Windows 8.1 RTM Trickling Out, With Start Menu and Boot-to-Desktop
poofmeisterp writes "It's about time. Windows 8.1 will be released to end users in October, and RTM is being released now: 'Windows 8.1, codenamed "Blue," is introducing a number of changes designed to make the new operating system more palatable to current Windows users. Windows 8.1 is adding a Start Button, a boot-straight-to-desktop option; the ability to unpin all Metro apps; built-in tutorials; an improved Windows Store and a host of other consumer- and business-focused features. Microsoft launched its one and only Windows 8.1 consumer preview test build in late June.'"
The start button takes you from the Desktop right back to the Metro screen, which is what pisses everyone off in the first place.
Start working on Windows 9, you won't redeem this one so late in the game.
How about an option to disable Metro completely? Opening the same jpeg in Paint versus Metro takes about 1/10th the time. Metro is not an improvement!
Sometimes, the doctor turned the words around and with Windows, adding a start button that turns the desktop around back to the Metro zombie screen isn't going to help.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
Ahh... Windows 8.1. The one requiring a "Trusted Computing" TPM in the PC to get a Window certification.
Thanks Microsoft - I really want a hardware dongle in the machine to enforce DRM and ensure that I never really own the machine as I don't have the keys to it. Cheers.
P.S. How's that arrangement with the NSA coming BTW?
That is not a start menu. That is a start screen. Who do they think is falling for this nonsense. The reality is, it was never about the start button. It was about taking a usable productive and powerful desktop environment using precision pointing and fast text input, and swapping it out for the weakest of the tablet OS's. In the hope in creating what they call an ecosystem, and moving the computer into an locked down electronic device running Micro$oft Store (The $ stands for money grabbing Monopolist), Rather than compete on price that 70% gross margins still too thin.
The real question is is it iOS, Android, Chrome or GNU/Linux
Bottom line? Don't make me learn new interface stuff. I hate it. If it takes a non-zero amount of time for me to think about it, it's not a value, add; it's a value-subtract.
FYI, this goes for ALL software AND programming languages. Adding a few things incrementally to use new features is fine. Changing interfaces or behaviors wholesale isn't.
This should fall into the "common sense" category - something the software industry isn't exactly famous for being able to perceive or implement.
Disclaimer: I write software for a living. Please don't hate me.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Please rewrite headline, it is misleading. There is a world of difference between the Start "Menu" and the Start "Button". 8.1 forces you back into metro through the Start Button and doesn't resolve people issues in the slightest. Metro is still forced on you and it is still wholly unsuitable to the enterprise. While Microsoft at least listened to people about boot to desktop, they showed continued contempt for their customer base by refusing to replace the Start Menu.
Fix the headline and stop propagating Microsoft's spin, this is a band-aid on sucking chest wound and nothing more.
Let's not confuse the two -- an icon in the lower left corner that takes one to the "start screen" was not what was asked for. What was asked for was an actual start menu, not a button that takes you to a page full of icons. It's extremely annoying that Microsoft would deliberately choose to misunderstand this. (They couldn't be stupid enough to think that's what we really wanted.)
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
"Boot straight to XP" mode.... with the memory and disk requirements of Windows 8; better thing would've been to bundle an XP inside of Windows 8; and provide an option to Boot Straight To XP mode; there's still metric tons worth software that will run only on XP; not even Vista nor 7.
People who truly need or want the Metro stuff can boot to that junk if they want to; and they'd probably get what they deserve.
That way MS can keep legacy code and legacy depending customers happy; and still provide them a path to run so-called modern apps which are a pain in the desktop.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
It appears that Microsoft are responding to the needs of their customers
The response was "fuck you"
> It appears that Microsoft are responding to the needs of their customers.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Once you get used to it, the new Start menu is ok. You don't spend much time in there anyway.
The real pain in the ass are the stupid full screen Metro apps. Yeah, they just pop up with brightly colored interface that is optimized for touch. They completely disrupt your workflow, there is no visible Exit-button, and they do that for one screen only (if you have multimonitor system, you will totally hate this).
This happens more every now and then and I have to go through some trouble to replace them with better OSS alternatives. If you are watching a video, default app might pop up, and maybe nag about codec or not being up to date - when you really just want to see the video now, with clear controls. PDF reader pops up with no clear navigation and ofcourse fullscreen, and these ofcourse always go to the same monitor, even if you would like to read the PDF on screen #2, while coding. Shit like this happens also with images and music, and the interface is just .. horrible.
