Win 8 Touchscreen vs. Win 7

My next laptop has both a standard lcd as well as touchscreen option.

There have been a lot of discussions regarding the merits of Win 8 compared to Win 7. If mouse and keyboard are the only input devices Win 8 fails terribly. However, there are many laptops coming with high-resolution touchscreen displays now. Do any of you own one? How is Win 8 when you have a touch interface, compared to Win 7 with only mouse? I briefly tried using a couple such machines a few days ago, and really found the touch interface intuitive. But the Win 8 still has that split-personality with desktop vs. Metro which concerns me about productivity.

 

My Elitebook 2760p while not recent has a touch screen, it is running Windows 8 and my take is:

When in laptop mode, I do not use the touch screen ever, mouse and keyboard and that's that.
When in Tablet mode, I mostly use the Wacom stylus with a bit of touch.

Moral of the story, if you don't like how windows 8 works with a mouse and kb, getting a touch enabled traditional laptop will not change your world. Get used to windows 8 with a mouse and kb (seriously, it's not great, but it's not bad either in my opinion) because touch on it will not change your world. If it is a convertible, then yeah obviously, touch will come in very handy.

At worse, get something like startisback to get the start menu back if you can't stand Windows 8 or get Windows 7. windows 8 hasn't really affected my productivity, but I don't use that many programs at once and I have the most important ones pinned to my taskbar. There have been a few cases where I felt windows 7 would be slightly more productive, but I never felt like I was fighting the OS to get things done. Note that MS seriously screwed the tutorial on Windows 8 and as a result, the adaptation period wasn't exactly smooth.

 

My Vaio Duo 11 has a 1080p 11.6" touchscreen. It's been my primary machine for both work and play since October 2012. I find touch input and Metro apps more pleasant than the traditional desktop interface when using the laptop for fun--browsing forums, checking facebook, surfing youtube, watching Netflix, that sort of stuff. I tend to use the desktop interface almost exclusively when I'm doing work, using the keyboard and the trackpoint. One notable exception is when work involves a lot of reading (whether it be a webpage or a PDF), I tend to use touch because I'm walking around and reading off it like your typical iPad-like slate. I find manipulating PDFs with a touch-friendly PDF viewer like SumatraPDF (my favorite) is more pleasant and natural than spinning a mouse's scroll wheel for two hours.

All in all, I like the dual personality of Windows 8, and if you're getting a Windows 8 machine, you're much better off getting one with a touchscreen.

 

I plan to get a gaming laptop with Windows 8, and without a touch screen. I have a tablet with touch screen for when I want that. The laptop will be for games and productivity. You mention that Windows 8 with a mouse is bad. I think people need to get used to it since it is different. Take a look at this How to Use the Mouse to Get Around in Windows 8

Also in a month Windows 8.1 will be out and will be free for Windows 8 computers. It puts the start button back in, and lets you boot straight to the desktop. And as mentioned, there are a ton of programs out now to make Windows 8 look and act more like Windows 7, or whatever you want.

It is a computer, customize it for you.

 

Just to be clear: Yes, it does have a Start Button, but that button does nothing useful. What people have been asking for is the Start Menu, which Microsoft adamantly refuses to bring back. Other than that, I see no useful purpose of touch screens on laptop or desktop computers. As far as I am concerned, Windows 8 is the first Microsoft OS product in my roughly 30 years of computing that I will not use, ever (and, yes, that included Vista, which wasn't all that bad given decent hardware, btw). I'll see what Windows 9 will bring, but I won't hold my breath. If things do not fundamentally turn around by the time that comes out, then that's going to be the end of the line for me. It's been nice while it lasted, but I don't have to use Microsoft products. P.S.: Oh, and if that piece of crap called IE 10 was compatible with this web forum, I could have separated what I wrote here into several paragraphs for better readability. That's more progress from Microsoft for you...

 

Nothing wrong with that if a company doesn't offer what you like. Are you going OSX or going Linux?

 

Actually with OSX it is a complete package of UI and OS. With Linux there is the core (various compilations and packages) and then the UI. Be it KDE, Gnome or one of the many new variants. While OSX offers the advantage of a one stop shop various Linux distro's offer much more customizability and subsequent complexity.

