Windows 8.1 Finally Passes Windows 8 In Market Share

An anonymous reader writes "May was the seventh full month of availability for Microsoft's latest operating system version: Windows 8.1 continues to grow slowly while Windows 8 remains largely flat, allowing the former to finally pass the latter in market share. At the same time, Windows 7 has managed to climb back over the 50 percent mark, while Windows XP still has more than 25 percent of the pie, despite support for the ancient OS finally ending in April."

Comments

12.64 percent in only 17 months

[symbolset]

It is a shame the next update still won't have the promised start menu.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Irate Engineer]

It is a shame the next corpse still won't have life.

FTFY

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[rubycodez]

will take more than a start button to fix windows 8.x

that's like putting parsley garnish on a dish full of shit

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

It is a shame the next corpse still won't have life.

Dinosaurs get overtaken by mammals. C'est la vie.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, from a structural standing, Windows 8 is fine, even better than the ones that came before.

It's the UI they changed.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Penguinisto]

It is a shame the next update still won't have the promised start menu.

Yeah, but funny as hell that, combined, Windows 8.x (all versions) is only ~25% after three years (a complete tech cycle in the consumer realm). It's doubly funny that this is in spite of every bix-box OEM pimping 8.x as hard as they friggin' can (go ahead and try to buy a laptop in BestBuy or Wal-Mart with something other than Windows 8 in it...)

Now compare that crappy growth curve to XP, 98, 95...

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[meerling]

It's more like looking at that plastic spork and giving them a stainless steel knife & fork again.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

For the majority of users the OS is the UI.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[jbolden]

If the OEMs were pimping Windows 8 they wouldn't be selling non touchscreen laptops without complex hinges. The OEMs have been "pimping" Windows 7 hardware with Windows 8 installed.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Jmstuckman]

Three years used to be a complete tech cycle in the consumer realm -- back in the 90s and early 2000s -- but the average consumer no longer upgrades their computer nearly that often. Most of my friends are still using 5-7 year old hardware, because the hardware from that era is still perfectly capable of running today's software. Your techie friends may upgrade every three years, but nobody else does.

The vast majority of consumers only upgrade their OS when they buy a new system. The lack of uptake of Windows 8 is simply because not that many people have replaced their computer in the last few years. Unfortunately, a lot of the hardware from the 2004-2005 era (the first generation of systems to take DDR2 RAM) is still floating around. Because these systems shipped with XP, they are still running XP, and we now have a problem on our hands.

Compare the Windows 8 growth curve to XP? That 9-year-old hardware from 2005 is still perfectly adequate for most tasks. On the other hand, using a PC from 1992 when XP came out in 2001 would have been impossible (unless you were rich, that computer would have had a 386 CPU and a hard drive with less than 100MB!)

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

I have yet to experience a Windows release where the majority of the chant was exactly this, until the HUGE, OBVIOUS, AND UNMISTAKABLE structural issues come to light after a few major security breaches. Not even Windows 8 has failed this test, and it is already getting owned in the wild with little abandon.

Re: 12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

And many of them are advertising Windows 7, not 8. I was looking for a laptop yesterday and on Dell's website they had an advertisement that "we still have Windows 7! Check out our Windows 7 computers!" You known your new OS sucks when companies are advertising that they DON'T have it.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Beck_Neard]

You mean 40% of servers, 96% of supercomputers, and 80% of smartphones/tablets?

Linux may have started out as a desktop OS, but now it's very much a server/enterprise/workstation (am I allowed to use that word anymore?) OS. Oh, and also embedded devices and phones (really, everything except the desktop). Turns out, the average person who buys a PC is going to use the OS the computer ships with and will never upgrade.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[0123456]

And who, exactly, wants a touchscreen on a laptop? Touchscreens are a crappy interface for devices too crappy to include a keyboard and mouse.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Blaskowicz]

Embedded devices such as the one that hands you cash through a slit run "Windows XP Embedded"

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Jahoda]

I think you got modded a bit high on this one. I am happy to hate 8.x as much as the next man. But 8 was released October 26, 2012. That is a scant 17 months ago. Wwhat I suddenly, with these stats, realize to be depressing is that apparently, even given all the terrible publicity and negative-everything, it's managed to hit 25% in 18 months. :/

