Even Windows 8 Users Prefer Windows 7
judgecorp writes "Windows 8 is not proving an instant hit amongst the early adopters who have got their hands on it. More than half of them prefer Windows 7, according to a survey by a Windows 8 forum. Skeptics cited fears of price and compatibility issues. Meanwhile, Intel is busily applying damage limitation to criticism by CEO Paul Otellini. Apparently he did say Windows 8 wasn't ready — but added that it was still a good idea to get it out before the holiday season."
How does it make sense to push a buggy product out the door before it's ready? It only makes sense if you want the product to tank.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Tried to figure out where the "I prefer Windows 7" button moved to and gave up.
Not what Micros~1 needed. Then again they've always had big problems with adoption. A dollar's worth of free advice -- Stick to Xbox, mobile, and your business segments.
I'm one of the people that will use Windows 7 for the future in my office and in my house....
Will give a try in the pad field but with both fingers crossed...
prefer non-Microsoft operating systems! ... well, it's not a joke at all! It's reality!
Easy joke
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
Don't hate me - but I like Win8. Takes some getting used to but there are a lot of nice power features. Just the fancy new keyboard shortcut Win+X alone will get you a long way toward adjusting.
Isn't it pretty much established that, like Star Trek movies, only every other version of Windows is any good?
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
So new users before the old, safe choice they're familiar with instead of something radically new and different. How does this surprise anyone?
Look, I had the same inclination when I switched from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95. I was one of those early adopters who bought it launch day and ran home and installed it. I, and many others, had the same feelings when the Ribbon debuted for MS Office. And yes, I thought the same thing trying out Windows 8. There is always that moment of "panic" when you realize you don't know where things are anymore like you did with the previous version.
But, each time, if you stick with it for a bit, you get familiar with new interface. You pick it up just as you did with the old one--and you even start to realize the advantages of the new layout versus the old. Sorry, Slashdot, but this is FUD and you're guilty of spreading it.
mr.nobody
--Don't you wanna go where nobody knows your name?
Apple announces a new version of the MacBook. The new MacBook has an IvyBridge i3, light weight plastic shell, and 13 inch scree all for $599. With a choice between WIndows 8 and an inexpensive MacBook MacBooks fly off the shelves.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Microsoft has proved to be able to deliver high quality software products.
Namely, the Office suite (especially Excel), the flight simulator and I think a few more.
When the operating system evolution went past the plain old command line (aka DOS), then Microsoft has been successful only as long as it's been novelty.
Apple did it far better as far as the UI is concerned.
*BSD and Linux-based OSes are much better in the overall operation.
So, Mr. Soft, get back to where you once belonged!
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
Something tells me that Windows 7 is here to stay, at least for the next decade or so. I can't see a lot of people switching any time soon.
/2penceworth
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
The product buggy was cited in fears of incompatable and user confusing. We wondered if Microsoft was to go over survey and compatable issue, with metro confusing and fullscreening. User did not want learning of new, but always to be changed according. Sales forced to laptop, to notebook, because of no self building, called "window tax".
I am using W8 prerelease in a work environment and it beats W7 on many aspects (I have a choice to work under XP/W7/W8 - daily system reloads for testing purpose) - speed for one. Search feature appears better but still cumbersome.
There are some quirks - closing/starting individual programs in multiple instances, the silly desktop interface. Guess it will be ironed out in final.
It appears to be basically a W7 with some improvements.
From what I read it will sell for $ 60 or so.
Definitely worth (IMO) getting it after Vista and W7 failures.
There's plenty of people on Win8 already. It does work, it is different (faster for one), people don't like change, and Windows has changed of course. If you don't like the metro UI don't use it. Where's the news here?
throw new NoSignatureException();
I've been using Windows 8 since it was released on MSDN/TechNet on three computers (two desktop machines and an ultrabook). I'm getting used to it, and actually starting to like the interface.