OSX offers the easiest route for the casual user right now looking for a M$ alternative. Now that there may be users out there looking for M$ alternatives maybe in the not to distant future there will be a Linux distro' that brings OSX simplicity overall to a Linux package.

Either way for most users looking to switch we will need to see what is available at that time frame. While I am right now looking at Linux this is in not a sure thing. Just as in only a year ago I would have never have thought of leaving the M$ camp there is no way to know where we will be in a year from now let alone at the time frame of Windows 9 launch. On that note too I doubt I would be willing to beta test Windows 9 either after the last fiasco................

 

Not sure yet; as TANWare says, we'll have to see what things look like when the time comes. I have used Linux exclusively for a number of years in the past, but I did sink inordinate amounts of time into customizing my system. By now I have neither the time nor the inclination to do that, so I would really like a distro that pretty much does what I want out of the box. Certainly OS X will be an option as well, and in two or three years I would expect that to have undergone a major overhaul, too.

Looks like we see things pretty much eye-to-eye here.

 

So put the start menu back in?

How to get the Start menu back in Windows 8 | Windows 8 - CNET Reviews

Every OS I have ever used I have had to customize. Some people loved Aero, some hated it. Some people like the touch screens, others don't. So a perfect OS out of the box for you, won't be perfect for everyone. We can't even agree on which car design is perfect for everyone.

Personally I am OK as long as I am not forced to use a touch screen. And as pointed out, I am not. I can create icons or tiles for my favorite programs. And once I get in my program I won't even know which OS I am running.

I was mostly trying to answers the OPs questions. That a mouse in Win 8 is doable, that you can get to the desktop, that they are both productive, etc. Hopefully I have helped.

 

I'll state again that I do not care about the start button, but that is just me. The loss of Aero Glass (Broken DWM) and no desktop gadgets are deal breakers for me. There are other issues as well but they can be resolved it is just that third party apps should not be required to fix the UI. It should be out of the box usable and customizable enough.

And do not make excuses for M$. They easily could have made a switch to do a simple change of modes between touch and desktop mode to satisfy enough people to make the OS a killer in the sales area. With proper programing all of this could have been easily avoided for all but a very small percentage of users. I just have to laugh at those saying you can't satisfy everyone as you can not but in this case over 99% of future Windows owners could have been M$ just chose not too and in the process has alienated a huge portion of its prior loyal consumer base.

 

Ok, here is Aero glass, (Which I never liked). Aero Glass with Blur on Windows 8 - Windows Phone Hacker

And here are your Windows 7 gadgets Add Windows 7 Desktop Gadgets to Windows 8 - PC Advisor

Please note that they removed gadgets because of security concerns. But they are no more risky than they were under Windows 7.

PS - Please note my point is every OS needs to be customized to the user. Yes, we can all say MS should have done it differently. I think they should have as well. I can guess even they think they should have done it differently.

 

This is (a) not generally available, (b) not free, (c) has all sorts of compatibility issues. Microsoft did a pretty thorough job of ripping out the Aero code in the last minute. I think Stardock's WindowBlinds now works on Windows 8, too, by now, but it took them quite a while to get it working. Of course, just like anything from Stardock, it's buggy, too. Oh, and by the way, if you never liked Aero Glass, it was trivial to turn it off. The difference with Windows 8 is, you can't turn it on. You have to buy software to do so. Not the same thing at all. Specifically, having to buy exotic pieces of third-party software (which, incidentally, are of questionable quality and will negatively impact the overall stability of your OS and/or the applications running on it) is entirely different from customizing an existing OS by adjusting a number of settings.

 

Gotta love those that throw links to buggy stuff that is unsupported. Good thing they do not do this for a living.................

 

I am just trying to help. But I don't think help is wanted here...

 

No one is forcing people to buy Windows 8. You have several options:

1. Stick with Windows 7. Several manufacturers offer Windows 7 downgrades especially on their business class while others like Sager/Clevo allow you to buy systems without OS's.

2. Switch to a different OS. There's OSX, a million flavours of Linux, a hundred flavours of BSD etc. Pick your poison. There'll be Aero glass replacements and gadgets galore on the linux side of the fence.