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Jahoda]

:ugh: 19 months ago, not 17 - embarassing.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Hadlock]

This probably has something to do with the fact that Chromebooks are something like 20% of the new laptop marketshare, Apple commands something like 25 or 30% leaving Windows with 50-60%, whereas Microsoft used to own 90% wholesale of the market. It's a lot harder to replace your old market share with new when you have half of the market presence you did six years ago, and the consumer marketplace is contracting at the same time. Desktop numbers probably look a lot better, but consumers buy laptops 2:1 and enterprise has learned to move from a 3 to a 6 year upgrade cycle.
 
My next laptop is going to be an Android powered laptop or Chromebook with crouton on it, so I can RDP in to work (windows environment). Nothing I do besides games requires Windows these days, and Steam in Home Streaming will probably solve that as well.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

Please explain then, how the (according to slashdot, idiot) non-technical Mac userbase has a 51% uptake of Mavericks inside of 12 months? No, it doesn't automatically deploy, and no, 51% of the Mac userbase is not on 12 month old hardware. I'll offer a hypothesis: Mavericks offers things end Mac end-users want. Windows 8 does not offers things Windows users want. For what it's worth - our company hardware rotation is 3 years on desktops, 5 years on servers.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't mean to make a pun here when I say you're out of touch.

People have nearly always put their damned fingers on the screen when they wanted things to happen. Children were doing that before touchscreens got big.

The big problem is this slashdot idea that if you have a touchscreen then you can't have a keyboard and mouse.

A mouse (and especially a touchpad) -- that's a crappy interface device for a civilization that can't manufacture good touch devices and program good touch software.

And yes, I prefer using a keyboard and mouse most of the time. I grew up on it. Same reason I prefer QWERTY, and the same reason I'm good with our ridiculous units of time.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[rcht148]

It is a shame the next update still won't have the promised start menu.

I think it makes complete business sense NOT to give start menu to Windows 8.x users.
If they did give it to a Windows 8.x user like me for free, I would lose a major incentive to buy an upgrade to Windows 9.
Not saying that start menu will be the only change in Win 9 but the start menu guarantees that I will be upgrading.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Blaskowicz]

Millions of them use a RTOS or no OS at all.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think they have. But it would be reasonable to assume that they have followed, at the very least, some basic principles of Operating System Design and not made the processes responsible for the UI also responsible for device drivers, multitaskig, file systems or networking; to name a few.

One of the main differences between Windows and Unix structures is that one is tightly integrated and the other is a bit more loose and allows the possibility to mix-and-match of the various components that make up the OS, from the kernel outward towards the UI (graphical or otherwise), and everything in between.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[reboot246]

Windows 8.1 beating 8.0 is like a polished turd beating the original turd. It's still a turd.

Maybe 9 will be better . . .

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[miffo.swe]

People did upgrade, just not into the same form factor for their computer. They bought mobile phones and tablets instead of a Windows PC.

And if you look at what they use for their daily computing the mobile is center and the PC is for some tasks that sucks on a mobile phone. Mostly things that has not been successfully translated to the smaller screens or demands a real keyboard.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Froboz23]

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the Windows kernel, UI, and default browser all share essential low-level processes, and therefore could never ever possibly be decoupled.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[0123456]

People have nearly always put their damned fingers on the screen when they wanted things to happen.

Since when? I've never seen anyone put their damned fingers on a PC screen and expect it to do something.

A mouse (and especially a touchpad) -- that's a crappy interface device for a civilization that can't manufacture good touch devices and program good touch software.

About the only things a touchsceen is better at than a keyboard and mouse are finger painting, or clicking huge icons in a fast food store. For anything that requires any kind of precision, a touchscreen is an appallingly bad interface.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[jones_supa]

How is OS X organized?

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

This could be an OEM issue (Dell and Asus being notorious competent and all); but I am, so far, 2 for 2 on Win8 machines that experience the delightful "Failure configuring Windows updates. Reverting changes. Do not turn off your computer" perpetual hang.

