Microsoft Has Sold Over 200 Million Windows 8 Licenses

you have no idea what you're talking about. and windows aside, what linux UI?

what did you use before dial up? might as well make some nonsensical analogy.

 

You get my point young padawan. You can say "what did you do before xxx" until you're blue in the face. It doesn't mean it was better, the newer tech just didn't exist yet.

 

i got your point, old jedi, but it just doesn't jive with mitlov's point (ergo it's nonsensical). if i understand his point correctly, he was asking what aero fans used before aero in a more roundabout way of establishing that UI themes/effects are not the end-all, be-all nor should they be a "deal breaker" for a UI or an entire operating system more generally -- not proposing that pre-vista windows was somehow better. in fact, i'd wager he'd probably argue the opposite, that vista was better than anything that came before it, aero and all.

 

But we're not talking about new technology that gives you new capabilities, like asking a doctor what they did before antibiotics. We're talking about a particular aesthetic style, and the assertion that anything but that one particular aesthetic style creates visual distraction or eyestrain for the user.

 

Sorry off doing other things. As far as Linux UI's, gnome KDE etc.. I have not found a Linux UI yet that I am as happy with as Windows 7 and Aero. Pre-Vista I used window blinds to either reduce borders or make them not so bland etc.. Again make them not as distracting. With Window blinds even I was always changing borders and what not. With older OS's and poor resolution grainy screens and other issues kept me pulling my hair out all the time.

besides why should I resort to having to deal with a pre-2009 eye candy? I thought with tech advances we were supposed to get more, not less, from our systems?


Edit; My other things for right now, still setting it all up.

 

Regard the windows borders and whatnot, I'd like to chime in this as well.

In the pre Aero days I also used Window Blinds because I did not like how things looked in XP. I did like Windows 2000 borders, but even classic in XP didn't match 2K. With regards to Linux, I have a found a few Emerald themes over the years that come close to Aero. However in Windows 8, the loss of Aero does bother me very, very much. I like Aero a LOT. It looks great, the borders aren't gigantic and I might as well have the GPU do something while I am working in Excel. I get the flat MetroUI (or whatever Microsoft is calling it now) and it looks decent, just dated. If I want a retro UI I can load up Windows 98 in a virtual machine, or use AfterStep in Linux. In this day and age with our phones, tablets, laptops and other computers having processor cycles to spare there is no reason not to have a nice looking UI on top of everything.

 

I just like the whole transparency thing and ability to have more visibility of what Windows I have open. Until I get usable 4k+ screens where I can easily position multiple windows without overlap, then it won't matter as much.

 

Because at some point it was determined that the majority of users didn't want a ton of flashy shiny effects thrown at them. This is why OS X in 2014 has *significantly* less shiny than it did in 2004 (and as Apple also makes the hardware, they toned *that* down too). This is also why your standard Linux distro no longer comes with spinny cube desktops and wobbly windows as a default.

I would definitely not call the Windows 8.x window theme "pre-2009". It's still got all the benefits of hardware acceleration and DX11. It's just less showy about it. It also happens to fall in line with all the other major OS's out there. I am glad they didn't go as crazy as Gnome 3 though. Oy veh that theme makes my eyes bleed, seriously.

 

Is it just me, or do gaudy, showy designs tend to age worse? (remember the glossy fad from a few years back) I turn off the animations on every device I own (I feel they don't add anything) and have always liked the matte style in the new UI, though I still don't understand how hard it would've been to leave the old code in as well...

And just for the sake of mentioning it - while I prefer 8.1 to 7, I still find modern apps to be an annoyance more than anything else. (The one major exception is the Netflix app - that seems to be quite light on system resources, and runs rather smoothly on my E350 machine.) My optimal config here would be the 8.1 desktop + 8.1 start screen + desktop app defaults + modernmix functionality built in + better DPI scaling on the desktop. And it sounds like they just might do that. (Only took them a few years to figure out the obvious...)

 

Although the funny thing, in Win Vista and 7 you could TURN OFF Aero. Imagine that. Choice of either. Brilliant!

 

You could. In 2006-2009 though, there were still plenty of older in-service PCs that couldn't run Aero, or couldn't run it well. By 2012 that became much less of an issue.

Just to clarify, the Aero engine for 3D accelerated desktop is still there. They simply changed the Aero theme. Maybe MS didn't want the weight of supporting another theme. They yanked a significant amount of "packed in" wallpapers and stuff in Win8, compared to Win7.