3. Put up with windows 8. Try and fix what you can with 8 and move on.

Luckily, there's choice in this space. No one is cramming Windows 8 down anyone elses throat. Stop with all the whining and whining and whining. Even if Microsoft released Windows 8 without metro, with the Start menu, gadgets, Aero glass and whatever else you fancy, I suspect you people would still find something to complain about.

 

Hi, not just you, there are several people who have not read all the threads and replay to the same. The problem is the hacked answers are all anyone has until M$ fixes this, if they ever do. Don't feel bad as M$ put you in this place, you have not. but yes we do want help for official properly working fixes.

Prelist; Yes consumers for budget machines without touch are forced into Windows 8 on many machine. Give consumer option of Windows 7 for no additional cost or loss of benefit on all machines and we will all shut up!

1.) Answered in the prelist.

2.) Agreed if there were not the M$ tax on purchasing most systems. If M$ were to offer a refund for non activated Windows 8 that would be a plus.

3.) Some can live with this but it is a shame to have to fix anything new out of the box. Edit here; as not everyone is capable of these changes. There are mom and pops etc. that barely know how to move and operate a mouse as it is.

Post list; No matter what choice in the list there is a cost in either financial or work. There should be no, or little, additional cost out of the box just for common usability of a device. Yes there will always be those that complain but there would be a substantial reduction in those numbers of people along with faster market saturation etc...............

 

You must be kidding? Several options where are they?

Not all do this and eventually some won't have that options if they still want to do business with M$. Not everyone can go out a buy a business class laptop.

Yeah right, switched and how would you get a PC specific software to work straight out install on OsX - you don't you have to spend more if they even have it for OsX to work and then it has different interface and learning curve. Linux don't me started...they are not one mind or one O/S which is a disaster in itself and will never be able to compete on the level of M$ O/S or even ak.... OsX. I rather have my tweaks from the O/S itself and not have to worry about security breaches from 3rd party software remember Sony Rootkits.....

Unfortunately that easier said then done. Fix what we can more like M$ didn't listen to what it's core users wanted and tried to be Apple iPad of which it isn't and that isn't what the M$ community wanted. Surface is a dead in the water duck already they need to get over it and move on.....

Really cramming - you go to electronics department store and say you want W7 on the W8 machine and they will laugh at you. The complaints come from lack of consumer know how and not listening. Leave Aero alone and give them desktop or metro install and trust me W8 would blow Apple out of the water but instead they torpedo themselves ramming it down user throats. And calling tester and users ignorant doesn't sell listening and letting users customize their setup mean your listening.

 

You guys want choice? Ok. BUY OLDER HARDWARE that has what you want. Not really good with analogies, but look at it like this. I can't buy a car with an older component. If I buy a 2013 car, I can only upgrade the components (sat nav, bluetooth etc) from the manufacturer. No one will offer me downgrades. But if there's anything I want, I can go to any of the 3rd party customization shops and get them to install it for me. I can't force Toyota or GM to install a 2002 model dashboard, ABS, tiptronics etc into a 2013 model.
You want the start menu, fine. There are plenty of places where you can buy original Windows 7 and Vista copies. Use them. For those buying $400 laptops and want the start menu, you can do what you do to get all other software that doesn't come with your laptop, install it. That's the essence of modular software.

 

1.) That is the key, Buy Windows 7. So you not only essentially pay M$ twice for the OS you have a limited time to do this. Remember Windows 7 has a planed end of sale date!

2.) Older hardware, slower outdated hardware and if you can even find what you want.

3.) go to a shop to have it customized, so your answer to all common users woes is to spend more and maybe still not have what you want. What if something goes wrong, go back to the shop to spend more again?

4.) Car analogy is way off, I doubt a car OEM would sell a vehicle where basic needs like viewing a speedometer would be hard if not impossible for the common driver. Wait I digress, there was a vehicle with issues called the Edsel.................

 

Microsoft doesn't have to cater to everyone. They are preparing for the future. How long do you expect the traditional desktop to hold sway over everyday computing? Sales of touchscreen devices are already eclipsing non-touch. Happened in the phone market and is happening in the computing world. The start menu isn't going to remain forever and its better Microsoft removes it now and starts fine-tuning the 'start menu-less' experience, than waiting until it is too late. We can argue about their timing of its removal until we are blue in the face but it won't change anything or bring it back. So either get on with it or forever curse the day 'metro' was born (I have a very good guess on what you'll do).

