Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Reacts To Feedback But Did They Get Windows 8.1 Right?
MojoKid writes "Microsoft's Windows "Blue" 8.1 update has been long-awaited. Those who've been using the base OS since launch have no doubt been anticipating some of the enhancements that are coming. At the moment, Windows 8.1 is available only as a preview, and if you are looking to give it a try, there are a couple of things to be aware of. The most important is the fact that once you upgrade, you can't easily downgrade — so you may wish to try the update in a virtual machine or on a test machine if possible. In addition, your current product keys will not work, so you'll effectively be turning your activated OS into an evaluation (it's assumed that once 8.1 goes final, we'll be able to update using our original keys). That said, Microsoft's free update offers a slew of enhancements like a new Start Screen, the return of the Start Button, even quicker shutdown and restart, boot to desktop, quicker integrated search and Skydrive enhancements. All told, Microsoft's new OS release is a more than worthy successor for end users but now Microsoft really needs to work on getting developers on board."
I gotta say I'm impressed with Windows 8.1 preview. It is by far the best OS there is. I'm happy that the start button is back and that they've improved Start Screen. The performance upgrades are fantastic. Everything runs so smoothly.
Windows 8.1 is by far the best Windows there is!
Soviet Microsoft requires that YOU pay to make positive posts...
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
I downloaded the dev preview.
Yeah, there's a Start button. Big deal. All it does is drop you into Metro -- pardon me. Into The-Interface-Formerly-Known-As-Metro. There's still no Start Menu, which is what the "I want the Start Button" was all about.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
...to Windows 7?
It's pretty obvious that someone high enough in their business-customer focused product guys heard enough Start button complaints to get that put back. I know a lot of people wanted the menu to return, but that was doubtful given how much Microsoft wants to see the Store and the whole Apps thing succeed.
They have made a lot of tweaks to make using Windows 8.1 on keyboard-and-mouse PCs much easier, and I'm happy for that. One thing that I desperately want back is the "themeable" user interface on the desktop. I'll even give up the Start Menu for that. I want to be able to choose between the new "Windows 2.0" desktop, the "dated and cheesy" Aero Glass theme I like in Win7, or even go all the way back to "Windows Classic" like I've been able to do since Win2K. That's just the in-box themes too -- lots of vendors used the theming code in the OS to completely transform the desktop. I was really hoping for Aero Glass to make a return (or even Aero without the Glass acceleration.) Unfortunately, it looks like they're still not listening to people on that front.
Start8 (boot-to-desktop, Win7 start menu, remove hotspots) slapped on top of Win8 solves most of my complaints about Win8, and ModernMix makes Metro apps (like Metro Netflix, since it can view SuperHD content) helps with Metro-only apps.
Start8 already has a beta out for Win8.1, to account for the fact that there is now a built-in boot-to-desktop, and that there is a system start button that needs to be removed before the fake one can be added. I'll undoubtedly get Win8.1 to get the improvements, and let Stardock fix the major annoyances for me.
Since when is fixing a fuckup that everyone bitched about so mmuch they were forced to reverse course an "enhancement"?
Common Sense isn't as Common as people think...
Pretty much mirrors my own. Although I would add in an extra side of "fuck you"...
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2013/06/28
Dream as if you'll live forever.
Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
~Anonymous~
No one is interested in the Modern UI apps and the Start screen is harder to use than the Start menu. It's a jumbled mess of icons which steals your whole screen and you have to move your mouse much more than before. Actually, I have noticed that many resort to just typing the application name they want to use into the search bar as the GUI is so clunky to use.
The minimal performance improvements, improved file transfer dialog, improved task manager, ISO mounting and DirectX 11.2, are not big enough features to justify an upgrade. All those features are good enough in Windows 7 already. Those improvements could have been released as a free Platform Update for Windows 7.
.. was naming it Windows 8, instead of Windows Tablet Edition, which could also be added to Windows 7 as a Tablet Mode.
Uh, no.
Windows 8 was a desperate attempt to get some kind of prescence on tablets and phones. To do that, they need apps. To get apps, they need to convince developers that they should develop apps for Windows 8. To do that, they had to push the tablet interface on the desktop.
Of course the idea was retarded from the start, which is why it's come around to bite them in the ass. They threw their desktop users under the bus and gained only a minimal number of tablet and phone users.
I put time and money and effort into making salable sofware products. What Microsoft has told me repeatedly is that I don't matter to them. At all.
What would motivate me, as a developer, to invest 1 more minute in a platform that's almost guaranteed to go the way of VB6, Winforms, Silverlight or XNA? Want to go to the web as your customers are demanding? Recode. Want to upgrade that game? Recode? Want to keep that nifty Silverlight app going. Find another platform and recode. Only C++ developers were extended the fundamental courtesy of running unmanaged old code along with .net. Everyone else is essentially told "tough shit." Worse, half-hearted efforts like the VB6 upgrade or WPF/Winforms hosting aren't developed to actually *work* and so end up wasting even more of your time.
VB6 should have upgraded with one click, or run between tags as unmanaged code. Winforms should either have actually been hostable in WPF, or come with a one click upgrade to an ASP simulacrum of Winform code. VBScript and JScript should have migrated to VBScript.net and JScript.net rather than the syntactic abomination that is Powershell. Those would have been the right decisions, had Microsoft given a shit.
When Microsoft finally realizes that the word "Recode" IS ALWAYS THE WRONG ANSWER when a developer needs to migrate to another platform, they might actually get some interest in their products. Not before.