My biggest gripes:
- driver/software support for my Samsung Series 9 for Windows 8 is currently non-existant (all h/w installed fine, touchpad is a bit flaky though) - driver support from Creative for my SB XFi is pretty pathetic, and buggy
Otherwise, it seems to run smoother and overall feels more polished. Yes, I know this is /. and I'm speaking positively about Windows 8--so I clearly must be a paid Microsoft shill or out of my mind. Honestly however, I think a lot of people are making noise and whining about a product just to say "hey look at me!" more than anything. Of course, I'm speaking entirely from a consumer standpoint. I can see some of the UI changes (notably the removal of the start menu) to be a problem for enterprise users. I can't speak to the changes/improvements/etc. for enterprise management and such (re: 'portable windows' on USB?)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I find 8's new Metro UI to be genuinely worse for desktops. I gave it a chance, just like I did 7's new taskbar, but it has failed to win me over. It is not a good way for working with a desktop. My desktop is not a tablet, I do not use a touch screen. So a start menu replacer (Start 8 is my choice) gets installed.
Also I'm sorry but it is ugly. It is a step back looks wise. 7 looks pretty slick. All the desktop composition is put to good use making it look nifty. In 8, it is just ugly. The desktop composition is still there underneath, and is in fact even improved, but it is used to render a very ugly UI. Worse still, the UI changes make it more difficult to navigate, it is hard to tell if something is a window for a separate program, or just a window under the current one. They all look the same.
It's sad because technically, 8 is quite competent. It is very fast. Cakewalk found basically across the board improvements in Sonar (http://blog.cakewalk.com/windows-8-a-benchmark-for-music-production-applications/) and this is just their release software, not a special 8 build. So it looks like under the hood, 8 is a good OS. However its UI is truly a step back and the UI is the first thing most people notice.
It isn't a horrible OS, but it is worse than it should be, all on account of them wanting to try and use their desktop and server OS to push tablet sales.
Did you know that spells God?
Son of Sam is back, and he knows dog AND god personally and he says Windows 8 is good for you and the country so get it and enjoy!
> which as of the latest release, won't even work with my video card without special boot parameters altering how it loads video memory
this. Same boat here, but even in NOMODESET and Unity by default, I prefer that to Windows 7, let alone Windows 8.... So, yeah MS is in a bad place.
Can't say I miss the start menu at all, haven't really noticed Metro being in the way or even there. Got 3 monitors, pinned my apps to the task bar, productivity is exactly the same as when I was on Win7 yesterday.
Time will tell I guess, but so far so good. I have no choice in running it as I own a computer shop and the general public are going to start coming in with problems at some point and I need to know how it all works!
I'll be leaving my home machines on Win7 for the foreseeable future. Kids n girlfriend don't need the change.
I switched from Win 7 to Win 8 and love Win 8.
Sure, when I reboot, I have to hit Windows-D or click the Desktop panel...big deal.
the performance benefits, so far, have far outweighed any minor inconvenience the interface changes have had on me.
prefer WinXP, and WinXP users prefer Win9x, and Win9x users prefer Win3.1, and everybody prefers windows would just get it right someday. (hint: they never will)
this message brought to you by the GNU/GPL
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Didn't most Vista users prefer XP? This is SOP for MS.
Am I the only one who can't wait to give Win8 a shot just to see what all the screaming is about? I haven't touched the interface at all and only know what I've seen in pictures, but usually something as polarizing as metro ends up being awesome in the long run or it gets completely ditched. I'm excited to decide which one I think it is....
Bah Vista is fine. Just people hate change for no apparent reason as there are tons of reasons to love Vista on the netbook with only 1 gig of ram right? They need to learn to put up with it and then they will see the light.
I mean how can their be a negative product ever! Just blame the user for hating the familiar.
http://saveie6.com/
From the article:
Right. Around 35% of Microsoft fanbois on a Microsoft fanboi site would prefer Surface to Android of I pad, and that's good news for Microsoft? If they can't get more than 35% of their own fanbois on board, it's dead.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
The notion that many or even most users of a new and largely untested (insert any-fracking-thing here) would prefer the one they were using and were comfortable with previously over this new and unfamiliar experience, is nothing short of blatantly obvious. Likewise, the notion that any new complex system is going to be completely perfect on day-one of release is utterly ludicrous. Crud... I'm a Mac user, and I'm not in the slightest surprised to hear that W8 users might want to go back to W7, any more then I would be surprised when any given Windows user who has migrated to a Mac expresses certain regrets over that move, now and then. Growing pains always suck... and in the case of W8, there's not really any seasoned users around, who might be able to help navigate through this new territory.
The real test of W8 will be to conduct the same type of survey a year or two from now, to see if switchers who have been using it for awhile still want to go back. Vista very (in)famously failed that test, which is what kept XP around for so long... but trying to conduct such a test now, on W8 early adopters is basically the same thing as testing to see if water is still wet.