Thankfully these aren't mine, just test machines; but it hasn't endeared the system to me so far, even if I did like the UI changes.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Gadget_Guy]

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the Windows kernel, UI, and default browser all share essential low-level processes, and therefore could never ever possibly be decoupled.

That is incorrect. The kernel can happily work without the UI, and you get the choice for this when installing Windows Server. It has two modes: Server Core Installation and Server with a GUI. With Server Core Installation, the server is configured be either a Powershell command prompt or using administration tools from a Windows computer. This is the default installation option.

The links to Internet Explorer were removed after they copped so much flak for it. This is why you can no longer customise the HTML of the folder view for specific folders among other missing features.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Gadget_Guy]

Please explain then, how the (according to slashdot, idiot) non-technical Mac userbase has a 51% uptake of Mavericks inside of 12 months? No, it doesn't automatically deploy, and no, 51% of the Mac userbase is not on 12 month old hardware. I'll offer a hypothesis: Mavericks offers things end Mac end-users want. Windows 8 does not offers things Windows users want.

The explanation is that Mavericks is a free upgrade, while Windows 8 is not. A correct analogy with Mavericks would be that the free Window 8.1 update has passed 50% within 3 months of release.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

Touchscreen is an awful interface on a PC/Laptop. Why? It fucks up your shoulders. Bad.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[stoolpigeon]

I went through that with a rather expensive Samsung. They finally rolled out a bios update that let me apply 8.1 but getting out of that loop was a real pain.

This is my biggest issue with Windows now. Not the OS itself but the lack of decent hardware vendors.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

Touch my screen with your greasy fingers if you want to die. Nothing wrong with touchscreens as an idea, but they really need a way to do it without leaving fingermarks on the surface.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Mashiki]

That's nice and all. But so is MacOS and 'nix, so your point again being what?

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Maxwell]

Server core still has the GUI, it does not have Windows Explorer and many of the GUI applications, but the kernel level basics are still there. Try typing "notepad" in your powershell window - up it comes. You can have multiple powershell sessions open, in windows, on you console. You can even RDP the console once configured.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[gfxguy]

Late 2012 I bought a laptop... I almost always use Linux, but decided to try Windows 8.0 and see what all the hub-bub was about, so I went ahead and got one with Windows 8.0 (and then configured dual boot to Linux). Now, I admit that one of the first things I did was install "Classic Shell" and delete a bunch of preinstalled crap that Toshiba installed (like any Windows box/laptop that comes preinstalled). After doing that, I'm at a loss, as a personal box, why people think it's so much worse than Windows 7.0. Yes, I realize I had to install something to make it work better for me, but I don't get the big deal about it.

I ended up "permanently lending" my laptop to my daughter, but just recently home built a new desktop; again, dual boot Linux and Windows, and figured, since XP was finally just recently EOLed, that I'd just go ahead and get the latest Windows. Like I said, I admit I don't use it much, but it does crop up now and then. I do not have a million applications installed, I do some very lightweight development (usually in Python, and only when the scripts need to run on Windows), but I got 8.1 and did the same thing I did before - installed the latest "Classic Shell," and with no preinstalled OEM crap, didn't even bother removing any "apps."

There are certainly some standpoints that I can see complaints coming from... I guess, like tablets, applications don't actually like to close, they just sort of get pushed to the background, which wreaks havoc in situations where you are using floating licenses for expensive software (which we do at work for our animators, but not for me). But on the whole, as an end user, I don't get where all the whining is coming from.

Re: 12.64 percent in only 17 months

[gfxguy]

They're giving into the hype, and catering to people's impressions, not necessarily "admitting" 8.x is worse than 7.0. 8.0 came out, and people just whined and complained, so OEMs jumped on the bandwagon to offer 7.0 instead. Frankly, I've only seen one valid complaint (after installing "Classic Shell"), and not a single valid complaint for a typical home user. It's another case of people not liking it because it's new without taking the time to customize it to their like - which is what I end up doing every time I install Linux, too.

It's interesting to me that the strong point about Linux is that it's so customizable to one's own preferences, from the command line to Unity, but if making Windows 8.x largely like 7, but with all the new features, takes installing a program, then it's the worst thing ever!