Common courtesy and consideration of the financial needs of real developers would go a long way. The ISV world is not made of C++ elite. It's made of people who have to get some work done and make a living - who do not, and will never aspire to the at the top of the programming heap. That's your core audience, not the 20-something genius you hire from Kazakhstan. Cater to them and their ilk, and them only and you will fail.
Like you're doing now.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
You know about all the bitching and moaning. It is just about a new UI, that really isn't that big of a deal, especially for a group of people use to using a bunch of Operating Systems.
I haven't read many comments about Windows 8 with problems with more important things such as Driver Compatibility, Unexpect crashes, other technical problems, or Slowness.
It just sounds like a bunch of Whiny people who wants to get an Apple or Defend Linux, or are so old or autistic that they cannot handle any change.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
It took me forever to get it installed on my clean system due to likely high download demand. I thought it ran slower than Windows 8.0, and iTunes hung like crazy when opening. Other programs will likely need updates when this upgrade goes final. They added shutdown to the right click start button menu. I cannot understand why they NEVER thought about making a SHUTDOWN TILE in the first group of tiles. that would have saved them a bunch of early adopter complaints.
Microsoft owns the desktop, and has tons of money. They didn't ever say, "How do we make the desktop really good? How do we use our massive resources to make our customer's lives better?" That can include serious and radical rethinking---if it makes desktop experience better.
Microsoft had a 'smart phone' -- a real computer on a phone with a reasonably capable OS -- long before Apple and Android. Microsoft did see the future and drove into a ditch.
This Windows Phone OS UI was awful. Terrible, revolting. The UI was really bad---because they tried to do a Windows XP on a tiny thing with a stylus. (I had a treo 700 something which I got for free). There was even a little mini "control panel" and similar confusions. Because at that time the ideology was Windows Uber Alles and serving the Windows empire.
Jobs didn't insist on stuffing MacOS UI on the iPhone, because it wouldn't be GOOD for those uses. Even though it was quite different there were no deep strain of serious complaint about the UI.
So phones and tablets get popular. And Microsoft makes the same mistake AGAIN as with Windows Phone (pre 7) -- stuffing a totally inappropriate interface (and one which isn't even that pleasant) somewhere else. This time, unlike Windows Phone, greatly annoying their enormous number of paying customers.
There are all sorts of ideas about how to make better desktops at a deep level (at least browse academia for 20 years) which are substantially more than another skin.
Back in 1995, Microsoft had the good sense to copy something decent for the Win 95 UI, NeXTSTEP, though of course it was degraded, it was still clear and effective enough. Nobody missed Win 3.1's UI. Desktop customers are not stupid dinosaurs, maybe they actually notice better from worse.
Even today, if they re-implemented NeXTSTEP 1993 for Win 9 desktop, they'd still be ahead. Really.
The Metro UI is just fine... maybe even good... for a tablet.
For a mouse driven desktop PC, it is still a pile of pastel colored shit.
All they need to do is not force me to use it on PC and I'm good. I'm not offended that they did it, I just want them to get it out of my way in a place where it is not very efficient. It's not like I am demanding that they re-write the UI, they already had the Windows 7 UI for the desktop. Just slap that on top of your improvements and add the Metro option if you want or need it. Have Metro run on tablets by default and the normal Desktop run on PC's by default.
I understand that sometimes you have to push things, but there is really no benefit to Metro for PC users. There might be one for Microsoft, in that they want everyone to think of Metro as the One and Only Operating System and parlay their desktop market share into tablet share, but that doesn't actually help me in any way.
At this point, they're just being stubborn assholes. The comic got that much right.
Amazed so few people notice/care about the real issue here. It's not about UI fails and touch/mobile focus - that's a minor issue.
It's about Microsoft moving from a 'general purpose computing' model to an 'app store computing' model. Where everything has to be code-signed, approved/censored, and taxed at 30%+.
They are doing this by gradually phasing out the desktop and applying pressure to users to use Metro, by making it harder to avoid - whilst the desktop gradually has functionality stripped out (first the Start menu, now the control panel)
This is why we should absolutely reject Win8. Not because the new start screen is annoying.
...to use their desktop monopoly to gain a foothold in the tablet market. And if there were an antitrust regulator left anywhere on earth that still had the intestinal fortitude to go after Microsoft, they would be getting fined for it.
"Getting developers on board"... yeah, on board the doomed ship SS Surface.
0 1 - just my two bits
I don't think people want "desktops" as much as they want an efficient control UI for the form factor they are using. Metro is okay for tablets. It is NOT okay for PCs with mouse driven inputs. Oh sure, you can use it with a mouse, but the layout is for fat fingers which completely wastes the accuracy you can get with a mouse input device. Consider that even large icons in the Desktop are still smaller than some of the gigantic boxes you have in Metro. That's all just wasted space unless you need it.
Agreed that the "desktop" metaphor might take some time to die out of inertia, but if they had actually built a better UI for the PC, it would not take that long to overcome that inertia. The problem is that Metro is a step back for a PC with an accurate input device and significant screen real estate.
When you start a full-screen application, such as a Windows Store app or the Windows 8 Start Screen, you lose the visual context of having the application semi-visible in the background, and you tend to forget what you were working on. The effect has been called doorway amnesia; see also my previous comments. Classic Shell makes it about as tolerable as Windows 7.