 

That's only partially correct. They did indeed remove the code that would allow for Window border transparency and such. Otherwise it would have been trivial to install a theme that brings the "Aero Glass" style back. However, when Stardock tried to do just that with the new version of WindowBlinds, they found that it took them months of work to make this possible. So, no, Microsoft did not just change the theme. They deliberately, and frivolously, eliminated significant amounts of code in order to make it as hard as possible to bring the old theme back. Which is exactly the reason why people are upset: Nobody would have cared much if they had just changed the theme, and I think everybody agrees that it was absolutely their prerogative to do so. However, ripping functionality out of Windows apparently out of pure spite is another matter entirely.

 

Actually Aero, with transparency borders, is less shiny (or contrast oriented) than Windows 8.x. This is my main point in that the borders do not draw my eyes from the main content.

 

You're clearly seeing it different than I do.

 

In W8 I add:

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\Desktop\WindowMetrics]
"PaddedBorderWidth"="0"

Then I pick a light gray window color. I think it's quite unobtrusive.

 

With the spirited debates, the haters and the people who evaluate an entire OS based on a certain visual effect, I find the whole discussion to be mostly a big YAWN. (Sorry zealous partisans, you just haven't moved my needle of interest.)

What I want to say is just a regurgitation of what others have said - probably some of it from other forums I've read. It goes like this:

1) If we're all clear that - absent Aero and a few other - in my view - minor changes, Windows 8.1 + any of 12 excellent, free or cheap, Windows 7 style desktop and Start menu emulators, I think the lion's share of the intense arguments against W8.1 lose most of their credibility. IMO, W8.1 + W7 desktop emulators is pretty much the same UI as W7 but with some very noticeable performance improvements - some of them due as much or more to Intel's innovations - including w8.1's excellent scaling improvements such that a Haswell-based new computer running W8.1 is, for a vast majority of users, a significant step up from W7 with - again, IMO, no meaningful compromises or changes for the worse - in anyone's opinion - and is unambiguously better, if not "revolutionary. For a long time - and to this day in the opinion of many - W8 is a total flop and a reason not to upgrade computers if your only choices are to run the "terrible" W8 or go through a fair amount of trouble just to downgrade to W7 (not much different than the difficulty Mr. Gates faced trying to install W8.1 from scratch on, apparently, an old favorite machine that he chose not to modernize from). Those are simply false choices, and they always have been, despite MS's initial attempt to make you believe there were not some easy mods to make it, as some have said and others derided, pretty much the same interface you loved from W7.


2) I agree that MS's strategy of initially offering W8 as a radically changed UI with no "choice" to do what was obviously very easy to achieve was bad strategy on their part and the basis of much of the early - and still present - tarnishing of the W8 brand, as others have commented. That doesn't make current-day W8.1 any worse (and it does make W8.1 + third party desktop UI mods better) or, in the end, anything but as good an interface as W7 with some material performance improvements that accrue equally to desktop mode users as "tile" users. I would wager that nearly everyone contributing to this thread knew at the time that it was easy to use W8/8.1 and thus removing the no-choice but to use the annoyingly "modernized" UI. What's worse, the media and those with too little knowledge or curiosity about how to use W8 without ever looking at the Modern UI are largely responsible for the terrible reputation MS earned with its initial roll out of "no-choice" W8 and even it's ho-hum promotion of the significant improvements in W8.1. So yeah, lousy strategy, marketing and PR by MS was inflamed (or without the -in prefix!) by being dissed by all the would-be cognoscenti's and always-wrong popular media, as well as some of the tech media. And I tend to agree that any version of W8.x will suffer much of the same fate, regardless how much less accurate the naysayers views may be of W8.1 through 8.infinity. So get wise, MS, and rechristen the next version with a name instead of a number (remember iPad 1, iPad 2, "new iPad, iPad 4 and iPad Air?). If it is a crowd-pleaser, they can always name the next rev. W8.2!