I'll admit again (like I did in another post) that I largely use Linux, but I've got a laptop with 8.0 and a desktop with 8.1 pro, and just don't get all the whining about it.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[gfxguy]

Ha! Was waiting for this response. I used to yell at people for touching my screen with their greasy fingers. I accept it for my phone and small tablet for portability reasons, the fact you don't always have a surface to use a mouse or space for a keyboard, but with the desktop OR laptop, you can keep your greasy fingers to yourself. Frankly, the surface tablets are great that way... you can carry them around for portability, but if you're sitting at a desk you can add a keyboard and mouse. I don't have one... I don't really want one... but it's definitely convenient.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[gfxguy]

Classic Shell is free... I don't get why this is not publicized more; it makes the Windows 8.x experience very much like Windows 7.0 for typical computing tasks. I guess since it's one of the first things I installed, it's why I don't get all the complaining. No, it's not exactly the same as Windows 7.0, but it shouldn't have to be... that would have been pointless.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I think what surprised me most was that the issue was so serious: assorted trialware, upsell nag screens, and a default 'metro' environment that was probably 50% ads were expected. Such has been the way of the Wintel OEMs since the days of yore.

Shipping a Windows image too broken to take Microsoft's own updates, though, seems like something that Microsoft would want to discourage, whether by bullying vendors during pricing negotiations, having 'Windows Defender', um, actually defend Windows, or by threatening to withhold WHQL approval if it's a driver issue rather than an application or service.

It's particularly weird because the pool of vendors for core hardware(obviously the world of peripherals and option cards is enormous; but the list of vendors soldered to the motherboard of a low to midrange laptop is likely to be a lot shorter: probably Intel for CPU, GPU, and assorted chipset, maybe Intel for wired and wireless ethernet, Broadcom or Realtek if it's a cheapie, possibly Aetheros or Ralink for wireless. Sound will vary; but be at least approximately compliant with 'Intel HD' or 'AC97', firmware almost certainly comes from one of two or three companies that still do that) isn't all that large, and has an obvious interest in their stuff working with whatever Microsoft is selling.

Bad industrial design, and preloaded shitware aren't a surprise; but I had naively assumed that basically everything critical to Windows working as intended was largely in the hands of either Microsoft, Intel, or the BIOS vendor at this point, so I was surprised that they managed to screw it up.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Kjella]

It started as a "UNIX" server you can run on your home PC and never really left. And the only reason it is popular on anything with a GUI is because Google scrapped everything but the Linux kernel (no GNU/Linux, no X11, no GNOME/KDE/etc.) and built their own, kind of like how Apple took the BSD kernel. Had they picked the BSD kernel then Linux would still not be seen outside of geeks, data centers and touchscreen kiosks. YotLD has become a running joke here like Duke Nukem Forever, except they finally delivered. That Munich, Germany is using Linux is a worn out track on repeat over and over again. Just admit it, the OSS community has for the most part failed to deliver anything that appeals to the masses, the only one who's done it is Google under an Apache license and bundled with a whole bunch of non-free services - hardly anything ships as pure AOSP.

Re: 12.64 percent in only 17 months

[jd2112]

The GUI and browser can be removed on Server 2008 and 2012 (and on 2012 can be removed or added at will, often not even requiring a reboot. 2008 requires a reinstall.)
Since 2008/Vista and 2012/Win8 share kernels I suspect this is no longer the case.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Rhipf]

I have been telling my clients this for a while now. If you just add a start menu replacement (the start button of Windows 8.1 was a missed opportunity for Microsoft) and set it to boot directly to the desktop there isn't much difference between 8 and 7.
One thing that I would like to see back is the Aero theme. The current Windows 8 style is to flat and retro for me (reminds me more of Windows 3 era).

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[benjymouse]

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the Windows kernel, UI, and default browser all share essential low-level processes, and therefore could never ever possibly be decoupled.

However, that is wrong.

Windows kernel is an incredibly modular piece of work, much more so that Unix/Linux. In fact, the "Win32 subsystem" is just *one* possible subsystem mapped onto a very generic kernel. From the start, the core was designed with WIn32 subsystem as just one of a number of subsystems and originally also included a POSIX subsystem and an OS/2 subsystem. Note, that these were NOT emulation layers, but full blown "peers" of the Win32 subsystem, That design is still very much alive within the kernel.

