Windows 8 must be universally hated, right?

Nope.

Just how much do people hate Windows 8? | ZDNet

 

After a while of hating, i got used to mine just fine.
Hate the UI decisions, but the system is usable and overall an improvement on Win7.

 

I don't care about what others think, I don't like UI and hate the MBR protection scam from a RedHat developer literally giving a head to Bill Gates.

My problem with XP at first was the shinny UI that wasn't needed, they doubled down on the same route with 7 and Vista, but it was still building on the fundamentals of Windows 98, now 8 UI is so different and it has that "App store" Google feel to it that I hate.

I am going to stick with 7, even when Windows 10 is going to be out, I kept my XP install until 7 was out, I can do it again now as long as my software is still compatible and not obsolete. They will need to literally make Autodesk Inventor and my steam client incompatible with Windows 7 for me to switch.

I almost always deactivate the shiny in both XP and 7, until i upgraded my RAM and could afford more worthless eye candy, but never used any of the other features like the media center and other craps.

 

No, only half of the people buying the upgrade to Windows 8 Pro from Amazon hated it. Everything is fine. Carry on, and stay the course.

 

"Windows 8: it sucks less than Vista!"

 

So have you seen any April 1 photoshopped pics of Windows Blue yet? You know, with a Start menu and Aero?

 

This bar is so high half the development team died from Oxygen depravation to climb to it.

 

Vista early on had massive instability, driver and compatibility issues. While 8 has some issues it is no where near the horror of initial Vista issues. So I'll agree 8 is not the horror of Vista in that it will not run at all..............................

 

Did you read this: Processor Supplies Take an Unexpected Dive on Market Uncertainties

" The usual trend for semiconductors is a slow Q1, even slower Q2, acceleration in Q3 for back to school and a serious uptick in production and sales in Q4 for Christmas. But in the case of 2012, inventory was built for three quarters and then plunged in Q4, according to supply chain market research firm IHS."

" So what happened to demand? Thank Windows 8 for stinking up everything. "Windows 8 isn't getting the demand they thought it would get to increase [chip] demand. Once they could see that, they turned around and started to pull back on inventory," said Stiefel."

-------------

So we have MS to thank for tanking CPU/PC sales. Way to go MS! Way to GO!

 

It's not that far-fetched. I know a decent number of people that are refusing to buy new machines because they would have to use Windows 8.

 

Good article. Basically, user satisfaction for Windows 8 is halfway between Windows 7 and Windows Vista. That sounds right to me.

It sounds to me like the chip-makers and part-makers are looking for a scapegoat for a PC market that was sagging even before Windows 8's release. Since people can get Windows 7 on everything from Thinkpad Edges to Alienwares to Clevos to Dell Precisions, it's hard to believe that a statistically-significant number of people are refusing to buy ANY new PC just because they don't like Windows 8. Because you can buy a new PC without getting Windows 8. It doesn't add up.

Even the boldfaced quote says that Windows 8 merely failed to stop the bleeding of a bleeding conventional-PC industry, not that it opened the would to begin with. "Windows 8 isn't getting the demand they thought it would get to increase [chip] demand," said Stiefel.

 

OK... Say Windows 8 was the best thing ever, how many people here would buy a new rig just for the new version of the OS? Seems a bit... strange to buy a new PC just to get a new OS version...

 

I wouldn't buy a new Machine with 8 unless the hardware was very good, or my current machine breaks, but even then I would prefer to get a second hand machine. The new MBR boot monkey business from Windows is not of my taste.

 

There are some people that buy the newest shinny toy out, they generally go for Apple stuff but some do low cost stuff like weird laptops, they aren't of the techie type most times, so they are the best target for W8.

 

Essentially Since Vista there is little to no real need for better hardware. Even if 8 was out sans Metro this would be the case. If anything the OS development has been geared toward better performance with the same hardware per incarnation.

The fact there is no software requiring higher end hardware is more top blame with PC sale slumps. The hope of M$ is 8 would have gained fast traction making the new touch screens a must have. This would have stirred up the hardware market as well. The problem is as a DTR touch screen makes for awkward use and actually slows productivity. It is however promising for ultra mobile machines.

Now 8 could have done much better itself being more friendly to DTR and desktop usage but I doubt highly it would have stirred hardware sales. It just would have stirred the OS sales and allowed better market penetration. On the hind side this probably would have eventually stirred 8 phone and RT machine sales.

