The fact that this thread, and many others like it, exist proves there is a problem (with the W8 Start Screen).
Apparently the point I'm trying to make is very hard to understand... so I'll say again that, yes, I agree. I already admitted there is a problem... one of perception and understanding. Still, although this W8 Start Screen problem is a matter of psychology (familiarity, subjective aesthetics, flexibility, etc) more than it is one of software technology, its consequences (market share, acceptance, image, etc) are nevertheless very real.
If you believe that a large number of people sharing a view automatically counts as validation of that view, then I'd suggest a good history book... Thor is real, Jews are a non-human race, the command line is far superior to this new-fangled toy called the mouse, which will disappear soon enough (or at least be relegated to the kids room)... all of those were once widespread and strongly held convictions, at least in some regions.
You don't need to change YOUR mind about which is better, or convince users one way is better.
No, I don't
need to. I
want to. The WPC community changes my mind a little bit every day, and I hope I can help evolve other people's views as well. Not everyone is satisfied by sticking with their first impressions for all eternity.
More than anything else, it is the W8 Start Screen that is faulted for people's poor experiences, yet the accusers rarely provide a detailed explanation as to how and why. I think the onus is on them to do so. However, few question those accusations, because many have subconsciously come to accept that the problem is self evident, which just isn't true. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I hope at least some people find such questioning worthwhile. I don't see how improving our understanding of the actual technical situation can be a bad thing, which is what I'd prefer to be talking about.
Again, in a nutshell, the W8 Start Screen is objectively superior to the W7 Start Menu. Anyone that goes through each feature, point by point, and compares how each task is completed in both versions of Windows, should have little difficulty convincing themselves that the W8 app launcher (the Start Screen) is functionally at least equivalent to that of W7.
I won't comment any further on whether I'm right or wrong to question the OP's opinion. I'll gladly continue with the technical discussion...
Back on topic...
Suggesting that OEMs believe W8 is the main reason for lower desktop and laptop sales volumes is just bad reporting. The reason for lower sales is mainly price, and the continued miniaturization of computing technology. This would have happened even if W8 was the best OS ever. If most people can now have 80% of their computing needs met by a cheap tablet, why would they continue to spend their computing dollars on far more expensive desktops and laptops, particularly when most people haven't seen the need for a faster PC in years. Putting Android emulators on desktops and laptops won't make them a dime cheaper, quite the opposite actually, and the cheaper alternatives will still be good enough... Android emulators won't improve desktop/laptop sales at all.
For WRT tablets, offering an Android emulator might make a difference, but only if that has little influence on price. This would be very dangerous to MS however. It certainly doesn't further MS' interests. Allegedly, MS is thinking about reducing WP and WRT licensing costs to zero. They would compensate via profits made through app sales in the Windows Store. If Windows tablet users instead turn to Google's Play Store for most of their apps, then how is MS to earn anything at all with their OS efforts? I think such a move has the potential to kill Windows as a tablet OS.