The confusion with respect to the "browser in the kernel" is at least partly Microsoft's own fault. During the browser anti-trust trials they claimed that Internet Explorer could not be unbundled from the core. Until someone actually did and demonstrated it during the trials.

Like virtually all OSes today, some of the core GUI administration components use HTML as rendering mechanism for at least parts of the user interface. Hence a html renderer is part of the core OS (unless a GUI less server SKU is used). However, a HTML renderer being distributed as part of the *core* OS does NOT mean that it will execute in kernel space. This is such a mindbogglingly stupid assertion that whenever someone brings up that claim I get suspicious that they actually know better, but finds pleasure in throwing it out there and watch the immediate condemnation and ridicule.

The HTML renderer is of course the same one as used in Internet Explorer (Trident, IIRC). That *still* does not mean that Internet Explorer is "part of the OS" - it merely means that Internet Explorer (the browser) uses the same rendering library as the core components in the same way that an XML parser can be used buy the browser as well as the core OS without it running in kernel space.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Rhipf]

It's Apple. Is that enough of an explanation for you?

I swear that if Apple reintroduced the pet rock as the iRock it would sell a few billion units (ok, an exaggeration but you get my point).

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Payden K. Pringle]

This one knows.

Windows 8.X can have a start menu with a simple download from (AFAIK) a trustable site.

I don't understand how techies can't do that. I can understand how the average Joe can't do that.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[jones_supa]

I have yet to experience a Windows release where the majority of the chant was exactly this, until the HUGE, OBVIOUS, AND UNMISTAKABLE structural issues come to light after a few major security breaches. Not even Windows 8 has failed this test, and it is already getting owned in the wild with little abandon.

I'm waiting. Meanwhile, can you tell what these structural issues are in Vista and 7? There are still various security vulnerabilities found, but in general the NT 6.x stuff is quite solid. There are no more big disasters like the Mydoom or Blaster worms, which I would count as "huge, obvious and unmistakable" security issues. John Doe will still catch malware for installing shady software, but if you are a geek with a clue, there should be no problems.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[camperdave]

OS X is UNIX based.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be new here.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[jones_supa]

Ya think? ;)

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[cellocgw]

I swear that if Apple reintroduced the pet rock as the iRock it would sell a few billion units

But would the rock have rounded corners?

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[spire3661]

Not by default they arent. Gatekeeper is powerful.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[spire3661]

By this logic i should just forget about Standard Oil and AT&T too, right.....

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[spire3661]

YotLD has already come and gone, guess what, we didnt need it after all. Linux got its foothold and isnt being actively hunted by the giants anymore. Microsoft tried to kill it a hundred different ways, using BUCKETS of money. The only failure here is your perspective. Linux survived, and is thriving, that is all we ever asked for. World Domination will come later, or not, who cares.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Beck_Neard]

> OSS community has for the most part failed to deliver anything that appeals to the masses

Firefox is an example, but you're making a wrong assumption. Very few open-source projects have 'appealing to the masses' as a primary goal. The goal isn't to sell more, it's to make a nice product that the authors themselves will use (as opposed to commercial software, where the creators themselves rarely use the software they release). If a lot of other people use it, that's great, but that's usually not their main concern.

Aside from that, though, an OS can NEVER "appeal to the masses", because the masses have no idea what an OS is. They want to go on facebook and listen to music and they memorize the button they have to press to do that. It's not that that's bad - they are just concerned with different things than computer tech in their lives. They don't care about security or reliability or long-term support. If some company came out with a Linux laptop and aggressively marketed it (just like Apple does) and it worked well enough to go on facebook and watch tv shows with the press of a few buttons (ordinary Ubuntu is adequate here), people would buy it, they wouldn't fucking care. If you asked them what OS they're using they'd probably give you a blank stare and say, "Windows?" (just like they do with Apple products).