I don't even care anymore, if they fixed this. I've been downloading OSS replacements for just about every program and I am curretly ok with my Windows. But instead of fixing the Start menu, which is only a minor nuisance, they could make WINDOWED and USABLE default apps.
They should also shoot the guy, who designed all their new software (Office, Visual Studio..) USING ONLY CAPS FOR TITLES, patch them back to normal and make my eyes hurt less.
When you're done GNU/Linux is here for you to upgrade to.
It has been marked flamebait, which is kind of strange considering users are migrating on the Desktop to GNU/Linux(For want of a name) Chrome and Android (seriously!?), the trend is small, but noticeable. Apple is having its own problem on the Desktop.
The bottom line is this version Metro is going to be Microsoft's OS offering those hostages of XP, end of Line only months away. I have to say the timing of Balmers departure looks almost as convenient as Bill (Fuck your charity) Gates (I don't need to pay taxes I have a charity) exit.
It appears that Microsoft are responding to the needs of their customers. This is a good start.
Not always, no. There are famous quotes by people from Henry Ford to Gene Roddenberry that all come down to "people don't know what they want". And it's true, if MS asked what people wanted, 90% would say XP, solely because they're used to it.
Part of the reason Apple is so successful is that they followed a vision despite all naysayers. As seen in both Windows 8 and X-Box One, Microsoft tends to backpedal on their vision. Not being sure about your own products can hardly lead to market success.
PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
Personally, I think this stuff with the Start Button is a side show. Even if they reverted it back completely to the Win7 behavior, it wouldn't remedy the underlying problems with the OS and the MS software ecosystem in general. In particular: the persistent development of their own "standards" for the purposes of locking out competition, general dumbing down of the OS, poor CLI integration (please just build-in Bash), no multiple desktops, and why sometimes when I drag many large files into a new directory does Win 7 spend ages doing a copy then delete?
soylentnews.org
Giving me an uninstall feature and I might consider it. ;)
Try ubuntu.com.
How effin difficult is it to get the difference?
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
Windows 8.1 is just fast, intuitive, customizable, and a lot better than windows 7. Don't care for the old start menu, never really used it, never cared for it, plus the windows 7 menu does not scroll when it exceeds the icon limit in favorites. With the metro I can pin more than 50+ applications on a single screen without the need to scroll, although, the scrolling never really bothered me. Installing the 8.1 OS, apps, applications, configuring, and transferring files is just better and faster than 7.
Windows 8/8.1 I think is a lot more productive than xp/7. To some people the metro may look childish but it's definitely easier on the eyes and quicker accessing applications just by looking at the tile icons instead of squinting reading the icon text like in windows 7 start menu. Overall, windows 8.1 is excellent.
Linux, I still have beef with the linux being too internet dependent(not everyone has 24/7 perfect internet) when it comes to installing applications(store mines in storage for later installs), although I can install whatever i need and just use aptoncd(sometimes works) or relinux to make another distro. The linux DE's are still flaky although mate and cinnamon put windows7 menu to shame. Unity is fine just wish they would make it more like the metro where you can pin whatever applications you want into the dash.
To the shills bleating about people denigrating Windows 8 as "just whiners" are being a bit disingenuous. We run Windows because we have to. Companies standardize on Windows because certain applications only run there. However, we do *not* have to go out and buy whatever crapheap Microsoft grunts out, because we're up on the shallow end of the curve regarding Windows -- with all its faults and security holes, it's gotten about as good as it's going to get. We haven't had to anticipate the large collection bugfixes, paradigm fixes and interface compatibility that is the next version of Windows since XP. There is no new USB-like interface that would make us snap up 98SE as soon as it's available. There's no huge stability increase that would make us slaver for Win2000 or WinXP. Even Win7 was really just a minor improvement.