 

If that future is to be judged by how Surface was designed and presented, I'm scared...

 

Who mentioned Surface??? We were talking about 'Metro', the user interface. Its a UI unification across all their devices - Windows, Windows Phone, Xbox - from now on. Once you are familiar with any one of the devices, you can seamlessly switch to another MS device and there will be no difference. This will take time to be totally unified. I don't see why you are bringing up Surface. Yes, its a Microsoft product that uses Microsoft's UI - Metro- same as all their other devices. Singling out Surface serves no purpose to our original discourse.
EDIT: Spelling

 

Well, while you haven't mentioned it by name, you did write earlier in this thread:

Do you get my point now? M$ has proven itself to be utterly incompetent when it comes to designing such devices...and had pretty darn high hopes about it.

Windows Phone? Might be an interesting concept, but is not doing anywhere near as well for them to be happy about it.

So, their concept of unification is going nowhere fast, all in all, and they would do a huge favour to their customer base to either completely dump it, or re-design it from scratch.

 

Yes M$ needs to cater to the consumer market, which they are not, they are trying to direct it! Also Metro, or modern, UI is already known to be a failure in the productivity field. This is the biggest problem, most users placing 500-1,000 or even better on a system also want a productivity machine. There are to many consumption device options well below those price points.

Touchy on the surface issue but it still remains. It shows where Windows RT and then even Windows as a tablet at the higher price point stands. M$ wanted not so much to be a hardware provider but to show OEM's how well these new devices could sell using the new UI. What a backfire that was in the end.

The unification of production machines to X-Box rings of HD-DVD for X-Box as well. It eventually just got dropped in favor of Blue-Ray. Touch for consumption can work but for production it can be too much of a hindrance. Someday maybe there will be software, not the UI, that really uses and is better with touch. You just have to remember that M$ is infamous for making marketing missteps.

Despite themselves M$ continues to make money. This time however they are playing with their core consumers and market. In the end it could be devastating for them unless they change paths. Signs are showing with Sinofsky and now Ballmer being the latest victims. Many here have seen this coming but in the it is up to them as to where the future lies for the company. The stockholders may be holding off for now but unless good news starts coming in the company may be starting to get itself into trouble.

My point mainly being this is all on topic. This is the reason for the original post itself. If Win8 were a comparable upgrade to win7 as win7 was to Vista this post would not even exist!

 

So MS should totally give up on the touchscreen market? And in 2 years time, where do you see them? Metro is still in its infancy and will only get better if the Windows Phone precedent is anything to go by. Windows 8.1 is a step in the right direction and already has more positive reception. There are 2 ways to survive in this rapidly evolving market:
1. Be the 1st to the market with something truly groundbreaking and innovative that's easy to use and refined. E.g iphone, ipad
2. React quickly to the 1st point and get your foot in the door. E.g Android

I don't see how Metro stops anyone from doing what they already do without it. Win key + P H O T, and photoshop is listed. Scroll down to it and press Enter. The taskbar remains. Switching between apps is not different.
Using the smartphone world as a direct comparison ( although there are some differences) shows where everything is going to end up. Touchscreens are the next step in UI interaction and in the future, touchless - think holograms - will be the de facto input mechanism. Will you still want your start screen then? I'm moving ahead of myself.

Microsoft operates a tick-tock strategy, similar to Intel. A tick is a very comprehensive overhaul while a tock is a refinement of that. And the cycle continues.
Windows NT family
Win 2000 - tick
Win XP - tock
Win Vista - tick
Win 7 - tock
Win 8 - tick
Looking at that, you can see that all the 'tocks' have been very well received especially in comparison to their 'ticks'. Vista's problem was the new model for the drivers which required them to be rewritten from scratch and also, bad marketing with regards to the Windows Vista compatible stickers which were allowed on systems which where barely able to run Vista optimally. Luckily by the time 7 came out, drivers were more commonly available and the system requirements were reduced.
Honest question, would you be totally satisfied with Windows 7, as is, for the next 5 years, touch or no touch?

 

I don't believe that anyone was proposing that course of action in this particular thread...

Honest answer: yes.

