive 12y ago
      That post was from two years ago. There were a lot of reasons the old start menu was removed. I listed some technical reasons why "just leave it in as an option" isn't as easy as it sounds. It is not a straw man to say that investing in one area means you have to sacrifice in others. This is what we call software development. Features are not added in service packs, and I don't even think service packs exist anymore (service packs are just collections of security and reliability updates, created and packaged together by a special "sustained engineering" team, not the product team). The product team is building a new start menu option for a future version of Windows. It's a significant undertaking, not something they're throwing together willy nilly. They don't have a time machine, so they can't go back to 2012 and ship it then.
      - yuhong 12y ago
        Yea, they are going to a different model, and I think they are going to ship the start menu in a future update.
      - smithkl42 12y ago
        Still, given that the missing start menu is most folks' #1 complaint about Windows 8, wouldn't you have to say that (at least in hindsight) it was a mistake to leave it out? Yes, software engineering is always about compromises, but isn't it also about making the right compromises?
      - Aldo_MX 12y ago
        > Features are not added in service packs Security Center Popup Blocking in IE Image Blocking in OE DEP Some others I can't remember IIRC those were features introduced with Service Pack 2 of Windows XP.
- Karunamon 12y ago
  Only if you think basic UI functionality and a few decades of muscle memory x a few tens of millions of people is "superficial", that is. It doesn't matter how awesome the changes under the hood are if it's painful to use. And I'd argue that the unwarranted attempt to shoehorn a (mediocre by itself) touch UI into a desktop, poorly, ranks as "painful", never mind the knock-on effects with certain configurations (laptop touchpads interpreting normal mouse movement as swipe gestures for example).
  - BrandonLive 12y ago
    FYI, Windows doesn't interpret mouse movements as swipe gestures. Certain trackpad ODMs (i.e. Synaptics) did that, and did a terrible job of it.
  - marcosdumay 12y ago
    They are superficial in "it will cust just a few hours of development time to fix". But certainly aren't superficial in "the user experience does not suffer because of them". Microsoft is living a lot of money on the table.
  - TTPrograms 12y ago
    I actually prefer the 8 UI to 7's. You click the start menu, and your intention is clearly to interact only with the menu, so why not make it take up the whole screen? The application icons on the bottom are also much more space efficient. I think a majority of the complaints come from "this is different!" not "this is worse!".
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - buster 12y ago
      No, the intention is to quickly start something without distracting from the main screen. There is no sane reason to go fullscreen here, if i have Writer open and want to start a calculator or MSN or whatever other app. I needed a few trials until i found where to shut down that stupid OS (and eventually installed the classic menu). Interestingly i have a touchscreen laptop but on my main OS (Linux) i went the complete opposite direction lately, with a much more keyboard-driven setup, no fancy animations. Basically a distraction-free work machine, and not the colorful, animation-loaded distraction "beast" Windows has become.

So basically what is say is Windows 8 sucks take it off the table anything else goes. I'm quite certain most people would agree with that statement.

by Fuxy 12y ago

So basically what is say is Windows 8 sucks take it off the table anything else goes. I'm quite certain most people would agree with that statement.

Pwntastic 12y ago

This doesn't contribute anything worthwhile to the discussion.

xiaq 12y ago
The GP has actually grabbed some of my sentiment. I doubt that it's just an outright expression of the frustration over Windows 8 from the government people as customers and doesn't have much conspiracy behind it, which the tone of Reuters seems to imply.
superduper33 12y ago
Your face doesn't contribute anything worthwhile to the discussion.

danudey 12y ago

The 'worst' part is that Windows 8 is actually fine, except for the extremely superficial differences. Given the many options for reverting Windows 8 to essentially a faster Windows 7 but with a new UI, Microsoft has really shot itself in the foot. If MS provided a group policy toggle to essentially say 'force Windows Classic mode', enterprises would have a lot less reluctance (beyond the normal reluctance that IT has to anything new, which is to get the enterprise's infrastructure into a state of balance and then not touch it for ten years).

yuhong 12y ago
Ah: http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1081755-do-you-like-or-hate-windows-8/?view=findpost&p=595048551 http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1081755-do-you-like-or-hat...
- Dylan16807 12y ago
  So this is a post saying that they removed the start menu because they didn't want to update it a bit? It's not really relevant to a "force windows classic" mode because the listed bugs are mostly interactions with new features. The claim that they would have had to sacrifice significant other features is a strawman. And they're doing the work anyway for the next service pack, apparently...
  - BrandonLive 12y ago
    That post was from two years ago. There were a lot of reasons the old start menu was removed. I listed some technical reasons why "just leave it in as an option" isn't as easy as it sounds. It is not a straw man to say that investing in one area means you have to sacrifice in others. This is what we call software development. Features are not added in service packs, and I don't even think service packs exist anymore (service packs are just collections of security and reliability updates, created and packaged together by a special "sustained engineering" team, not the product team). The product team is building a new start menu option for a future version of Windows. It's a significant undertaking, not something they're throwing together willy nilly. They don't have a time machine, so they can't go back to 2012 and ship it then.
    - yuhong 12y ago
      Yea, they are going to a different model, and I think they are going to ship the start menu in a future update.
    - smithkl42 12y ago
      Still, given that the missing start menu is most folks' #1 complaint about Windows 8, wouldn't you have to say that (at least in hindsight) it was a mistake to leave it out? Yes, software engineering is always about compromises, but isn't it also about making the right compromises?
    - Aldo_MX 12y ago
      > Features are not added in service packs Security Center Popup Blocking in IE Image Blocking in OE DEP Some others I can't remember IIRC those were features introduced with Service Pack 2 of Windows XP.
Karunamon 12y ago
Only if you think basic UI functionality and a few decades of muscle memory x a few tens of millions of people is "superficial", that is. It doesn't matter how awesome the changes under the hood are if it's painful to use. And I'd argue that the unwarranted attempt to shoehorn a (mediocre by itself) touch UI into a desktop, poorly, ranks as "painful", never mind the knock-on effects with certain configurations (laptop touchpads interpreting normal mouse movement as swipe gestures for example).
- BrandonLive 12y ago
  FYI, Windows doesn't interpret mouse movements as swipe gestures. Certain trackpad ODMs (i.e. Synaptics) did that, and did a terrible job of it.
- marcosdumay 12y ago
  They are superficial in "it will cust just a few hours of development time to fix". But certainly aren't superficial in "the user experience does not suffer because of them". Microsoft is living a lot of money on the table.
- TTPrograms 12y ago
  I actually prefer the 8 UI to 7's. You click the start menu, and your intention is clearly to interact only with the menu, so why not make it take up the whole screen? The application icons on the bottom are also much more space efficient. I think a majority of the complaints come from "this is different!" not "this is worse!".
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - buster 12y ago
    No, the intention is to quickly start something without distracting from the main screen. There is no sane reason to go fullscreen here, if i have Writer open and want to start a calculator or MSN or whatever other app. I needed a few trials until i found where to shut down that stupid OS (and eventually installed the classic menu). Interestingly i have a touchscreen laptop but on my main OS (Linux) i went the complete opposite direction lately, with a much more keyboard-driven setup, no fancy animations. Basically a distraction-free work machine, and not the colorful, animation-loaded distraction "beast" Windows has become.