The issue, if any, is that new systems have Win8 crapped all over it, and Win8 is another one of those ill-advised attempts at "leading the industry" by producing a bad copy of what Microsoft thinks everyone else is doing. This requires reimaging at work, which is ok because we'd probably do that anyway, and I can still get Win7 through my OEM, so systems I build for friends and relatives are not affected that much. But someone buys a laptop and it has that nasty interface on it, and they bring it to me, and well, I'm afraid I have some bad news. I can put the start menu back, but all the other stuff -- the charms and hot corners and sliding gestures that can't be done on a trackpad, you're stuck with those, unless you pay for another copy of Windows.
We are at the point where we don't care about a new OS anymore, because we have actual work to do that does not entail learning the quirks of a new OS.
This goes double for servers. We still have a lot of stuff running on Server 2003, because it works and there's no reason to swap it out. Newer machines will have Server 2008, which is still ok, but we have no inclination to deal with the metro-esque misfeatures of 2012.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Patch XP past its EOL, and charge $30/yr for the patch subscriptions. I'll buy it.
What I will NEVER do is use a locked-down phone platform as my primary device.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Not always, no. There are famous quotes by people from Henry Ford to Gene Roddenberry that all come down to "people don't know what they want". And it's true, if MS asked what people wanted, 90% would say XP, solely because they're used to it.
This is actually something I think about often. Steve Jobs' "genius" was that he always told people what they wanted, then gave it to them.
Microsoft, on the other hand, always CLAIMS to make changes because "that's what people want." They do endless research to see what buttons people click after they click this or that button, and then they make those buttons bigger so they're easier to click. They arrange the Office Ribbon based on what they see people doing. Everything, EVERYTHING is based on research, both through direct surveys and blind feedback from their software running in the wild... ...and yet, when they make the changes, most people seem to respond negatively. But Microsoft won't revise its changes -- or allow a smart, Steve Jobs-like human to make the decisions -- because they have all this research, so they "know" what people want. "You say you hate this? Well you're wrong, you don't hate it, and I can prove it."
TL;DR Microsoft actually seems hamstrung by its own design methodology. It designs by committee, vote, and statistical study, rather than by inspiration -- and its slavish adherence to those methods means it has a hard time recovering from its own mistakes.
Breakfast served all day!
One of the crappy features of Win8 is that they try their best to shove a Microsoft Account down your throat and use it to log into your OWN computer. I'm betting that their intentions include using that account to increasingly more datamine various things about your and your computer usage. That's not cool at all.
I get the RTM from torrent instead of waiting till October.
I bet Micro$oft is tired of supporting XP
Bless them maybe they should spend a little of that 70% Gross Margin. Customers measure support from time of purchase as does consumer law. The bottom line is XP users had no viable upgrade option till Windows 7, and then that is unlikely to support XP machines and peripherals.
Just finished learning how to use the new Windows 8, now they expect me to learn the old way again? Never. LOL.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
*looks it over*
Oh hey a start button.
*Click*
Why am I back here at this Metro thing?
*click click*
Yeah I'm not paying for this either. Please go take another long hard look at Windows XP and Windows 7 and try again thinking "Classic Interface". For further references please see Windows 95, and 98. If you go near ME then we'll have to feed you to the forum trolls.
~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
Where is the file manager in "Metro" ?
None, just as there is no file manager in Android, unless you download an app. Developers developers developers developers!
I have been using Windows 8 on a few of my machines. I have been trying and failing to understand why Metro exists on desktops. I can understand tablets, but desktops? What does it do for an advanced user that cannot be done in standard desktop? From many examples I have seen so far, it appears that Microsoft ships two different ways of accomplishing various system related tasks (e.g. Windows update). If you use the old way in desktop, you are provided more options and given more information. The Metro version is made grandma friendly. You see nothing, you can change nothing.
Additionally some things just take longer to do in Metro.
These sort of thing keeps me from wanting to use Metro. But it keeps getting shoved in my face. I am really truly baffled. Maybe there is a benefit to this and I cannot see forest for the trees. Somebody enlighten me.
Not always, no. There are famous quotes by people from Henry Ford to Gene Roddenberry that all come down to "people don't know what they want". And it's true, if MS asked what people wanted, 90% would say XP, solely because they're used to it.
Part of the reason Apple is so successful is that they followed a vision despite all naysayers. As seen in both Windows 8 and X-Box One, Microsoft tends to backpedal on their vision. Not being sure about your own products can hardly lead to market success.
Sure. And part of the reason why The-Artist-Formerly-Known-As-RIM is on the brink of implosion is that they followed a vision despite all naysayers.