And that's why as for YotLD, I concur with spire3661. The endgame has changed. Most of us still use desktops for doing actual work, but more and more stuff is being done in the browser. Who knows, maybe in 10 years everyone will use google docs and no one will use office anymore. Or maybe google docs will die. But the point is that desktop domination is an obsolete goal, one that the Linux community SHOULDN'T be pursuing at all.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Mashiki]

In other news, unplugging the machine, gluing all USB ports shut, and removing the keyboard/mouse works too.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Jack Griffin]

It's not just what your were brought up with, it is about efficient and ergonomic input. You simply can't beat a keyboard and mouse for that. I spend 12 hours a day on PC/Laptop without issue. I can last about 15 minutes on a phone/tablet due to the mechanical overhead of a touch UI. Same goes for a multi-window desktop over the one-app-only-at-a-time desktop. For productivity, traditional windows (small w) beats the IOS/Win8 style hands down.

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[jonadab]

> three years (a complete tech cycle in the consumer realm).

I don't know exactly where you live, but where I come from most consumer (i.e., home) computers aren't really new enough to comfortably run Vista, let alone Eight. Most of Seven's market share comes from people's work computers, which are upgraded considerably more often than home computers, on average. Most of Eight's market share comes from people whose old Windows XP computer finally died, so they went out and bought a new computer. (Seven has some of that too, but such systems are outnumbered by work computers, which are *mostly* Seven at this point, although there are still some XP holdouts.)

Re:12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Rich0]

Yup. A keyboard/mouse brings the interface to you. A touchscreen makes you go to the interface. A touchscreen also forced you to look at the same surface that you interact with, so either you'll be reaching or craning your neck, since your arms and eyeballs are separated by a considerable distance.

The interface works fine for media consumption, because then you're only using your fingers minimally and thus you can position the device for comfortable viewing, though probably less comfortable than watching your TV.

dont want it

[Anonymous Coward]

i dont want 8.1 if it means signing up with fucking microsoft/windowslive id to get it, fuck off

Re:dont want it

[tepples]

It's confusing, but you can upgrade to Windows 8.1 without having to get a Hotm^W Outlook.com account. You have to click buttons with titles to the effect of "create a new Microsoft account" followed by "continue using my local account" (or whatever; I don't have it in front of me).

Re:dont want it

[SeaFox]

You have to click buttons with titles to the effect of "create a new Microsoft account" followed by "continue using my local account" (or whatever; I don't have it in front of me).

Sounds like you're describing setting up a new 8.1 system. If we're talking about updating from 8 RTM to 8.1 I didn't even have to do that. My system was originally configured with a local account and I never use IE, Windows 8 Mail, or Skype. Went into the Store and there was a big tile to upgrade to 8.1. I wasn't logged into the Store at all (have never wanted to use it) and it didn't ask me for anything before downloading the installer.

Re:dont want it

[tepples]

True, the update from Windows 8 RTM to Windows 8.1 doesn't ask the user to convert to a Microsoft account before the download. It asks during installation of the update, which incidentally resembles setting up a new system.

Re:dont want it

[jones_supa]

It's confusing, but you can upgrade to Windows 8.1 without having to get a Hotm^W Outlook.com account. You have to click buttons with titles to the effect of "create a new Microsoft account" followed by "continue using my local account" (or whatever; I don't have it in front of me).

You can't install anything from the Windows Store without an account, and I think some other functionality is broken too. All in all, it's like using an Android phone without Google account: it's possible but somewhat clunky, and you finally end up saying "fine, fine, I'll create the damn account".

Re:dont want it

[gfxguy]

But if you want stuff from the MS store, then so what if you have to create an account... is that really different than anywhere else?

Re:dont want it

[tepples]

What's different is that Windows 8.1 is in the Windows Store, not Windows Update. But then I didn't have to put in a Microsoft account when I downloaded Windows 8.1 on the work computer. So either Windows 8.1 is an exception or all gratis apps are an exception.

Re:dont want it

[gfxguy]

And I installed a new 8.1 and didn't have to create an account, either. People are looking for any minor thing to gripe about - it's like most discussions on the internet, where they'll overlook the same flaws for something they like (whether it's an OS, a religion, or a political party), but complain about it in the "other" ones.

Re:dont want it

[jones_supa]

If you don't need the Modern UI apps, I recommend Windows 7.