 

Of course not. They don't have to cater to anyone. However, if they want to sell their wares, then they'd better cater to whoever their target market is. Then the question becomes, what is that target market, and what is the busniness proposition for it?

They don't know the future. They are preparing for what they think the future might be. They may be wrong.

Wrong question. Nobody cares who holds sway over what. The question is: How important will that desktop market be in the future? There is no doubt that it will not go away anytime soon but, yes, its relative important will decline as unsophisticated users, who never needed all of the power the desktop environment offers, will gravitate towards more convenient options for themselves. However, be aware, and beware, of the phenomenon of linked markets...

And? I'm pretty sure that sales of ballpoint pens are eclipsing sales of touchscreen devices as well. So what? Lesson: Try to understand what it is you are trying to say, and in what way it may be used to construct a cogent argument.

Why is that better? Better for what purpose? Do you understand what the "Start Menu" really stands for? I'll give you a hint: It has to do with functionality.

Interesting. Are you now saying that that sorry, crippled excuse for a user interface that you call Metro is "forever"? If so, how do you figure that?

 

I'm typing this on my phone so I can't properly format my response with respect to quotes but to ajkula66, thanks, I now understand where you stand.
Pirx:
1. My point exactly. You don't have to buy their product if it does not suit your needs. That is the point I have been repeatedly stating. If their marketshare craters tomorrow, fine on them. But you don't have to buy it. Apple doesn't cater to everyone and it works for them.
Might not work for others.
2. They are preparing for the future of their product.
3. Relative importance to what? In the mobile arena we can see the proliferation of BYOD in the enterprise. Traditional heavyweights in this space have all declined and you have the so called 'consumer' devices being used in the enterprise. Android and ios never started out with every feature required for enterprise especially compared to os's like Blackberry which were rock solid and secure. Where did that leave them? Fact of the matter is that the battle for the consumer space proliferates to the enterprise in today's world.
4. Ballpoint pens? I had to really laugh about that. We are talking about user interface paradigms and mechanisms and you brought up ballpoint pens. Well, toilet paper outsell all electronics combined. What point have I made with that statement? None. Same as you.
5. Microsoft has already gone down the route of using their existing UI with touchscreens. Windows mobile 6, Windows XP Tablet edition all had start menus and were all failures. Maybe they should try a different tact, don't you think?
6. "Either get on with it or forever curse the day metro was born". Let me break down what it means. You can get on with it or you can forever curse the day Metro was born. Nothing about Metro being forever. Tempted to say something snarky but I'll pass.

 

MICROSOFT disabled their logo. Start button and loading logo were the one. They are idiots. Guy who jmps from a bridge because of love is less idiot. He is one while MS contains a lot people.
Windows 8 is crap.
Now done. Can somebody tell me how good Windows 7 isfor touchscreens?

 

That's really dependent upon how one uses the touchscreen, and what their needs are...

I own several touch-enabled laptops and convertibles running W7. Smooth as silk IMO, but do bear in mind that I positively hate leaving smudges on the screen and only use stylus...and no, I don't game on my laptops either.

 

Decent with a stylus; godawful with a finger. Windows 8 is the first version of Windows that even attempts to be finger-friendly.

 

Very good! At least you got that one.

Now if you can re-arrange those random examples into a logical train of thought, we'll have something to talk about. You wouldn't want me to think that you consider "A is a failure, B is a failure, therefore Microsoft should start selling pink balloons, since that's different" a good example of constructing a logical argument, or do you?

That's it? A binary set of random choices? Really?

I'm relieved.

 

Pirx, are you a lawyer? I don't see how you can take what I post, twist it and not even address what is referenced or make a point. You seem to have something wrong. How are Windows mobile 6 and Windows XP Tablet edition 'random' examples when we are talking about Windows 8? That's a truly baffling statement. Look at the train of thought here:
1. Microsoft has tried using their existing UI on touchscreen devices and it failed. People complained about usability issues,it wasn't designed for touch and that it was a square peg in a round hole.
2. Apple came and showed the world you can have a great experience on a touchscreen device by designing your UI around touch 1st and foremost. They've even started introducing elements from ios into OSX and it is widely expected that its only a matter of time before they follow that up with touchscreen hardware.
3. Microsoft went back to scratch and designed a UI designed for touch, noting that their previous efforts of using their existing non-touch UI on touchscreens utterly failed.
How is that not related?
Maybe their effort isn't good enough for most people and I can understand that and for those people who want the existing UI to remain are also welcome to want that, but to imply that MS shouldn't have tried something different is asinine.
You're trolling me aren't you?