This is the same paradox Microsoft struggled with on Windows XP: if you make a really good product, people will buy it once and buy nothing else.
If you wonder why Microsoft makes its money selling Windows with new PCs, this is why. Buying a new PC is the only time most of us buy an operating system.
Look for them to go to a subscription model soon, with different UIs being options on a constantly-refined code base. It's about the only way to make money outside of new PC OS sales.
I imagine this is the same reason that every car manufacturer hasn't re-tooled and started making those old VW bugs. A car that runs forever is a bad product.
I am TOTALLY shocked about this (Extreme sarcasm)
Was keep the old Windows 7 desktop and make switching to Metro seamless. OS X can gracefully switch to full screen apps. Why can't Windows 8 just gracefully slide in a Metro app into full screen mode?
I'll tell you why. Because Microsoft is like a jack booted thug who sees Steve Jobs compelling people to accept a new UI and completely misses the Steve Jobs-era quality control and salesmanship for the authority he has in the eyes of the customer. Therefore they think "if Steve Jobs can make them like it, anyone with some type of authority can compel change."
News flash, Microsoft. Metro will fail on the desktop until you realize that Metro can only work on the desktop app as a part of the desktop that takes over the whole screen.
And just extended the Windows 7 shell so it had a "Tablet" mode with some sort of auto-detection, they might have kept the desktop people happy AND the tablet crowd happy - just like the actual users suggested on the Windows forums, again and again and again....
Microsoft, missing the obvious since the 80s.
Next up? Microsoft ignores 3d printing until Linux dominates the field!
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Just yesterday I installed the final version of Windows 8 from DreamSpark to a netbook just for fun. The result? It actually ran smooth, but none of the Metro apps could be run due to the 1024x600 resolution. Not a big loss, but I was slightly surprised that they actually completely skipped us netbook-connoisseurs.
As a sidenote, it was funny how in W8 many of the texts have been changed to a casual, "user-friendly" style. "While we set up your stuff, please enjoy a pizza. Meanwhile we'll send some info to Microsoft, but you can change this later."
Filed under "thank you, captain Obvious."
I needed less than a day with W8 to know I hated it. It sucks. I don't have a touchscreen and have no intention of getting one. Most geeks, while applauding a touchscreen, have absolutely no intention of ever using one.
It's Windows 7, with a bad UI. That brings it back to Vista suckiness.
Making UI uniform across all devices is a risky strategy. If consumers, familiar with Windows 7 & XP, hate Windows 8, how are they going to be sold Microsoft's new phone on the strength "it's the same as our new PC desktop" ?
This new ver of Windows introduces many new features. So many, in fact, that we're still finding and counting them.
My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
Most of what I see in Windows 8 is a touch screen-centric interface. If you have a tradition desktop with a keyboard and mouse, it looks like a Pre-School, Fisher-Price interface.
Microsoft sees tablets and touch-screen devices as being the way of the future and desktop PC not shipping the their previous volumes. This may be true, but dumbing down the PC even more to accommodate touch-screens is not the way forward.
Competition Good, Monopoly Bad.
It kind of perpetuates the notion that every even release of Windows sucks. I've had 98, XP, Vista and Windows7. Vista was a dog and I've heard that ME was bad, as well. Now, I'm hearing Windows8 (at least, on the desktop) is bad.
Users experience the most radical UI change since DOS added Windows. And shockingly, 53% percent prefer the older more familiar Windows 7.
You know what this really means folk? Microsoft actually succeeded. If you can get 47% (or just shy of half) of users to prefer a new completely radical UI experience. You've done something really really right. As I'd expect 80% to prefer that which they're familiar with and have used since 1995.
Let's use our brains, and look at this data for what it really is. A measure of a decent amount of success. 50/50 on a new experience is good. Heck, probably didn't have that much higher support when XP or Vista came out. And those were incremental changes.
I prefer Windows XP as well. I played with Windows 7 for a while, but had problems with a new Asus ATI graphics adapter that provides an HDMI output for home theater use. Windows 7 crashed several times producing the "Blue Screen of Death" after the adapter was added. I switched back to Windows XP and haven't had any problems since. I haven't found any compelling reason to use Windows 7. Linux would be my second choice after XP for home theater use.
i would still not choose to use as my main working OS, but I see it as a great improvement over windows 7.