3) In any event, nothing about MS's bad marketing strategy has the slightest to do with the merits of the OS and it's UIs, though it may in part explain the slower uptake - though that seems to be refuted by a more careful analysis of the numbers. The possibly slower uptake is also explained by several specific market changes: 1) significantly slower growth in the purchases of PCs - a major reason for new OS adoption, and, 2) increased market share of OSC/Macs that has cut Windows users of new computers purchased in the past year pale by comparison to 4 years of W7, 3) the terrible - and terribly inaccurate - badmouthing of the OS throughout popular media and, likely social media, where negative comments seem to travel even faster than positive ones and, finally, the very view that I have tried to express here, that W8 with W7 emulation has little press promoting its lack of negatives, plenty promoting what they consider huge negatives, and the "dirty secret" that, if run in desktop mode, it doesn't appear to be much changed or improved (all of the improvements being deep in the code and not very apparent to - IMO - a large number of current W7 users. Thus the question, what is there to compel me to update my OS? is likely felt by the very users most likely to not see the negatives, but neither are they aware of any of the positives - the performance, flexibility and other below-the-skin improvements. This, in turn, IMO, is responsible for part of the decline in new PC purchases - what's the benefit of replacing hardware and/or OS when neither appear - at best - to offer significant improvements, battery life of laptops notwithstanding. Yes MS has suffered business due to its shooting itself in the foot with the initial roll out, but not close to entirely for that reason. Oh, and I almost forgot, W7 was such a dramatic improvement over Vista that just about anyone using Vista would upgrade, with or without a new computer, especially when W7 did - in opposite to W8 - enjoy excellent press, deservedly so. "The first Windows OS to stack up well compared to OSX," especially in terms of rock-solid stability, a huge change from its predecessor.

As I opened this post with, the whole subject has become a yawner - even my on post is boring me to tears! It seems to parallel the initial disastrous roll out of "Obamacare," by which was meant "the terrible web based signup mechanism. The Affordable Care Act - though meriting criticism for its own poor and even misleading PR - will long be derided by politicians for its "terrible web site," even though it's now widely acknowledged to work every bit as well as it ever could have. I can't believe that this could be true, but even the politicians are quicker to ditch the web site propaganda now that it's all but a dead issue than are the OS partisans still griping about the way W8 was rolled out even though essentially all of the problems - perceptual as well as actual - have been pretty well ironed out.

I'm going to take some well-earned rest, now that I find myself yawning a couple of times a minute . If it sounds like I'm calling the majority of fervent naysayers of W8 to be ill-informed, possessed of a personal agenda and/or not terribly bright or remotely tech savvy, it's because that's exactly what I'm saying.

Good night Chet; good night David. Good night John Boy. (If you're old enough to know these references, you're probably experienced enough to know that OS's come and go, get better, then worse, then better again, but mostly follow a cyclical pattern that makes new versions, good and bad, relative non-events.

 

Uh huh. That's why you had to jump right in for the win in the category of "most boring long-winded rambler in the history of the forum". Congratulations, you did it!

Awwhh, we're not entertaining enough for you? We're in tears.

You think so? Let's use one of the ever-popular car analogies: Let's say Ford decides that they're going to get rid of that antiquated steering wheel in their cars, and replace it with a touchscreen control. You know, it's awesome, everybody loves touchscreens (it's the future, didn't you know that?), plus, you people can check facebook and the weather while diddling around on that screen. Oh, and Ford's user metrics show that people hardly ever use that steering wheel anyway... So, now those never-do-wells start complaining that they want a steering wheel. Hey, what's their problem? They can just go to the Advanced Auto Parts at the corner, and get one there. In addition, there's these guys giving away steering wheels at the street corner for free. Sure, those things are a bit wobbly, and occasionally they fall off while driving, but they're free. So, I think we'll all agree that the lion's share of those arguments against Ford's new car loose all credibility. Right? Right.

Very funny. You really fell for that? There are no objective, meaningful improvements in performance of Windows 8 over Windows 7, period. Oh sure, the interface feels "snappier", but here's the secret: Why don't you turn off all the eye candy in Windows 7 (remember, you do have that choice), and watch how all of a sudden things feel just as "snappy". To get back to my beloved car analogy, all Ford did was add "speed stripes" to their paint job, and some people now go "ooh", and "ahh" about how much "faster" those cars are. Hilarious. Plus, now you're all of a sudden comparing that brand-new Haswell laptop to that old Core 2 Duo clunker. Not cool.

Seriously, however, I love to trot out that 2-year-old Samsung Series 9 Ultrabook I have. That's Ivy Bridge, by the way. Boots Windows 7 in less than ten seconds. Resumes from sleep by the time I have the lid fully open. Show me a Windows 8 laptop that is meaningfully faster on that count, and we'll talk.

"Revolutionary"? What have you been smoking?