 

I don't feel sorry for the mess Microsoft has gotten themselves into and it's a reason why there's a big shakeup going on in Redmond. They could have avoided this entire mess if they would have simply reduced all their Windows offerings down to two simple choices:

1) Windows 8 Business (traditional desktop based OS)
2) Windows 8 Home (the current split personality desktop)

You keep your loyal business customers and try and go after the tablet oriented consumers. It should have been that simple.

 

God, no!

No. The issue is the particular solution that Microsoft has implemented. Any way you look at it, their GUI sucks, and that is true even after acknowledging that integrating better touch support for certain devices is probably not a bad thing. Crippling traditional user interfaces in the process, however, is plain idiocy.

 

Okay. Good for you if you feel that way. So what next? Throwing the baby out with the bath water isn't very wise now, is it? Windows 8 has plenty improvements both big and small even in the gui(file transfer speed graph for one). So do you abandon all that? Security has improved, system requirements are lower, battery life is better, all relative to Win 7,BF4 will run better on Win 8 due to directx 11.2 etc. For me the metro negative (debatable, YMMV) is too small to bother myself about compared to all the positives. Rather than focusing on the 1 negative ( see above), I prefer to look foremost at the positives. Maybe its just me, and I thought I was a pessimist.

 

My sister has VAIO 14" with touchscreen and I am thinking very much to install Windows 7. She hates Window 8 too even after 2 monthes of using. Especially lags like each time she reboots she needs to connect laptop to wireless network and checkbox for auto connecting doesn't work. Also she had to install Desktop Skype because Metro one didn't see camera etc.

ALl she needs from touch is possibility to adjust windows size, and click with finger some icons when she is too lazy to do it with mouse (screen has protective film which she didn't take off). So this is my main concern.

 

Very odd; Windows 8 runs smoother and faster than Windows 7 on all of my hardware. Touch is useful when I'm editing pdfs. Metro can be ignored if you don't like it. As a former Mac user for 15 years, I switched to Windows after Lion was released; so the prevailing view that OS X is better than Windows 8 isn't held by all.

 

That wifi problem is related to the wifi hardware, not Windows 8. Some MacBooks with the same wifi hardware have had the exact same issue. Switching the OS on her Vaio will not solve the problem.

 

Windows 8 did this for me too. On Windows 7 I don't have such problem. So it could be something in the OS after all.

 

Maybe it was indeed hardware problem on Macbook. But here It can't connect just because setting of that checkbox for some reason is ignored.
ANyway, now I can assure you that in this Sony E14 it was OS problem.

 

Why in the world would you ask that? There is not a single improvement in Windows 8 that has anything whatsoever to do with the Metro stuff*. There is no reason to abandon any of it; we could entirely remove every last trace of Metro in Windows 8 and still have all of the improvements that are in there (minor as they are in my opinion, but that is not the point here).

*As a matter of fact, conversely, every single piece of Metro in Windows 8 has had a negative impact on the usability of the OS on standard computing hardware.

 

That gives no more info then nothing said faster then Windows7 how did you test that? Editing pdf well that depends what and how does the pdf look that your editing? Metro ignored really how? Cause you can't get a Desktop setup like W7 even if you wanted one. Actually in this instance OsX is akin to a Desktop W7 so that would make it more user friendly that is the problem with Metro it isn't user friendly and with all those Charms bar how was one suppose to know that even existed til W8???

 

While no expert on Windows 8 I know there are issues connecting to some phone hot spots from droid. This has something to do with system handling dynamic N networking. The fix I saw was to only connect as b/g. This could be an issue with some routers as well. Again don't shoot me here but this is what I have seen on various Droid sites.

Again, as many have stated, I would love Windows 8 but let us natively deselect any hints of metro, natively use DWM again if we want, Natively use Gadgets if we want, Use a true Windows 7 start button if we want etc..