Windows 8 isn't buggy... it's unfinished and unpolished. What is there works well.
The desktop and metro side by side experiences make you feel like Microsoft put a lot of effort into getting the system running fast, smooth, and seamless, and then forgot to do anything with the desktop, or bring over any of the options. I posted about this yesterday, but suffice to say, Windows 8 is really great in terms of technical prowess, but the UI is unfinished, unpolished, and jarring, to say the least. And this is coming from somebody who actually *likes* Windows.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
I've been using the Release Preview as my primary OS for over 3 months now. Personally, I look forward to the full retail release and will be upgrading day 1 to it. There are a few issues that stick out due to it being touch-centric but overall it works better than Windows 7.
What I like:
-The Desktop is cleaner than Win7, with icons and gadgets turned off, and the taskbar set to hide, there is zero hint of any toolbars and the only thing visible besides the mouse pointer is the text at the bottom right for the Release Preview build information.
-I don't have to dig through menus/folders to find the shortcut to a program, they are all on the Start screen and instantly visible once accessed. It used to take clicking on the Start menu and digging down through multiple folders to find the right shortcut, now it just takes clicking the Start "corner" and then clicking the visible icon. Commonly used programs are pinned to the Taskbar of course.
-The flat interface is less gimmicky than Win7's Aero, it feels more polished and professional.
-The Task Manager is beautiful and far more useful than before.
What I don't like:
-Having to move the mouse all the way into the last 1 or 2 pixels of the corner to active the Start screen, and worse yet activate the charms bar is very annoying. I would rather there be a visible button to click for each corner, yes a return of the Start button would not be out of the question so long as it just brough up the Start screen and not a menu.
-The Control Panel is overloaded with too many utilities/functions.
-Default apps like the Music player and Media player suck donkey balls. It always pisses me off when I double-click a media file and end up kicking over to Metro for one of those stupid apps. Setting VLC to be associated with all formats has helped.
-There is no close button for Metro apps. As a gamer I am opposed to having unnecessary apps running in the background even if they are in a suspended state. It is annoying as Hell having to press Alt+F4 to kill them. I really want a 'X' button at the top right of all apps.
-Companies have been really slow to announce support or update their software for Windows 8, in particular: iTunes & Steam.
Overall, Windows 8 has been rock-solid for me. It has never crashed once and performed well. Even though I have a beast of a gaming rig and use an SSD, I do not get anywhere near the 10-15 second boot times that others have stated. My fastest boot has been 37 seconds. Perhaps it's because I only reboot to install updates and no longer shutdown. The last time my computer was off was over 2 months ago when a heat wave knocked out power long enough for my UPS battery to run low.
Who cares if Windows is liked or not. Half of the installs are coming on pre-installed whether you like it or not. The other half is coming from the businesses that have to upgrade because of finished support for Windows XP/Vista or 7. So it really don't matter how you like your Windows, in 5 years Microsoft will still have 80% market share of Windows 8.
Really, Microsoft have a monopoly on PCs and Laptops that comes from the a) Office format, b) games and c) applications. Microsoft can put one turd after another on the market, as long as it is compatible with the old Windows applications, it will be an instant hit (compare with the alternatives like Linux or MacOS).
What you want to choose as an alternative? MacOS, where half of your applications and games are not working (and costs double of that of PCs)? Linux, that you have to install yourself (plus the same problems of MacOS)?
So maybe, the anti-trust commission of EU or US should finally look at this grip of death, and should care less about the stupid choice of browsers.
I myself am using Linux now for 4 years exclusively on my laptops. Linux installation is finished in 10 minutes and if you enter in Google "Laptop xxxx Linux" then you can be sure that everything works before you buy the laptop. Also KDE is looking way better and is more functional that I have seen anything yet from Microsoft or Apple.
http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
Always skip every other iteration.
Yes. agreed. I'd mod you up if I could.
Microsoft needs the changes in Windows 8, ie the UI formerly known as Metro and it's programming APIs, to create one massive developer community so they can beat down Apple. They have nothing on the mobile device side to compete and without apps everything there fails.
So the real question is, what percentage of complainers does it take to force Microsoft to change? Probably not 50%.
How long ago was this? The ati drivers are pretty decent now for win7.
DNA -- National Dyslexic Association
UGH.