Now while I doubt it, M$ with Blue has a chance to change marketing strategies. They can make 8 behave as it should have for the desktop users by allowing options and even improve on the Metro UI. This could make it the OS it needs to be and allow faster market saturation without admitting they were just wrong. Would this make me trust them again? I doubt that as well but the are very fickle and forgiving. Look at how quickly NVidia was forgiven with the solder media issue..................

 

Why buy a second-hand machine just to get Windows 7 when you can buy a brand-new Windows 7 machine from the business-class Big Three (Dell, HP, Lenovo) or any gaming PC company (Sager, Alienware, etc)?

 

I don't know about the rest of the manufacturers, but it's getting more and more difficult to get a ThinkPad with W7 and not W8...

 

Windows 8 isn't bad in my opinion. Like most people, I hesitated before I upgraded because I enjoyed, and had no gripe with Windows 7. But once I did, I got use to it quite fast. My only gripes about it was that I had to pay for Windows Media Center, which normally I wouldn't use, but since I have a TV Tuner, and that company cannot be bothered to make an application for it for use I kinda needed it. The only other issues I have is that its at least a three step process to shutdown (either go to the right, go to settings and shutdown) or log out and shutdown from there. The third thing I hate is any metro app, because they all take up a full screens worth of space. For tablet users this makes sense, but for someone with two 2560x1440 monitors, it is such an annoying thing. You can append it to the edges of the screen, but that's like cutting half your screen off for nothing, Modern Mix fixes this, and Microsoft mentioned they might do the same.

The benefits are nice though, Applications run faster, the interface is a lot cleaner. Task Manager is leaps and bounds better. Multi-Monitor setups are more recognized and don't require application such as UltraMon. Boot times are improved (Yes I am comparing two fresh installations, not my well loved Windows 7 installations to a brand new one) and most importantly, it allows you not to use the stuff you don't want.

Example, you don't have to use the Start Tile thingy, you don't have to use the store, you don't have to use apps instead of installed applications, but you can if you want to. You can find your "mix" of what you like and don't have to use the things you don't.

What I hate about reviews, and the general audience is that they don't understand everything. They feed off a rumour or, one persons review and expand, rather then going in with an open mind and forming an opinion for themselves. Windows Mohave, despite using paid actors probably, is probably the best example I can think of exploiting this backwards thinking. Download a release preview, put it in a virtual machine and try it (except be under the impression that it will work faster not virtualized)

 

That's simply not true. I just went to Lenovo's website and tried to configure every single Thinkpad they sell. The following models can be configured with your choice of Windows 7 or Windows 8:

T430
T430s
T430u
T530
X1 Carbon
X131e
E430
E530
L430
L530
W530
X230

The following laptops can only be configured with Windows 8:

X1 Carbon Touch
Thinkpad Twist

 

I think it's kinda the opposite, holding off on buying a new PC because it only comes with Windows 8 and are loathe to have to use it. So many people don't realize they can just buy Windows 7 and install it themselves, as long as drivers exist, of course. That's going to be the issue likely with the next run of laptops end of this year. If they only offer Win 8 drivers then you're forced to use Win 8.

MS knows Win 8 is a flop. I don't know why they just don't offer what everyone is asking for. Add full fledged desktop use for those who want it and Metro for touchscreen / convertible devices. Problem solved.

 

From my short visit to Lenovo's site it appears that you are correct. Haven't visited the main/sales page in a while and my oh my look what happens...

My presumption would be that this recent policy reversal must have been initiated by an earful they've gotten from their corporate client base.

Not that it matters to me personally one way or another - I have absolutely zero interest in Lenovo's current offerings regardless of OS - and will happily maintain a similar level of disassociation with W8...

 

Stealing a line from Prix, Windows 8 is a really good OS if you want to piddle around with. I like the idea of Apps that you can find on tablets. Not all is good on that front because some Apps don't have that distinct Tablet UI feel to it and therefore lacks features as well.

I purchased W8 for the easy price of $15 so that works for me, At first I accepted the START menu because it was NEW but I quickly grew tired of the added steps so I installed StartIsBack and all is good now.

I must say that that W8 is rock solid. I have not had one crash other than the occasional Apps that have been shoehorned for a touch OS.