Not that they should abandon touch. Even during the beta etc. no one said abandon it. Give us the options we need to make it just like windows 7 UI for desktop users all the way to options to make it just a metro system if so desired! The biggest problem, besides dropped items, for M$ is they are forcing the new UI on the users. Well Users in general are not just giving into this new UI and are looking for options to avoid it. In time other M$ options may not be the way to do this (read that as end of Win7 sales) and this is what worries me. That it will no longer be a Win8 vs. Win7 but either Win8 vs. another alternative or even worse for M$ and eventually just that other alternative...............

 

Personally, I don't like the Windows 7 look. Give me the Windows XP look and feel. I am still running XP on several of my computers.

I think everyone has a different opinion, and I don't see anyone changing thiers.

DWM? Desktop Window Manager is always on (Windows)

 

The start menu that people are clamoring for its return faced heavy criticism at its introduction too. And I'm not surprised one bit that metro faces the same. People will always be more comfortable with what they are familiar with and change is not always welcome. The reason MS put no option for the start menu in Win 8 is because of this, otherwise everyone would just ignore metro. Well its here to stay, hate it or love it.

 

People tend to be more comfortable when it makes them more productive and are not resistant to change when they know the new product is better than the old.

Even MS knows they blew their Windows 8 UI design. When users refuse to use what they thought we would like should be a message to them but obviously they're not learning from their mistakes.

Who knows the future? At the rate MS is going and ALL the back steps they have made there's no telling what Windows 9 will look like. Hopefully they can offer 2 products Windows 9 Business (traditional desktop) and Windows 9 Home (whatever flavor UI they want to try next). All that's going to happen is drive more customers to competing products like Android and iOS Tablets, maybe Linux or OS X.

 

[Sigh...] Now we're down to the level of dragging out that rotting corpse of the "change is hard" canard again...

So, the Start Menu faced "heavy criticism" at its introduction? Really? Are you aware of the fact that in those days, just about no serious user was putting up with the primitive GUI that Microsoft was supplying with Windows 3.x? That this was the heyday of alternative GUIs, such as Norton Desktop, PCTools Desktop, etc., etc. Funny, by the way, how this reminds us of the situation now, where all those Start Menu replacements are seeing a renaissance...

Apart from that, no, there are no similarities between the reception of the Win8 GUI, and the reception of the Windows 95 GUI. None at all. This situation isn't even remotely the same. Just drop this nonsense.

Utter BS. This discussion is not about change per se at all. People in general, and most of us Win8 critics have always embraced change, when it was change for the better. This is not the case for the Windows 8 GUI, hence the heavy criticism. I have probably used more operating systems and user interfaces in my professional career than you have ever heard of. In the Win 3.x days, I was using an alternative GUI because the one Microsoft supplied was god-awful. I switched to and used OS/2 for a while, then went to Linux exclusively, and experimented with a number of user interfaces (graphical and command-line) until I settled to what I considered the optimal one for my work. You are in no position to tell me about adjusting to change; I have probably forgotten more about user interface design than you ever knew. As a general rule, most of the heavy critics of Win8 fall in the class of highly sophisticated users, with complex usage scenarios and correspondingly high demands on their computing environment. These are not the kind of people that are "afraid of change". I'll say this very clearly: Anybody suggesting that these kinds of users criticize Windows 8 because they are "afraid of change", or "unable to adapt" is just making a fool of himself.

Well, let's observe first that there is no factual basis (as in, an official statement of that sort coming out of Microsoft) for the above statement, so this is pure speculation. Nevertheless, it's a most revealing statement at that: Since it is assumed that "everyone would just ignore metro", what is really being said here is that there is no value in metro, period. I'll say first that even I would not go that far. It is clear that there is a certain group of users, typically characterized by minimal requirements on their computing environment, that genuinely seem to like Metro. Second, I'll observe that it would stand to reason that while, initially, users may indeed avoid Metro, if there is genuine value in this environment, people would eventually embrace it. If this does not happen, then you have proof positive that the environment is worthless. It's as simple as that.

 

Let's avoid beating a dead horse even more in another thread if possible please. I realize that the topic is about Windows 8 vs 7 and touchscreens, but keep on the topic of using either on a laptop with or without a touchscreen rather than debating on which direction MS is heading and turning this into another Windows 8 vs Windows 7 flamewar. I see the thread heading that way slowly, but surely.

 

The horse has been dead for a few pages...