Re:dont want it

[jones_supa]

But if you want stuff from the MS store, then so what if you have to create an account... is that really different than anywhere else?

Not really, but it's still a nasty spying feature. They probably know when you log in on your computer (if you are online), your synchronized settings will reveal data (including your wallpaper), maybe other stuff. It's a convenient slippery slope to a route where Microsoft and NSA governs your whole computer.

Re:dont want it

[gfxguy]

How is that different from Google? Even using a Linux based system, whenever you open your browser to do something, if you have chrome synchronized, if you use gmail or g+, or whatever? And I don't use an Apple, but even on Windows iTunes is constantly checking for updates and wanting to install new stuff (unless you go out of your way to turn it off... but again, how is that different than the others?). I'm asking because people apply different standards to the companies they don't like than they do to the ones that are "blessed." I have Windows 8.1, I did not create an account. Nevertheless, even Windows 7 and XP do their software validation crap every so often, too... so if you're already a Windows user, you were already accepting that. All I'm saying is that the complaints about 8.x are like most arguments on the internet.

Web forums... turning molehills into mountains since 1994.

Re:dont want it

[jones_supa]

I'm not claiming that it's different.

Mouse Latency Issue?

[Ferrofluid]

I read sometime last year that Windows 8.1 introduced a bug related to mouse latency, which was especially noticeable for gamers using high-dpi mice. Apparently, many games became unplayable because of the greatly increased mouse lag. Microsoft issued a temporary "fix" (patch KB2908279), which from what I've read only corrected the issue for a few specific games -- i.e., it was not a true, universal fix. Does anyone know if they have finally fixed this issue? I've been holding off from upgrading to Windows 8.1 for this very reason.

Re:Mouse Latency Issue?

[rubycodez]

all the gamers I know use windows 7, including two in my house.

Re:Mouse Latency Issue?

[Gadget_Guy]

all the gamers I know use windows 7, including two in my house.

According to Steam's hardware survey, Windows 8 accounts for about a quarter of gamers. I think that Valve knows more gamers than you do.

Re:Mouse Latency Issue?

[Mashiki]

My 2500DPI mouse(logitec g series) doesn't experience this. And my razer which is 5600dpi doesn't have any problems either and didn't before the patch. What it seemed to apply to is specific games, not the system as a whole.

ME and Vista

[mfh]

I like how Windows follows a SIN curve of customer satisfaction, almost flawlessly. My prediction is that Win 9 will be the next XP, loved by all only to be replaced by Win10 which everyone will hate... and so on and so forth, ad nauseam.

This kind of business policy is pretty corrupt and if it's not illegal it really should be.

Each release guarantees problems between users in terms of learning curve. Techsupport bottlenecks each time and they take the brunt of the flak from idealized Microsoft decision making.

Re:ME and Vista

[drinkypoo]

This kind of business policy is pretty corrupt and if it's not illegal it really should be.

I think it's entirely possible that the particular phenomenon that you are describing is a symptom of incompetence and not malice. Don't get me wrong, I am always ready to ascribe malicious intent to Microsoft, but this just smells like incompetence.

Re:ME and Vista

[drinkypoo]

Well, I am really quite happy with Windows 7, which is still supported. My last block fell away when, amazingly, not only did Gateway/Acer finally provide Windows 7 driver support for my LT31-series netbook (Athlon 64 L110 1.2 GHz, whee!) but AMD also decided to start permitting direct downloads of mobility drivers, and even put them into their automatic driver downloader/ad displayer. I was even able to skip installing CCC, glory of glories.

Windows XP still runs nicely under VMware player. Or there's always XP Mode, but it's fairly incompetent. Virtual PC's stability is nowhere near vmware player, nor is the graphics compatibility even participating in the same sport.

Re:ME and Vista

[techno-vampire]

We're the dumb ones though. We buy the Vistas, the Win8s, the MEs... we BUY that crap. We're to blame!!

I run a Linux-only household. I don't have to buy a new computer every two or three years because my OS is too much of a resource hog for what I've got. Don't blame me because you keep on drinking the MS kool aid.

