A Serious Proposal To Fix Windows 8

GMGruman writes "Windows 8 is simply not selling, and everyone but Microsoft knows it's a mess of an OS. And the Windows 8.1 'Blue' that Microsoft revealed some details of late last week doesn't address the fundamental flaws. So a team at InfoWorld worked up a serious proposal to rework Windows 8 for both PCs and tablets that fixes those flaws and lets Microsoft's true innovations break free of today's Windows 8, complete with mockups of the proposed Windows 'Red.'"

Comments

Nice objective summary

[dywolf]

Nice objective summary

Re:Nice objective summary

[LateArthurDent]

Nice objective summary

Actually, it is.

Windows 8 on the desktop is broken. This isn't a subjective tastes issue. It is objectively horrible.

Unless you can explain why someone in a desktop would actually *want* to be subject to tablet limitations like full screen apps, or having to dock apps at specific locations in your screen if you want to work with more than one at a time. I can see why it would be beneficial to be able to run the tablet apps, but if you have a mouse and keyboard, by default they should be placed inside a desktop window that you can do whatever with. Instead, we're being guided by default to use tablet apps instead of desktop ones, and going to a horrible screen that shows a limited set of what you have installed instead of getting a well-organized menu.

If you install classic shell, Windows 8 is perfectly usable, but it doesn't really add anything to what was already available with Windows 7.

Re:Nice objective summary

[Darinbob]

I find the start menu much more navigable than the start screen in Windows 8. Giant icons in metro is means less stuff up there available, so the first thing most people do is go to "all apps". Then you've got a 2 dimensional grid of smaller stuff. However that is less convenient in many ways; start menu is top to bottom, with vertical scrolling, but start screen is top to bottom and left to right with horizontal scrolling which is very disconcerting.

Also by default start menu keeps things in sub-folders. Thus my newly installed game will have a folder all to itself, including the game, readme, and miscellaneous files. This keeps the menu list shorter, compared to the "all apps" on the start screen where everything is expanded by default so I'm scrolling (sideways) through many more elements than the start menu had.

Also consider the awful icons you get in metro. A flat square with a smaller icon in the center of it, many of the icons which look exactly the same as others (ie, all document files are identical). So you are reading the text only here, the icons get ignored. This leaves a huge amount of space between each name in the start screen, which means you can't visually scan as easily through the squares list looking for the name you want. Start menu is compact; start screen is spread out with wasted spaced.

When I use start menu it is for a couple reasons essentially: to find things that are seldom used or hard to find, or to find things that are used often but which can't have on-screen icons. For the former, the start screen does not speed up the searching and actually slows things down. For the latter, metro makes it difficult to find control panel or shutdown (without using undocumented shortcuts that the average user will not know).

I don't use start menu in windows 8 because I don't have a replacement, so on occasion I do use start screen. I always find it very clumsy. I also find myself pinning more stuff to task bar than I used to, with more icons on the desktop than I used to. I hate that, I want a relatively clean desktop.

No problem here

[flnhst]

I have now worked with Windows 8 now since last october, and it is working just fine for me. I have had no problem getting around the new interface.

Re:No problem here

[LordThyGod]

I have now worked with Windows 8 now since last october, and it is working just fine for me. I have had no problem getting around the new interface.

You must be the target audience then. The rest of the planet, or most of us anyway, are not.

Windows Red looks horrible

[Anonymous Coward]

The suggestions involved are klunky and the idea of splitting it into 3 OSes is going the wrong way. Windows RT is a disaster because it lacks app compatibility. MS needs to retire it and fully embrace x86 now that intel has fixed it with Haswell.

All that needs to be done to "fix" the start menu issue is make it so the task bar never goes away and the desktop background stays persistent but faded out. You click "START" and tada, the tiles appear right on top of your desktop. It is a simple solution, should be easy to present and works equally as well in mobile touchscreens as it does mice.

Re: Windows Red looks horrible

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

The problem with Windows RT was naming it Windows.

Had they just called it RT, or Surface or Metro or something other than Windows, the app compatibility wouldn't be a problem. OSX application support or, out of the box anyway, X or Gtk support didn't harm Android or iOS. The whole thing supports the same CLR as Windows so...

I think what's really hurting them is the insular nature of Microsoft. Spreadsheets aren't cool. Using Power Point in ads is more likely to turn off a user than turn one on.

Re:Windows Red looks horrible

[Junta]

The issue is that WinRT has to offer *something* that IOS and Android do not in order to gain share.

They didn't pursue lower price, their offerings are no less expensive than Apple.