I also agree with WingNut and have said the same many times over that MS should have released 2 OS's, one for touch devices and another for the traditional desktop. But I can put myself in Microsoft's shoes in that PC purchases are on the decline while Mobile OS's are more popular. There are rumors to the effect that Dell may leave the PC hardware business. So in that way I can understand why MS wants to branch out.

Funny how most W8 fans i've found are Mac OS X users. They tend to like W8 more than those who have used Windows in the past.

So for me I do like Windows 8 but I think the OS could have been so much better. My W8 approval score is a 75% whereas W7 was an easy 95% favorable view.

 

I agree that it might have been a good idea to supply consumers with two different versions of Windows - one touch-oriented and one not - but I do commend Microsoft for taking such a bold step and pushing consumers towards a single product. It shows their commitment towards innovation and trying something new. Windows 7 was a hard operating system to top; Windows 8 is starting a trend of its own.

I've been running two laptops with Windows 8 (one touch screen, one not) and love it on both. With innovative technology like "The Leap Motion" and Intel's decision to force touchscreens on all "Ultrabooks" with Haswell and above, I think we better strap ourselves in and get comfortable... the touch(screen) revolution is just beginning.

 

Thanks for clarifying, I didn't shop for a laptop for the last 6 months, except a short trip to my local PC World to help a female friend who ended up buying a Tablet-laptop Windows 8 hybrid freak-machine.

 

I hate touch screens. They have their place and I use them all the time on my iPod, my phone, and my Android tablet, but that is only because using a mouse and keyboard on those devices is impractical!

 

I don't commend Microsoft for pushing all users towards an experience that only works well on a small fraction of devices. WINDOWS 8 TABLETS ARE THE MINORITY. Windows, by and large, is a desktop, keyboard and mouse operating system. There may be a day when that changes but we're not there by a long shot.

Typical Microsoft though, come up with a good idea a day late and then screw it up anyway.

 

I very much doubt that, starting with the fact that touch screens are really old hat. Nobody wanted them years ago when manufacturers first started to try and peddle them, and very few people are interested in touch screens on laptops today, either. Fact is, other than on tablets, touch screens make no sense to most people. Looking at the lineup of upcoming models, manufacturers will simply offer the same laptops they did before, without touch screens, because customers don't want them. So what if Intel will not allow them to call those laptops "Ultrabooks" anymore. Nobody gives a flying fart, really, what they're called.

 

Intel has done some extensive studies on touch: Do People Want Touch on Laptop Screens?   Intel Free Press I think your wrong on this one. W8 is such a drastic UI change that will need some smoothing out. Bigger issue here is most systems out on the market now are just converted W7 systems that don't have touch, and worse have crappy touch pads with poor gesture support which guarantees a frustrating W8 experience. Although I fully believe touch will be a huge part of systems in the future, I admit their will probably be at least 25 percent that won't be reaching up. What I see happening is w8 maturing and being easier for non touch systems and touch-pads improving by multiple factors. Touch screens will get cheaper as well as wi com digitizers. OEMs have no choice, market forces are putting high pressure for this to happen and competition and market forces will achieve this.. they have no choice. IMO touch will eventually be an important role in future displays that Apple will eventually incorporate that into OSX. But many things will have to happen first, which includes many changes in W8, haswell, and component costs dropping. All these are guaranteed to happen, they always do in the PC world.

 

I agree, but you'd be hard pressed to walk into any brick and mortar like Best Buy, Sears, MicroCenter, Frys and buy a recently released laptop with anything BUT Windows 8. I don't know that Windows 8 is the real culprit, but I'm sure for many people they hear Win 8 sucks and don't even think to configure with Windows 7, they just assume it's Windows 8. I dunno.

I have zero issue with Windows 8 as a product, and I like how it works as a touch OS. But the fact that MS completely neglected the option to turn on traditional Start Menu is the egg on the face. They could have left the Metro UI as default and even made the traditional start menu as simple as a registry edit and reboot or even a hidden option so that power users still could make use of it. That's what I have the biggest issue with that they neglected their largest and most tech savvy user base. But I've said my piece (probably more times than most here care to hear).

 

You call this single, uncontrolled, off-the-cuff test "extensive studies"? You find the outcome of such a poor process, conducted by the company that has committed to pushing exactly this product, convincing in any way? Be my guest. I happen to disagree on all of the above. And, no, it is no accident that Apple has shown no interest in touch for their laptops or desktops. We will see who turns out to have been right on this one.

