Windows 8.1 is the best

[tgp]

The "Mail" app (and many other Modern UI apps) also has the option to show notifications...

Outlook 2013 shows a notification like that as well on the Windows 8 desktop.

 

[jmshub]

I get sick of people parroting that windows 8 is a disaster, when its clear most of them have little more than a passing glance given to Win8. While my evidence is anecdotal, I have set up several users onto new systems with Win8, some with little computer experience and coming from Xp. A few minutes to go over how 8 is different, and everyone has been comfortable with their new computer. After a little time, most admit that they actually like their new pc over even windows 7.

I do like the changes that 8.1 added, the ability to boot to the desktop, and put the desktop background behind the start menu really makes the start menu seem just like a new menu instead of a radical new ui.

 

[Cleavitt76]

Well, I would like to disagree. When windows 8 came out, there were some people who said that it was the best OS ever like some comments above ,but the sales speak for themselves. Its not good enough. ...

Microsoft's quarterly earnings report says otherwise. It was released today and it is the best in at least two years. Windows sales were up despite the PC market slowing down overall.

Sales of Windows 8 have actually been pretty good. Not quite Windows 7 good (i.e. phenomenal), but still "billions of dollars of profit" good. The difference in sales is mainly due to an overall decrease in PC sales in the past two years. People love to blame that on Windows 8, but the reality is simply that the PC market finally "caught up" to demand after a decade of insanely rapid growth. In other words, everyone that wants a PC finally has one (or more) by now.

Also, the modern PC (both hardware and software) is much more powerful, reliable, and capable than in previous years. There is no need for most people to replace their PCs every couple of years like they did just a few years ago. Many desktop PCs sold in the last few years are quad core beasts and all the Netflix videos in the world isn't going to slow them down anytime soon. The average lifespan of a new PC is probably 2 to 3 times what it was less than a decade ago.

Finally, you have to consider that Windows 8 sales in enterprise environments is going to be almost non-existent for the first few years. Uninformed people will claim this is because Windows 8 can't be used by businesses, but that is not the case. I work in enterprise IT for a moderate sized company. We are nearly finished with a multi-year project to transition all PCs from XP to 7. That project started before Windows 8 even existed. It takes an enormous amount of effort to complete the testing of all our applications, security policies, and centralized management systems and just as much effort to roll out updated PCs to all of the thousands of workstations we have to support. Enterprise IT departments need a consistent user environment in order to make support feasible so a mix of Windows 7 and 8 is a no go. We have lots of other projects to focus on and it will be years before we can allocate resources for another company wide workstation upgrade to another version of Windows. I'm using Windows 8.1 at work (and love it) along with some of my IT co-workers, but we are early adopters that support our own systems.

What about the bifurcated UX? Why do you give me two experiences inside a single OS, its just BS. Give me one, either the desktop or if it is the modern UI you want to push for the future, give me that and ship the product ONLY after you are done with the transition(looking at you windows 8) and optimise it according to the hardware on which it is installed if it is touch enabled, modern/metro else desktop. One size doesn`t fit all, it simply doesn`t.Steve Jobs got that right long back, these guys are still trying and failing over and over again.

You make the ability to *optionally* support two experiences (and switch between them) in a single OS and device sound like a disadvantage when it is actually quite innovative and helpful. You also seem to think that Modern UI is supposed to replace the desktop, but they actually serve different usage patterns and different requirements (in the same way that iOS is not intended to replace OSX). The advantages of the Windows 8.x "bifurcated UX" design are...

• Single OS to learn.
• Single OS to configure.
• Single OS to maintain.
• Ability to use the same software programs on all devices. (i.e.: Same learn, config, and maintain advantages at the program/app level.)
• Less need (or no need) for file syncing since devices can be consolidated.
• Ability to switch between desktop (productivity/work) and touch (consumption/play) optimized software without changing OS/device. Do a quick edit to an Office doc or run Adobe Lightroom on a tablet. Play angry birds on the desktop if you want. With competitors products you would need to switch devices every time your workflow changes even temporarily.
• One device can serve multiple roles and blend between roles. I use my Surface Pro 2 as a tablet ~40%, a laptop ~20%, and a triple monitor desktop (via docking station) ~40%. No other OS allows this.

The disadvantage is basically nothing other than the initial learning curve. However, that is really no worse than the combined learning curve of a mobile OS and a separate desktop OS which is what you get with the competition. Apple's iOS and OSX products are "bifurcated" in user experience, software, and hardware.

Its ok for the time being, because windows 7 is still around but once that period is over , if there is no product which will solve all these issues, Microsoft will be in deep trouble.Touch enabled laptops, really??Not a fan at all.

There is a product to solve these [non] issues. It's called Windows 8 and it does everything Windows 7 does. If you don't like touchscreen laptops, don't buy one or don't touch the screen. I don't understand how the availability of diverse products to other people is a disadvantage for you.