Yep, we agree on this one. I will go as far as saying that without that single disastrous mistake, Windows 8 would be in a much, much better place now. Mistakes of that magnitude have consequences, and they cost a number of people at Microsoft their job. Pretty mild for a billion-dollar mistake...

Forget that one. It's a cheap cop-out if there ever was one.

Hmm, what happened to "revolutionary" all of a sudden?

Hey, we definitely see things eye to eye with regards to your post.

Ooh, now that's terribly mean, don't you think? First you're calling us not entertaining, and now stupid. This is terrible. Awful. What are we going to do with the rest of our lives now?

Wait, there's a ray of hope here: You said "the majority", so it's not all of us who are stupid and boring! Can I be not part of the majority? Pretty please?

I am old enough. I actually liked that show. And, yeah, there may be hope for Windows 9. Sleep tight.

 

Actually a better analogy would be replacing the traditional hardware center console controls with touchscreen controls. Which is happening. At least with premium and luxury cars as opposed to economy cars, hardware knobs and buttons evolved into GUIs with joysticks and trackpads (such as BMW's iDrive), and now the hot thing is touchscreen center consoles, like iOS in the car.

 

New Coke vs. Old Coke
Is an example of a company taking a wrong turn.

New Tablet OS vs. Old Desktop mouse driven OS
Is an example of a company taking a wrong turn.

If they hurry as Coke did, they might just salvage this thing. Otherwise it will be forever a case study about failure.

 

Ahh yes, the trouble with those analogies: You can tailor them to whatever point you are trying to sneak across. But, fair's fair, obviously I did the same thing, so in that sense your analogy is as good, or bad, as mine.

P.S.: I might add that BMW did catch a fair amount of flak on their iDrive, at least in the American auto press (not so much in Europe). I think they made some modifications to it at some point, but I haven't kept track of what happened. I ended up not getting that BMW, but not because of the iDrive. I happened to like it.

 

Hey, I'm not trying to "sneak" anything I'm totally open about what point I'm trying to make: user interfaces evolve over time with consumer expectations (hence LaunchPad, hence Start Screen, hence iDrive, hence iOS-in-the-car), even if some people prefer the older style (iDrive has its fair share of detractors, particularly on internet forums).

Microsoft is doing a better job of making the Win8.x UI flexible for multiple workflows. 8.1 is more flexible than 8.0, and the next version should be more flexible still. But had they not branched out to make Windows capable on touchscreen devices, convertible tablets, slates, etc, Microsoft would have risked pulling a Blackberry (being too stuck in their traditional-UI-only in order to evolve with an evolving market; Blackberry stuck with BB7 for far too long).

 

Again no one has blamed M$ for reaching to touch screens. Many of us were happy with PRE-RTM versions of windows 8. In fact if released as it was then with a desktop option this would all be entirely different discussions. IMHO Windows 8 could have easily have been a success and this is what most of us have been saying all along.

 

I wanted to point out the comparison is more accurate than you may know. Regarding New Coke, taste tests done over and over said that people actually preferred the taste of New Coke to either Coke or Pepsi. The problem with New Coke wasn't the taste, it was the ingrained attitude that Coke had to taste a certain way, whether it was perceived as good or bad compared to other colas. It was also a matter of southern pride (Coca Cola's HQ is in Atlanta), as southerners interpreted any change in "their product" to be an insult. Coke is a perfect southern product, it does not require changing!

As per your own comparison, maybe people's issues with Windows 8.x isn't the actual usability of the OS, but just ingrained notions that are unable to change.

 

I thought the same thing, lol. "It's a YAWN, but I'll just throw in my wall-o-text for good measure".

Not to mention you'd only be able to look at a single gauge at a time. Take your pick: speed, RPM, fuel, radio... but only one at a time

I'm plenty old for that too... I don't know why people equate change with always being better or advancement. I mean it would be a change to paint bright pink over a Van Gogh, but it doesn't mean it's better or even a good idea.

 

I really don't like that they took out a lot of options in the OS.

I guess I am one of the weirdos who actually loved Vista compared to XP and have gotten used to that style from 2006 that continued in Windows 7. But not only is it just a visual theme issue with Windows 8. They also disabled a lot of advanced user options, some of which I actually liked to change. Why? I don't know. When Windows 8 came out, it looked super dumbed down, copying iOS and Android, and was trying to be some cool thing to wow people instead of having actual substance. My feelings haven't changed a whole lot, but I am a little bummed that I paid for it, even at a reduced price.