See how that works? Dip-shit decisions are dip-shit decisions regardless of how stubborn you are.
Only time will reveal if Microsoft's stubborn unwillingness to budge on recent UI moves will turn out to be brilliant or not. For now all we (the users) know is that we don't like it, which isn't a great sign.
"Oh no... he found the
I have been using Windows 8 on a few of my machines. I have been trying and failing to understand why Metro exists on desktops. I can understand tablets, but desktops? What does it do for an advanced user that cannot be done in standard desktop?
What it is intended to do is boost Microsoft's anemic penetration of the mobile market by forcing everyone to get accustomed to the Zune-style tiles UI on the desktop machines they have to use at work so they'll see a phone or tablet and won't shy away, and somehow this will translate to market share. Unfortunately, it's a non-starter because people buy phones and tablets for relaxing AFTER work. Because after 5 pm it's time to do something DIFFERENT than PowerPoint and Outlook and Excel.
I do a lot of remote IT support, and it's a nightmare getting that damn thing to pop up in an RDP or logmein session.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Users only exist as lock-in to pay for the arbitrary, stupid, and blundering design path of Windows. Windows is not to serve them. They are to serve Windows.
Now listen to me, all of you. You are all condemned men. We keep you alive to serve this ship. So row well, and live.
Your eyes are full of hate, forty-one. That's good. Hate keeps a man alive. It gives him strength.
Battle speed!... Attack speed!... Ramming speed!
I just tried that. I was offered a choice: 'Paint', the MS provided basic image editor, or 'Paint.NET', the full featured system I installed.
Oddly enough, I knew the name of that one. I also know the names of Lightroom and GIMP, so I can type those too.
If you don't know what you're looking for, use the clumsy visual search capabilities, but don't go knocking the quick simple way for people that are familiar with the system to interact with it.
Why must people use faulty examples? If you type "pai" you get paint. Same is true of the control panel entries. When using the app search, filename for programs and CP entries doesn't matter as much as what it's called. It isn't my preferred method of interacting, but it does work well. At least understand what you're talking about...
While the Start Screen and Metro engine unnecessarily consumes resources in the background.
Steve Jobs' talent was that he understood computers should be easy for everybody to use, in a time where they were technically intricate wonders for the initiated circle. He understood what people needed.
The real irony is what Microsoft actually resembles most: a Communist central planning agency. They hand down five year plans that look good on paper and test well in "focus groups" but that end up causing general mayhem and malaise when force-fed to the workers.
It's as if Ballmer was visiting East Germany when the wall came down, and got a good deal on a bunch of old books they were throwing out.
It seems pretty obvious (to me, anyway; I'm a home user rather than an IT worker) that in Windows 8, Microsoft wanted to try to appeal to both tablet users with Metro, and to desktop users with the traditional desktop, all in one release. So they bolted a tablet interface to a desktop interface. It's sort of an odd combination, especially if you're new to Metro. Since the OS boots into Metro, it also seems pretty obvious that Microsoft's design choices wouldn't please business users or home users with large, non-touchscreen monitors who aren't interested in their computers looking like a tablet.
As part of its marketing campaign for IE 11, Microsoft's made Windows 8.1 Pro Preview virtual machine images available, so it's easy to try it out for yourself. The Start button takes you back to the Metro start screen, unless you right-click on it, in which case it brings up a context menu allowing you access to some of the more technical aspects of the OS (i.e. control panel; power shell; etc.).
I haven't played with it enough yet to find the setting that allows you to boot straight into the desktop rather than Metro, but even so, it's just one click to go to the desktop. But what they really to make desktop users happy is a Start menu button application launcher, and if you want that, AFAIK, you still have to install a 3rd-party utility.
I really don't get what the point adding the start button even does at this point in time, except as a demonstration that Microsoft didn't understand what the actual problem was. Anyone can hit the windows key or even ctrl+escape to access the metro screen. What people wanted back was the familiar menu. The "start button" is irrelevant and merely a waste of space if all it does is activate the metro screen we already have.
What I find interesting about this is not simply the fact they have implemented the start menu and a boot to desktop option. It's the simple fact that when we (Enterprises) sat down with Senior Microsoft Architects and internal consultants two years ago for our Windows 8 upgrade options, they swore black and blue with utter confidence, "It's never coming back". I thought this provided a nice insight into Microsoft's culture and communication.