The didn't pursue better specs. They focused on Tegra 3, which is respectable but dated. Their screen resolution is downright atrocious compared to comparably priced products. While Android and IOS both have high ppi displays, MS has been left behind on this front.

They don't have more apps. Android and IOS had to build their ecosystems from scratch, but they had early mover advantage. After letting that situation simmer for years, they release a product with a paltry number of apps despite having a legacy of the most application compatibilty of any platform. They don't even have app compatibility between their phone and winrt as it stands (though that wouldn't have helped *much*, it still is a sign that they made a mistake compared with the strategies of Apple and Android).

Basically, every possible advantage that MS could have brought to market, they failed to do so. Like it or not, their best hope was/is to focus on x86 solutions where their application compatibilty can really come into its own.

Bad OS or bad GUI?

[gatkinso]

If it is simply a shitty GUI on an improved kernel and stack then I will deal with it.

What little Windows development I do is at least 50% command line anyway. My GUI apps simply are wrappers (and quite ugly thank you).

A simple question I have wanted to ask:

[fredrated]

how is it 10,000 Microsoft engineers and managers couldn't pour piss out of a boot if instructions were on the heal?

Is MS *trying* to commit suicide?

[TWiTfan]

Between Windows 8 and trying to turn the Xbox into some sort of kludgy, half-assed DRM'ed TV tuner instead of a game console, I sometimes wonder wtf is going on in Redmond. Has Steve Balmer just checked out to lunch or something?

Re:My solution for fixing Windows 8

[Known Nutter]

You left out one option: Windows 7.

Re:My solution for fixing Windows 8

[serviscope_minor]

and replace it with what?

DOS 6.22 of course, with Windows 3.11 for workgroups. I suggest also installing Trumpet Winsock in order to be able dial in to what is known as "the internet. Obviously you'll need to buy a modem for that.

the growth of OSX showed that the usual linux trope about there being no possibility for a competing desktop OS to succeed was bollocks

You do realise that (a) MacOS is very old and already had a very well established software base, and (b) Microsoft Office which is at about the 99.9% monopoly level has supported MacOS (X and pre-X) too?

Re:Uh oh. My common sense is tingling!

[Xest]

"Microsoft should hire Infoword's writers as design consultants. Inforworld's staff doesn't have the luxury of being out of touch with users."

Judging by the fact that what was really just a simple article when it comes too was presented as some kind of faux-slideshow that randomly went white in the middle with a link return to slideshow (I assume my ad blocker half-killed a popup ad) I'd say they're perfectly well out of touch with users too.

Common Sense....

[houbou]

From Win 7 to Win 8, the differences are simply too huge.
We've been using a desktop PC for about 20 yrs and basically, the core Win OS hasn't changed all that much. Start Button, Control Panel, etc..
I believe that as long as you have PCs operating with keyboard/mouse that you should be able to have the Win 7 experience. And then again, if possible, the Windows Classic experience without all the frills and thrills.
Well, that's my opinion anyways. It would make sense and it wouldn't be rattling user's cages so to speak.
Microsoft wants to get into the mobile world with their OS. Great, no problem, bring it on, but, maybe, they ought to make it a separate OS. It's going to be a while before a 'one solution' fits all approach will work when it comes to computing. For once, Microsoft should look at how Apple does it. It might LOOK all the same, but it isn't.

Re:Or simply install Linux

[Merk42]

So in order to solve the issue of a completely different UI, you suggest installing Linux that has a completely different UI (and app incompatibility)?

Not great editing oversite on that article.

[OvidNaso]

It links you in the third paragraph to "20 things you will love about Windows 8." Number 9 is the "Charms bar." On page 3 they suggest "The Charms bar is eliminated".

Re:No, it's not.

[Toonol]

Lots of people, obviously. Probably millions. Why'd you ask this question about a statement that had a clear answer?

Re:Works for tablets

[PPH]

but it works realy well for tablets and touch-enabled devices.

How nice for you. But some of us need a desktop to actually get some work done. And there, it sucks.

Um, what?

[tgd]

Windows 8 is selling extremely well.

New PCs are what isn't selling, and that has nothing to do with Windows 8, no matter what the Slashdrones like to believe. That has to do with Moore's Law finally outpacing the needs of software, the change to near universal consumption on computers.

Hardware vendors need to make upgrading hardware compelling. Microsoft can't do that -- they're selling plenty of upgrades, as it is.

Re:My solution for fixing Windows 8

[Sockatume]

Paging out every single item from VRAM just because you have to draw the desktop is like dragging everything from your sitting room into the hallway because you want to put on your socks in there.