 

like what?

Sent from my Lumia 1520 using Tapatalk

 

No I think you hit the nail on the head it wasn't users didn't like W8 but the features one can control and trying to be like iOS and Android and trying to force their windows apps store on users was the start of the the mistakes one right after the others. The biggest on was not listening to the testers and IT and calling them dumb was another. So it seems like M$ is making one mistake after another and not factoring that wait they might actually be right this isn't the O/S they wanted but instead it was what M$ wanted. They can create many W8 O/S but no one will buy it is a poor management skills marketing.

 

Despite my personal feelings for Win H8 (see what i did there? I am so clever), the discussion surrounding it has provided me almost as much entertainment as gaming has over the past year. So MS, thank you for that.

Since every other release of windows is the good one, I have high hopes for Win 9. My own guess is that while they will continue down the metro path, the Professional version of win 9 will return to the classic layout UI or at least have the option. Someone at microsoft will realize that this option will be necessary to transition the corporate world off of Win 7, right?

 

i don't suspect i'll get an answer to my question. it's apparently become acceptable to make unsubstantiated claims in this "debate."

yea, what's that? i wouldn't hold your breath considereing there's literally no workflow difference between my W7 machine with start menu and my W8 machine with start screen. i do have to agree with you about how entertaining this all has been though. i don't even think you need to go as far as thanking MS. there's been plenty of unintentional comedy posted by a few of our fellow members.

Sent from my Lumia 1520 using Tapatalk

 

just my own hypothesis. I wouldn't be surprised if they did or didn't. At this point, all Win h8 does is entertain me. I don't like it, so I won't use it. Other people do like it, and they will use it. MS will either listen to the most vocal complainers, or they won't. Some people will judge it to be a commercial success, others will judge it an utter failure.

Will I sign off on any more win 8 machine purchases for the employees I supervise? No way. Have I gotten win 8 to work the way it needs to for the ones who have win 8? Yup. Do I personally think MS made a colossal mistake by not offering an option? Yes. Does my opinion matter in the slightest? Nope.

 

It's almost as if BMW iDrive and similar systems had separate screens for climate control, car audio, adjustable suspension, etc instead of doing it the traditional all-the-controls-on-one-panel approach!

 

The abruptness.

I was considering all of the alcoholic mixers, cooking recipes and general refreshment needs etc. that Coke goes with. That when you go somewhere and order a Coke you're saying you want a Caramel flavored/colored soda - not Caramel/Clear colored soda or Lime/Caramel soda (7-Up tried that, weird). If they don't sell Coke you'll take a Pepsi in its absence, oh well ok, reminds you why you like Coke. It's a brand, it has certain qualities and characteristics that we've come to expect - it appeals to us.

An OS has to evolve and we accept that. But the change was abrupt and not well coordinated.

They've quickly started shaking up management and that is a good start. I have a sense that things will improve, hopefully enough for the better.

 

Some of the advanced power options.

 

I was just thinking though, that Microsoft are stuck with Win 8 Metro to some extent because of the whole "Windows Store" thing and apps for the Metro UI. People invest in what few usable apps are there for the "Modern UI" and next OS revision, they can't use them any more? They will tick off a lot of customers that way too.

 

Not really; people will be able to run Metro apps in a window on the desktop, so they could still use them. Having said that, I do think that chances of Microsoft dumping that whole ModernUI altogether are zero to none. That would be fine with me; they can, and indeed should, continue to offer and improve that interface. All I wanted is never, ever, having to look at it if I don't want to. Seeing how they have even polluted the desktop with this crap I don't even have any hope that this more modest wish will come true...

 

Screew thatt. Why microsoft! Why?! Why did you have to change to such an ugly, block-like gui thats meant for touch screens! I will not accept that touch screen laptops are the future. Win 7 ftw!

 

A bit off topic, but as a division or entity M$ seems to not disclose what kind of money their store is generating. I wonder if this has something to do with their stubbornness. Even at a minimal amount this may be keeping them afloat while Windows 8 sales slump and the PC market is being driven to oblivion. Not saying Windows 8 is causing the slump just in no way helping it to recover at all.

 

Keeping them afloat? No. But I would like to see the numbers. It would be very interesting. That is one more thing about Windows 8 and Metro: pushing Metro and their app store as a revenue stream.