 

I was at Best Buy recently trying out the new touch based laptops. It felt unnatural reaching for the screen when I had a keyboard and touchpad in front of me. Touch devices are fine for tablets or devices where there isn't a keyboard available. I don't see touch based laptops gaining any traction. Even if all laptops became touch based I would use the keyboard and mouse instead.

 

I definitely have my list of disappointments in Windows 8 but the one thing I hate is the desktop integration with the metro screen. People think that M$ did them a favor buy allowing access to the desktop but it's just a UI scam, IMO. When opening a PDF from the desktop it always opens up a metro-style PDF reader and takes me completely away from the desktop. I would have to install Adobe Reader AGAIN in order to have real desktop interaction. This is stupid. When M$ promised a built-in PDF reader I thought it would work exactly like Mac OS X's PDF. I can open any PDF from the desktop on Mac and view it on the desktop. It doesn't take me away from the desktop. Now some may not see the PDF reader in W8 as an issue but it's quite an annoyance to be on the desktop and being taken back to metro and having to deal with ridiculous trackpad and keyboard presses just to get out of the PDF metro screen and back to the desktop. I just have to wonder if the M$ employees truly like Windows 8 or do they pretend to like it because Steve Emballmer threatens their job?

 

Pirx, I'd expect you may be in the 25-30 percent group that will not use touch. Time will tell who is right. But my prediction that in one year, it will be very different when we have second and third generation hardware ultrabooks running on haswell with optimized trackpads for improved gesture support with 8 hour battery life. Because that is where this is going for sure. I'm seeing W8 having a second set of updates by then as well. The problem now is we have a first generation OS, and first generation hardware of which very few seem to integrate very well with w8. Allot of converted w7 systems that do horrible with w8. At this point in time only the Asus zenbook and newly released samsung series 7 ultra seems to have decent HW where they achieved decent battery life, good trackpad support, good KB and display with good audio. And both of these cost a thousand dollars. Component shortages, component costs for touch and wi com digitizers combined with a first generation OS is why adoption is slow. MS is a publicly traded company and Ballmer can only dictate top/down for only so long. Change will be forced if things continue to spiral down. The OS will evolve eventually to what people can live with. Even Ballmer can't stop that. I'm positive that W8 will get better. And the hardware will get better this summer when Haswell is introduced and the second generation of systems are introduced But I agree, at this moment in time, its a bit bleak with the whole windows thing.

I don't have as much faith with windows phone however. I see people using windows metro on W8 as a glorified windows seven widgets. What I don't see is that experience being so good that consumers will run out and buy W8 phones. I believe MS is way too late. Even if it were better, which some say it is, they are not the standard. Android/IOS is. People are familiar with those and they are the standard. Windows phone will probably remain in the single digit market share for a long long time.

As for OSX never having touch? Its only a matter of time. So I disagree with you. Apple will put touch in OSX since IMO its where everything is going. Most people are going to want it. Not sure when that is going to happen but I'd be surprised if Apple did not have something in the works by the end of 2014. Nothing scientific here in my prediction but my gut says it will happen. Just like I feel Apple will cave at some point and build phones with bigger screens. They are stubborn since they did not do it first. But people want bigger screen phones so Apple will have to follow user needs instead of always thinking they are the god that determines user experience. Apple has to change their leadership environment just like MS does. But I also believe Apple is really missing a good opportunity to capture more market share from MS with their W8. Mac books still cost a ton. I feel if they offered a low cost mac book, they could suck up a bunch of frustrated windows users that don't like W8. Sure I hear on these forums all the time I'm going to buy a Mac if windows does not fix w8 etc.. But in the end, the 1600 dollar price tag keeps MB's at a niche market share.

 

25-30% is an extremely large group to just say "well, we can't do anything for them."

 

In my opinion: if you don't like how the new start screen looks like, you don't have to hate the windows-7-like traditional desktop.

As for myself I really don't like that start screen and all its apps. Not only they are slow to load (opening mail in my Alienware M15x takes around 10-15 secs), they also carries low amount of information despite being served in large screen. Microsoft calls it simpler UI, what more could we expect?