Windows has been the work-horse OS for every serious user since Windows 2000. However, after the most recent rise of Apple, the braindead upper management of Microsoft decided that all their products needed to be high-fashion toys, with new pointless and useless gimmicks to be learnt with each new generation of release. Intel was an active partner of this initiative, since each new iteration of Windows and associated products would be slower, thus needing the latest Intel chips to return speed to the PC.
The upshot is that Windows 7 x64 marks the last edition of Windows that serious users will ever consider or need. Everything important from Windows 8 (like point upgrades to DirectX) will be silently released as updates to Windows 7. Windows 8 is such a disaster, Microsoft would be cutting off its nose to spite its face if it encouraged ANY proper windows apps (not RT/Metro/New-UI) to only run on Windows 8. Microsoft's big under-the-hood architectural change was from XP to Vista. Vista/Win7/Win8 can be considered the same for real use.
Microsoft will never again produce a truly 'new' desktop OS. Variants of Win7 are all you will ever get now, dressed up in high fashion clothes that will be labelled "9", "10" or whatever. And life is too short to bother wrangling these post-7 variants back into something as useful as 7.
With Ballmer gone, expect Win9 to offer 'flavours' including "original". The RT/Metro/New-UI crap will be reworked into a 'free' OS to allow for mobile devices as cheap as those that use Android, but this move will be far too late.
Microsoft's trashing of XP and the users that still find it perfect will prove to be Microsoft's greatest mistake. The error would have been mitigated if Microsoft itself stood behind Windows 7 x64, and formally declared it the next XP for serious users. Instead, Microsoft pays (and I mean PAYS) shills to flood forums like this with dribble about how haters of Windows 8 are moronic Luddites. Given that those who defend XP and Win7 are defending Microsoft products, Microsoft is using shills to trash brand loyalty, and this is extraordinarily self-destructive.
Linux without some form of X based desktop is fine for servers, but really less than appealing in user land.
I'd bet an Android based GUI has been more successful in terms of number of devices in use than all X based GUIs combined.
A desktop background is not behavior. The amount of screen space that the application starting method covers is behavior. There's a difference.
unlike Linux, Windows costs me money.
I'd wager a good amount that you dick around for hours making linux 'work appropriately'
This sounds like the old saw "Linux is free iff your time is worth nothing." But in practice, the time/money tradeoff isn't the same in all situations. Someone might be learning to operate a computer on the meager amount that a minor is allowed to earn under child labor laws. Building a nettop out of a Raspberry Pi with GNU/Linux is cheaper than building a PC with Windows. Or the Balassa-Samuelson model demonstrates how countries without a mature export industry tend to have undervalued currencies. People in such countries have to buy Windows in US dollars, which are worth more hours of their labor than would be the case for someone in a G8 country buying Windows.
I've tried several Windows applications that members of my family use under Wine on my Linux laptop. Then I found out why they were rated "garbage" in AppDB.
I am working on a project at home where I need virtual machines with hostnames so I can type in the name of the servers in an url in all 3 browsers. I can't do this in Windows 8 as it will ignore my custom HOSTS file.
Then run your own DNS server on one of those VMs.
When you're not a computer geek or Microsoft employee, you don't necessarily touch computers every day, and trying to remember which hot corner to touch or where your application is, or how to get out of a full screen Metro app, is not something they're going to remember or even want to try to figure out.
Then put stickers on the four corners of the monitor: "<- Start Screen" at the bottom left, "<- Switch App" at the top left, and "-> Charms" at the top right. It'd be like the cardboard overlays on the F keys back in the DOS days.
I.T. people cant and dont use random weirdo programs from no-name companies.
You mean like Firefox? What makes Mozilla Corp less of a "no-name" developer than Ivo Beltchev?
It's really a simple strategy. Microsoft needed a way into the smartphone/tablet space. So, they push the same interface across all devices. Now slowly everyone will upgrade to Windows 8, either by buying new PCs as their's die, upgrading, using computers at work, etc. Then when they go to buy a phone or tablet, the interface is already familiar.