Even about modern UI, I get confused with all those tiles, especially when there is a whole lot of them on my start screen, I use my laptop presently with Apps view switched on by default. Good thing they introduced it with 8.1.Why can`t they get the simple fact that people need stuff which works not those which need to be tweaked in order to. Oh well, they realised quick settings, notification center had to be introduced 2 years later with WP 8.1, surprise,surprise..

So all you have left to complain about is that you get confused by the Start Screen that you couldn't be bothered to organize? This is even more strange when you go on to say that you have the apps view displayed by default as if having EVERY app icon displayed at once is somehow less confusing. All you have to do is unpin tiles and drag things around. How hard is that? A one time task that takes a few minutes.

The old Start Menu was a mess of nested folders once you installed a dozen or more programs. Many of the users at work have their desktop covered in icons, but somehow the Start Screen is too cluttered an confusing for these same users? Personally, I always found myself deleting and rearranging stuff from the old Start Menu and desktop to keep it tidy. The new Start Screen is much better in this regard. If you enable Start Screen synching between devices you only have to customize your start screen on one device and the rest fall right in line.

Anyway, it's clear that you don't like it and that is fine, but it's a bit of a stretch to claim that it's an epic fail in every way or that it will be the end of MS. MS is actually doing very well right now financially and much of that is due to Windows 8, products made possible by Windows 8 (i.e. Surface series, OEM hybrids, Windows Store revenue), and products that are a spin off of Windows 8/Modern UI concepts like the Xbox One.

 

[anony_mouse]

Are you trying to help me prove my point about people that haven't used Windows 8 talking smack about it? :wink:

I have used Windows 8!

Outlook and lots of other desktop email clients have that "notification icon" functionality. They continue to work on Windows 8 the same as previous versions of windows.

The "Mail" app (and many other Modern UI apps) also has the option to show notifications...

Indeed. So it's got similar functionality to Windows XP. Actually I think Windows NT4 could do much the same. Good that Microsoft not moving backwards! But let's be clear - notifications are not a new feature!

And of course you also get the live tile update on your start screen...

I avoid the live tiles - not useful on a PC and catastrophically ugly.

I don't usually dock the mail app to my desktop unless I am actively emailing back and forth with someone while trying to do other things. I only did it in this case as an example of how Modern UI apps can be docked since that was specifically asked about. It could just have easily been Skype, Facebook, Twitter, Stocks, or any other Modern UI app and of course you always have the option to not use Modern UI apps if you only need the desktop.

I don't use modern UI apps. I can achieve a similar effect by resizing the window of my email client or whatever (although I have never actually bothered to do so).

Also, the docked Mail app doesn't just show "an ugly list of emails." It continues to function as it does when it's running full screen. If you click a message it will display the contents of the message and you can reply/forward/delete/whatever even from that narrow window. Of course you can drag the docked app larger or full screen if that makes more sense and you can make it go away by dragging its "panel" off the edge of the screen.

From your screen shot, I have to say it looks like an ugly list of e-mails. Of course I understand it's a full e-mail app.

As far as Facebook messages, if you are using the Facebook app you can also get live tile updates, popup notifications (even when the app is closed), and you can dock the app along side the desktop or another app very much like the Mail app. I actually do this all the time when people are messaging me, but I didn't feel like sharing a screenshot of my Facebook messages with the whole world so I didn't use it in my example.

I used to have a Chrome extension that did the same thing, but I disabled it as my smart phone and tablet also buzz when a Facebook message arrives and I don't need every device to tell me about it. I expect you can get some program that shows a notification icon in the task bar for older versions of Windows.

It's good that you like Windows 8, and that Microsoft have tried to innovate. I think the problem is that Microsoft didn't consider the needs of their customers, but concentrated on their own strategic interests - i.e. to have a UI that is the same across smart phones, tablets and PCs, to try to leverage their dominance of PCs to gain some market share in those other devices. Perhaps it was a good plan in theory, but in practice I find the Windows 8 UI jarring and inefficient, and prefer older versions of Windows.

 

[peachy001]

Thanks for the comments people. I actually am pretty up for Windows 8 now, despite the views to the contrary. Now, just got to find the spare cash.

 

[Ian Too]

I don't use modern UI apps. I can achieve a similar effect by resizing the window of my email client or whatever (although I have never actually bothered to do so).

Modern UI apps have one advantage not mentioned so far: that they have been vetted by Microsoft before being published in the store. Part of the point of Windows 8.X is to transition to a walled ecosystem where users (not geeks, but ordinary people) can have computers and not have to buy anti-malware.

This is part of the beauty of Windows RT, which is as safe as an iPad and once developers get up to speed, will be as versatile as any PC. It is time to start transitioning from desktop style apps (or as we used to call them, programs) to Modern UI ones. Imagine all those clock cycles freed up from Mr MacAfee and his little gnomes.

Another thing to consider with Windows 8 is that there is a lot more to it than a UI, the changes run deep. The PC I'm using to write this on originally came with Windows Vista (now that was a dog) and has been upgraded through 7, 8 and now 8.1, which has given this machine a new lease of life. This is because 8.1 runs 30% faster than 7, which was faster than Vista and the difference is noticeable. What's more, 8 and 8.1 have proved to be rock solid.