I love my ATI card and AMD chpset and view them as great quality. However, the drivers are very problematic. I am very careful to watch the version number as I have HDMI setup with my monitor due to a flaky on board sound (... dont ask). Sometimes I have a black edge as the driver thinks my monitor is a TV with underscan. Sometimes it goes away, but VMWare goes bizerk with my USB chipset drivers even when I do not use it. Yes I went into the registry to make sure the AMD filter driver was not installed but no luck.
My computer's ASLR protection is SHUTDOWN because of the crappy driver version. The latest fucks up VMWare where it takes 5 minutes to mount a flash drive and the version in between forgets my HDMI settings and puts the black underscan back in but the later too put ASLR sandboxing protection back into the kernel for safe browsing.
So 12.3 is my lucky driver number and I have flash uninstalled except for Chrome as it is a security risk due to the terrible drivers. I would recommend Junior Samples to try 12.3 as they are the most stable. ... sadly I only went ATI because I had issues with Nvidia BSOD due to buggy hardware. I can never get a break. Crappy drivers is an understatement.
http://saveie6.com/
I agree that the Metro music app is annoying...almost as annoying as the full-screen PDF viewer. I prefer Win7 Aero to Win8 - it seems unnecessarily bright, and changing the color to be a bit darker makes the title bar text hard to read. The Task Manager is epic, and I must be one of the few people who find the ribbon on Explorer really handy...though admittedly I keep my copy of XYPlorer close by as well. I'm a bit irked at the start menu situation, since my start menu is fairly well populated, so it's a "seek and ye shall find" situation that's a lot more difficult to deal with than a densely populated start menu. Granted Metro is worlds better than a standard start menu on a touch interface, but I don't have one of those on my laptop.
I've got a Seagate hybrid drive on my laptop, along with a Crucial Adrenaline SSD cache, and I can personally vouch for the 15-second startup once you've gotten past the BIOS. I don't know what your specs are, but it's entirely possible that the bus speed of your RAM or the number of services that start with the machine bump that number up.
You can't just make a product in total secrecy and then declare it done and have the world accept it. You need to iterate. Get a version out there, let people use it, take measurements and feedback then pivot. That's what made Windows 7 so successful. Even Steve Jobs admitted to taking customer feedback (eventually). Personally I am enjoying Windows 8 very much and I find myself going into Windows 7 (dual boot) less and less. There are a few annoyances (mostly around the metro/desktop boundary limitations) but for the most part it's great.
Pretty sure these folks has not used it enough to realize the advantages. They probably picked more from all the anti writers about it. Nothing is lost from Windows 7, and lot to gain. Its a trash survey
I'm not a huge fan of iOS, but to Apple's credit, at least they confine their tablet interface to tablets. I fail to see how Metro on a PC without a touchscreen makes anything better.
And wouldn't it make more sense for Microsoft to see if Surface Pro is a hit BEFORE they drag desktop users to Metroworld?
Let's take a look at the title of the story again, shall we? "Even Windows 8 Users Prefer Windows 7" Now let's go ahead and read TFA: When asked "Which Windows Operating System have you used before?" only 26% of survey takers responded they've even used Windows 8. So let me get this straight: 25% of survey takers say Windows 8 is their favorite OS, yet only 26% of survey takers say that they've even used Windows 8. If my calculations are correct, and please, correct me if they are not: According to this survey 96% of Windows 8 users report that Windows 8 is their favorite Windows OS (assuming that no one who has not used Windows 8 checked it as their favorite).
But no, let's not even read the article or report any statistics in the summary. Let's just bash until our heads turn blue.
Giving us the option of running Metro apps in a window alongside our other desktop applications would have satisfied me. After all, the idea of running tablet and smartphone applications on your computer IS sort of attractive (there are a few programs on my phone which I wouldn't mind running in a little window on my desktop). But forcing the user to use these apps in giganto-vision full-screen mode is... weird.
Shouldn't the title read: SOME Windows 8 Users Prefer Windows 7?
Doesn't have the same impact when you tell the truth, eh?
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I come to slashdot now for random science stuff and mindless microsoft bashing. That said. Everyone I know who has used Win8 for more than a few minutes loves it. Also, when I see a survey from a random help forum...don't you think the results will be skewed?
One of his quotes was: "Windows 8 is one of the best things that ever happened to Intel", meaning to this wag that Win8 is a bloated, CPU-sucking pig that will need every possible clock cycle thrown at it, requiring a new computer or at the least a new CPU and motherboard for yet another new proprietary socket and RAM spec. Profit!