They basically don't give a shit if it's an inferior interface for the desktop, because they know people won't have a choice as Windows 7 goes EOL they'll be forced to use it.
the waste of having 2 gigs for a DNS server
You wouldn't need 2 GB. There are plenty of small GNU/Linux distributions and smaller BusyBox/Linux distributions into which you can install a DNS server.
And so it also is on MS Windows due to codec weirdness, yet there are simple solutions that work on both platforms like VLC.
Then use Mint. I'd rather have a Mint than a Saucy Salamander.
It is a big deal if you have to replace a core component of an OS with a third party solution to make it usable.
A logical acting company would hire the developer of "Classic Shell/ Start Menu". Microsoft, however, contacted him (a rough guess) to change the freaking Windows icon. It is already ironic that something open source, hosted at sourceforge may have saved millions of lost sales for Microsoft.
> 64 bit memory management was by far the most important upgrade.
agreed agreed agreed. Also agree with the rest of your response, and would like to add -- the search on start menu on Win7 has a really annoying, almost whimsical delay. I use mstsc a *lot* (as an admin) and I've found that you need to count one-one-thousand-two-one-thousand after typing it before hitting return, or you get the file explorer instead. Why? Who the HELL knows. Just some quirk they never got around to fixing, apparently.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Not home consumers - they don't care if Windows 7 is EOL, they'll use their PC till it dies. And for corporate customers, they usually install their own image on any new hardware they get, so Windows 8 coming pre-loaded won't help with them.
I know there is all this hate about the Windows 8 UI, I have it in a VM. If you make the launcher the smallest size of a 1080p screen you can fit 294 icons on the screen without even scrolling. (actually another 16 on the far right edge so 310). If for some reason you use more than that you can click the little down arrow and get all your applications in categories just like the Start Menu you're used to, with the exception of not having to click for categories, so actually better.
Call me shill even though I run Linux at home, at least I look at new UIs and don't just say it's bad because it's different/Microsoft.
My wife works from home as a Medical Recruiter, should she get all pissy with I.T. because her laptop has to comply with HIPAA regulations?
That depends on the answer to the following: What in HIPAA forbids the IT department to review and deploy Classic Shell or Start8?
The fix is to run the thing in the environment it's been developed for.
This requires acquiring a lot of Windows licenses.
Personally I'd like to see a windows platform version of wine for all the old stuff that won't run on win7 but will run on wine
Wine under Cygwin has been attempted, but I don't know whether it's supported. You could try running Wine under Xubuntu or a similarly light GNU/Linux operating system in a VM.
What exactly is Apple's problem on the desktop? Other than the cost of a Mac?
As the whole "perspectives on the new UI" argument has been done to death, I'll only add my personal feelings - no demands on Microsoft, it's their product. But I really despise the jarring change of perspective using the Start Screen, I like the overall image of the desktop to remain static - which this new version will apparently provide (to be clear, I watch movies/game etc, but when working with a document and the web side by side, I don't want to visually have to reacquire every time I hit the winkey). I installed a 3rd party addon - problem solved. However, I think that the criticisms have been overly harsh on an element that is relatively unimportant with aforementioned fix; what is nice about Windows 8 is the improved Windows Explorer, the snappier boot times, the decent multi-monitor support (hey, look - I don't have extensive requirements, it does everything I need in a straightforward manner), the ridiculous ease of home networking/NAS media storage etc, the fact I can install the vast majority of software and expect it to work etc. Despite all that, I haven't upgraded the beta because the changes appear to affect components I no longer see or deal with (Smartglass aside - useful for Netflix control to the TV). I haven't looked at the Windows Store in months, and nor it seems, do I need to.
*Insert ridiculous, apparently intelligent but ultimately meaningless phrase here*
Yeah I agree with you, generally speaking. 99% of consumers don't ever upgrade their OS, but just threw in that caveat because some will. And Enterprises will be the ones that are pushed onto Windows 8 by the EOL.
You are tolling again Tepples.
Is there some sincerity mark to show that I honestly don't know why something isn't possible?
You know why I.T locks things down and standardizes machine loads.
I still don't know why the IT department, which has the power to decide what the standardized machine load consists of, can't include Classic Shell in the standardized machine load.
JUST when i buy Windows 8...
No, it isn't. I wasn't comparing Windows 8 to Windows 7. Your argument is correct, but so is mine. However, Windows 8 would consume even less resources if the Start Screen and Metro engine were shut down.