In recent years Microsoft have worked really hard to get their act together, first with Windows Phone, now with Windows and by integrating their services through WP, Windows and Xbox in a way which is truly innovative. Someone at MS had a really powerful vision of the future and Ballmer & Co had balls enough to run with it. That deserves credit.

The fact that people who criticize do so on such minor grounds as the lack of a Start button or a personal dislike of a new UI is testament to how far Microsoft has come as a company. The fact that a six year old PC can run Microsoft's latest OS without a hitch and integrate that old technology seamlessly into the cloud is a real engineering achievement worth lauding (& perhaps one of the reasons PC sales are down?). The fact that Microsoft actually listens to criticism without getting huffy or pompous is also a credit and probably one of the secrets of their success.

Please by all means criticise MS, but also maintain a sense of proportion. A more positive approach to innovation will help you get more out of it.

 

[anony_mouse]

I am very concerned about a single company from a single country controlling what you can install on *your* hardware (this is not only a Microsoft issue). I understand the security advantages, but much prefer the Android approach where users are able to disable this protection and use their judgement (good or bad) on what software to run on *their own* hardware.
This has not only commercial but also geopolitical implications. A single company and single country controlling what the world runs on its computers is a very scary prospect. Given Microsoft's dominance of the desktop/laptop PC market, there is a serious danger of this happening.

 

[jmshub]

I am very concerned about a single company from a single country controlling what you can install on *your* hardware (this is not only a Microsoft issue). I understand the security advantages, but much prefer the Android approach where users are able to disable this protection and use their judgement (good or bad) on what software to run on *their own* hardware.
This has not only commercial but also geopolitical implications. A single company and single country controlling what the world runs on its computers is a very scary prospect. Given Microsoft's dominance of the desktop/laptop PC market, there is a serious danger of this happening.

One of the reasons I like Windows 8 is that it still supports the full desktop. You can download and install whatever you want. I don't think Microsoft will be able to restrict users to just Windows Store applications anytime soon.

 

[tgp]

Modern UI apps have one advantage not mentioned so far: that they have been vetted by Microsoft before being published in the store. Part of the point of Windows 8.X is to transition to a walled ecosystem where users (not geeks, but ordinary people) can have computers and not have to buy anti-malware.

But what happens with companies that develop their own programs, or have specialized ones made for them? Would they have to go through the Store?

 

[Cleavitt76]

I have used Windows 8!

Indeed. So it's got similar functionality to Windows XP. Actually I think Windows NT4 could do much the same. Good that Microsoft not moving backwards! But let's be clear - notifications are not a new feature!

I avoid the live tiles - not useful on a PC and catastrophically ugly.

I don't use modern UI apps. I can achieve a similar effect by resizing the window of my email client or whatever (although I have never actually bothered to do so).

...

Your other post seems to have been removed and even the part where I quoted you has been removed from my reply by a moderator. Now there is a strange hole in the conversation and my previous reply seems out of place. I'm not sure what is going on there. Nothing in your post or my post was out of line.

Anyway, I think you misunderstood the purpose of my post were I posted the desktop screenshot. I was responding to Peachy's question about the desktop and whether Modern UI apps can be run side by side with other apps. I was just providing a quick example of the concept by docking the Mail client along side the desktop. I never claimed it was a superior email workflow or anything else. It was just an example of docking functionality in Windows 8. You are the one that responded with comments about " email notifications were in XP and didn't take up a large section of the screen." or something to that effect (it has been deleted now). I never mentioned email notifications prior to that and I certainly never said that email notifications are a new or special feature of Windows 8 so there is no point discussing this.

 

[Cleavitt76]

One of the reasons I like Windows 8 is that it still supports the full desktop. You can download and install whatever you want. I don't think Microsoft will be able to restrict users to just Windows Store applications anytime soon.

I agree and I don't think that is even their intention. Microsoft is well aware that one of their greatest advantages is being able to run diverse hardware and software. Just because they are providing an app store doesn't mean that the end goal is to completely lock everyone into a "walled garden." Modern UI apps are targeted at different needs than desktop apps. One does not replace the other any more than web apps could replace all desktop apps or .Net/Java apps can replace low level C++/Assembly coded software. There have always been different programming models for different requirements. Just because a new model/framework comes along to fit a certain use case doesn't mean everything before it gets replaced. Microsoft has not told developers to stop programming other apps types. They are still expanding the frameworks used by desktop apps and other types of apps. They are still developing brand new software themselves using non-modern UI frameworks and tools. I don't know why so many people think that Modern UI and the Windows Store is intended to replace every other aspects of Windows and Microsoft software.

But what happens with companies that develop their own programs, or have specialized ones made for them? Would they have to go through the Store?

No. There are already ways for enterprise customers to deploy Modern UI apps (both Windows and Windows Phone) to devices trusted on their infrastructure. They have full control over the "validation" process. It's similar in concept to the way developers can deploy an app to their own phone (if dev unlocked). I haven't read up on the details well enough to elaborate, but I know the option exists.