Sent from my PadFone 2 using Tapatalk 2

 

Been using W8 on my desktop since I built it in October. Never used it with a touch device. I'm cool with it. Just because it's an OS that's optimized for touch doesn't make it unusable for those who don't touch.

 

Yeah, and MS has been known to accommodate it's customers as much as possible (even to a fault at times), so people were expecting the same.

That doesn't mean that things couldn't be better with a few minor tweaks. For the record, I'm cool with Windows 8, but that doesn't mean that I don't see some flaws with it either. There were some annoyances with xp, vista and 7 as well, they were just less flagrant as far the UI is concerned, but they were there.

 

I did not say ms should not do anything. I said eventually they will improve the experience being a public company they have no choice. I also said this is a bleak time for ms in the interim. The hw and software will get better. Much more so in the next year. But as it is now, the oems have weak offerings and ms has allot of work to do.

 

You make it sound like Adobe Reader and Microsoft Reader are your only options. They aren't. I use Sumatra PDF, a desktop-based-yet-touch-friendly PDF reader. For those who primarily use Metro instead of primarily using the desktop, there are third-party Metro PDF readers as well that are generally a step up from Microsoft Reader.

 

True, but it's not as bad as many people make it out to be, and the suggestion that Windows 8 is built with complete disregard for those who don't have touch capabilities in their computers is a bit silly.

 

Not entirely. It's less efficient for workload if you do a lot of content creation and multitasking. Win 8 is more of a linear approach to processing. Reminds me of Win 3.1 days. Seriously. It's a major step backwards IMHO. The "START" interface feels added on and just a skin that's forced on you rather than integrated with the OS.

Many simple things that could be managed just with the keyboard are lost. Heck, show me how you can shut down the machine with just the keyboard blindly. This may seem stupid, but you don't know how many times I've lost video and needed to shut down (Win key, then right arrow, enter - bam shut down).

 

It's definitely got its quirks and issues. Losing the Start menu still baffles me. It introduces more clutter and work to keep a functional desktop with access to everything you need, since you have to rely primarly on icons or third-party docks (I use RocketDock) to maintain links to everything you want to use unless you want to use the wacky search function.

Still, I've adapted fairly well. To be fair, I'm not really a Windows power user, and 8's currently exclusive to my entertainment machine, but I haven't minded it for the most part.

I thought someone posted a tips and tricks thread a few months ago that included shutdown shortcuts. Maybe that part wasn't in there, though. Either way, hopefully Blue will fix some of the issues.

 

I don't mind it for free.

The Three Fs: Fast, Fresh, and Free.

 

Alt + F4 on the desktop still works IIRC.

 

This is definitely of note. Even forgetting the faster startup, the fact that Windows 8 is faster and better-optimized than even Windows 7 (and very stable in my experience) is often lost in interface complaints. You may not like the way you interact with it, but it's a solid OS on the inside.

 

they are the same=)) (expt startup time)
its just feeling that you use something new

links
Windows 8 vs. Windows 7 - Speed And Performance Testing | Usability Geek
Windows 8 - Performance Analysis and Final Thoughts | bit-tech.net

win8 brings only some cosmetic things.. even REFS still only for windows server... after half of a year...


i dont understand logic: why people must buy new windows and learn metro to do same things that they do without it?

i installed windows 8 and tried to learn it.. but most things conterlogical

 

Actually, the ModernUI is a lot more like MS-DOS of the old days.

No, it's not. There is no meaningful difference in speed. This is even true for booting, on new hardware.

 

Just going off my own experience, which is not apples to apples (desktop never ran Windows 7 because 8 was cheap just after I built it; laptop has never run Windows 8), and things I've heard, for which I have no meaningful sources. You may be right, you may be wrong. It makes no difference to me - Windows 8 works very well on my desktop and I'll have no qualms using it on the next laptop I buy. Do I kind've hope that Windows Blue will reinstate the start button? Sure. But I'm fine with the interface as it is, and the performance is great.

 

Apple tries for a patent on removable laptop touchscreens with wireless charging

Combined with the touchscreen on the Chromebook Pixel, and we're looking at an industry-wide shift, not just one company's vision.

 

That's because it's Windows 7 on the inside. Seriously though. I have started to use Win 8 and no it's not horrible for casual use. It is fast. But take away Metro UI and it's nothing more than a tweaked Windows 7.