Every version of Windows that has come after Windows 2000 hasn't really had anything new to offer except the need to pay for it again. I'm still running it as my primary work machine. I have an XP box for the occasional game, and Linux servers for all the rest.
I think this was a panic product. Seemly "easy" OS adaption so MS could get a product to compete with Smart Phones and Laptop OSs.
How do you design Win32 applications to support vastly different PPI?
How do you design Win32 applications to support vastly different scalings?
How do you design Win32 applications to support menus that change size and style based on device?
etc...
There was no way to keep everyone happy. They had to make choices.
Apparently he did say Windows 8 wasn't ready — but added that it was still a good idea to get it out before the holiday season."
So how far does the hand extend up into the puppet's rear? I'm just curious because if it looks like a puppet, sounds like a puppet, acts like a puppet..... well... yeah.
"Unless I have a machine with 8gb of usable ram"
2003 Server can be used as a desktop.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
When Windows 95 looked like being delayed even more* Bill Gates is alleged to have said "Windows 95 will be out by Xmas, but we may have to delay December for a couple of months".
* it was originally supposed to be out in April or so. There were a few months where purchasing was delayed waiting for it. Meanwhile WFW 3.11 continued to be produced (on many diskettes) and these had to be stored as they weren't selling. This then became known as 'Windows for Warehouses".
It's hard to like at first, whether one likes gesture/touch for input or not. And the interface formerly known as metro needs a lot of work. Even so, the boot time is responsive, its pretty good at stability and drivers for a new platform, the iso mount and hypervisor are cool and work well. I've mostly used just win8 and Ubuntu since February. In my view there are similarities between them...
95 Good, 98 Junk, 98SE Good, ME Junk, XP Good, Vista Junk, 7 Good, 8 ... Guess.
Go Figure.
About 4 or 5 weeks ago. I downloaded the latest Win7 drivers from Asus when I installed the card. I would get random Blue Screen crashes on Win7 after switching from Intel motherboard graphics to ATI graphics card - nothing that I could make happen on demand.
He was modded redundant, and the comment was in fact repeated several times in this thread. "It's a fair cop, gov!"
Free Martian Whores!
I didn't ask for a completely different UI. I actually LIKE Win7 as is. It's (so far) rock solid stable. My ATI and NVidia drivers Just Work(tm). The apps for the most part all use a familiar menu/hotkey structure so all those little keyboard shortcuts still work without me having to learn new ones (we won't talk about Office 2010's changes to that.../grumble). On the off chance I download an app that does crash or I experience a beta video driver crash, everything recovers at least well enough to allow me to close my work normally and reboot at my leisure. I don't have performance issues after weeks of uptime. I don't have app compatibility issues. I don't have any complaints about being able to find stuff. My desktop and start menu work the same way they've worked for most of the last 10 years.
WHY? Why would you think Metro is something I'd want on my desktop? I partly understand re: tablets but my desktop??? It's bad enough that I'm considering going out to buy another few copies of Win7 just in case family wants to upgrade older PCs (or have me build new ones) expressly so that when Win7 disappears from shelves, we won't be forced onto it.
Then again, if the linux nerds could get their heads out of their asses (I'm looking at you, Ubuntu Unity/Gnome3 idiots), and more game developers start supporting it, I might just start migrating everything to linux.
How do you design Win32 applications to support vastly different PPI?
How do you design Win32 applications to support vastly different scalings?
Same as you always did for the last 20 years if you knew what you were doing. Either use a UI framework that transparently handles it for you (e.g. WPF), or use the Win32 API calls that provide you the relevant information and recompute UI layout and widget sizes based on that.
How do you design Win32 applications to support menus that change size and style based on device?
Same as you do it in Win8 - alter your UI based on OS-provided info.
Here's what I want in a new version of Windows:
a) awesome compatibility - It should run every piece of Windows and DOS software ever written...and do it well. Moreover, it should be able to use ANY windows device driver ever written for my beloved favorite hardware.
b) it should boot up in less than 10 seconds and do hardware checking in the background.
c) It should provide a simple console to show ANY communications by any process with anything external to the system and have a right-click option to permanently stop or restrict any process.
d) it should recognize and translate any common CD, DVD or digital media format into video and/or music out of the box.
e) nothing should be able to execute without my explicit prior approval that I can easily and freely revoke with a simple console.
f) Nothing should ever be able to modify the registry without my explicit approval at the time of the modification and there should automatically be a permanent time-stamped backup made prior to a modification.
etcetera...
It's really not that bad, I'm running it now. For my main day-to-day usage, I'm still in the desktop. The Marketplace is limited, but with a nice large trackpad with supported drivers I don't feel like a second class citizen. This OS is faster and does everything I used to do with Win 7, and it's *certainly* worth $15 to upgrade. I use a few "Not Metro" apps too, simply because they get the job done in a more direct and beautiful way than before. I was a huge skeptic and the "Previews" truly sucked. However, the full release is really much more usable and very much polished. I've found a number of annoyances with Windows 7 to be *fixed*, not more broken. I still have a few complaints with it, but honestly far less than the junk GNOME has thrown recently.
Windows 8 is not better than Windows 7 on touch of touch enabled... So all those who are sulking, shutup and keep running 7 or something else on the desktop or old laptops.... if it wasn't M$ you would be complaining.
since alot of people here use linux i gotta ask would it be possible for nvidia ati etc.. to enable virtual extentions in video cards so that something like virtualbox could do games instead of trying to fight with wine? doesnt intel and amd do this on their cpu with the vT thing?
and at that point just make windows a freaking app that you launch to play ____________?
Would you be content paying a subscription if Microsoft continued to support and develop for Windows 7? I would. I already have an Android device, and I don't want my PC to look like a Tablet. Then again, when Google creates their OS which runs on X86 architecture will I even use Windows in the future?
I think the reason why people prefer Windows 7 to Windows 8 is simple: _we are all used to the user interface Microsoft pioneered with Windows 95_.
Indeed, if you compare Windows 95 and Windows 7 side by side, the UI commonality is surprising striking, even with all the improvements done to the Taskbar especially from Windows Vista on. Because Windows 8's interface is essentially a total redesign from the ground up, it could be quite some time because end users get used to the new interface, which is designed with touchscreen operations in mind.
Does it make sense? Yes, it does when you're Microsoft and can release a little bit of cheap hardware that, all of a sudden, changes the rules of the game. Remember how awful it was to be continually scrolling with the scroll bars before an _usable_ mouse with a wheel appeared? Suddenly scrolling felt easy and natural.
Put back the startbutton, put back windows aero glass theme, and the opportunity to start in desktop mode, then windows 8, will the next big win and succes for microsoft
I upgraded my Win7 PC to 8 via in-place upgrade, in the first week it was available to MAPS. I don't like the Metro interface or the start screen. But, having installed the Stardock Start8 start-key, I very seldom access either, I boot straight to my desktop and that's where I work.
I had a problem with a no longer supported legacy device, but found an easy workaround and now it's working perfectly. My Win95 accounting package which wouldn't run under Win7 unless in XP VM mode, happily installed and runs natively on Win8.
I guess I'm just lucky everything is up and running and I don't do the chicklet screens.
I'm still hoping that Microsoft will understand that not everybody wants Metro forced down their throats and will bring out a fully supported Start button. Their current attitude just looks childish, but the OS is perfectly usable and stable.
I've been using Win8 for 6 months and find it schizophrenic. Basically until all applications are ported to the metro interface, people will switch to the Win7 mode to be productive. The problem is, is that each mode has a different UI. This is not only confusing but gets annoying to the point where I just kept using the Win7 mode and never used the Win8 apps.
So early adopters of a completely new UI still prefer the old UI they've been used to for decades. Wow.
Microsoft particularly, however, aren't having a good time with their recent UI changes. The last two Visual Studio versions have been met with complaints. VS 2010 because of UI slowness and difficultly to customise. The latest, VS 2012, "Metrofication" created an uproar. http://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio/filters/top
Isn't necessarily the UI (although it is terrible), it's the fact that Win8 is intentionally designed to work with Intel mobile CPUs that perform inaccurate floating point calculations as a trade-off for low power consumption.
This trade-off is completely unacceptable in the realm of desktops/servers/laptops/whathaveyou.
There is no possible way that Windows 8 can ever be certified for use for architectural/drafting design, medical use, military use, accounting, software engineering or even general corporate use (Just think what sort of subtle bugs will appear in Excel calculations now), because of the CPU calculation bugs that are deliberately allowed by and acceptable to the operating system.