Re:ME and Vista

[Kjella]

I'd rather have love-hate releases than spreading it thin to make everybody half happy, half unhappy. It was 8 years between XP and Win7, if it's another 8 years between Win7 and the next good "classic" version Microsoft has a few more years to pull it off. I didn't use Vista, don't use Win8 and the more Win8 is the New Coke the more they'll need to bring back Coke Classic in Win9 so it works out fine for me. And most businesses who'll skip a release. Consumers that bought it could have read the reviews and skipped it. The only ones it really sucks for are those who didn't choose it but has to support it, but hey... I'm sure there's a guy in India who wants that job if you don't want it.

Re:ME and Vista

[miffo.swe]

I am a hardware guy that loves to tinker. Sadly i cannot excuse getting new stuff for my Linux box because it runs so smooth.

Re:ME and Vista

[jones_supa]

I run a Linux-only household. I don't have to buy a new computer every two or three years because my OS is too much of a resource hog for what I've got.

A Linux desktop is more resource hog than Windows these days. I'm not joking. You have to step down to minimalistic XFCE/LXDE style desktop environments to get the similar performance to Windows.

Don't blame me because you keep on drinking the MS kool aid.

How do you know that you're not drinking Linux Foundation kool aid?

Re:ME and Vista

[gfxguy]

I just built a new PC to replace my 10 year old one... ten years; multiple Linux OSs, but only Windows XP Pro, and now 8.1 Pro. Somehow I managed to skip several versions of Windows and upgraded largely to improve my Linux experience, since I use Linux 95% of the time anyway.

Re:ME and Vista

[jones_supa]

I actually like this list. It's exactly how I see it too.

Re:ME and Vista

[techno-vampire]

That may be true, but it's not the fault of Linux itself; it's caused by developers who either don't know how to write lean code or simply don't care. Personally, I use Xfce, but not because it's lean or minimalistic. I use it because I find it very easy to customize and personalize so that my desktop looks the way I want it to rather than the way whoever wrote the DE thinks it should look.

more deck space on the Titanic

[chromaexcursion]

OK, my subject is an exaggeration.
The ship is still sinking.
Apple isn't winning the desktop space. But Microsoft is still losing. Linux never really made the field.
I won't go into the mobile space, where desktop is going, but MS is losing badly there.

Microsoft learned the system requirements lesson

[tepples]

And let's not forget increasingly high hardware requirements.

Microsoft learned from this mistake when Windows Vista's requirements delayed adoption and caused low-cost Atom subnotebooks to use first GNU/Linux and then Windows XP. That's why the requirements haven't increased much since Windows Vista, except for requiring PAE, NX, and SSE2 starting in Windows 8.1.

The only reason

[Brad1138]

I started using 8.1 was I could install "Classic Shell" and make it more or less just like 7.

Re:The only reason

[Anonymous Coward]

so... why wouldn't you just use 7?

I've heard this over and over. "you can tweak this and that and install the other thing and it works just like 7." So just use 7. 7 is awesome. one number higher does not a better product make. spiderman 3. star trek 5 (and 9. and 10). godfather 3. highlander ... well any of them after the first.

Re:The only reason

[Brad1138]

I like a few things about 8.1. I like 7 a lot, but I like the quicker boot in 8.1, I like some of the apps, the weather one in particular. From what I have read, 8/8.1 is better underneath and generally faster than 7.

Re:The only reason

[Gadget_Guy]

I've heard this over and over. "you can tweak this and that and install the other thing and it works just like 7." So just use 7.

I always dissuade people from upgrading from Win7 to Win8. It is a half step forward, two steps back. Frankly, I would not even upgrade from Vista to Win8.

highlander ... well any of them after the first.

The producers should have known that there could be only one.

Re:The only reason

[Gaygirlie]

I'm in similar situation as the OP, ie. I'm using Start8 to add a Start-menu and disable the various hot corners and the likes. The system looks and works pretty much like Windows 7, but it boots slightly faster. I could totally have stayed with Windows 7, but I went with 8 simply because I wanted the Netflix - app; Netflix in the browser is limited to only 720p and stereo-sound whereas the Netflix - app on 8 can do 1080p and 5.1 surround. What can I say, I'm a movie buff.

Re:The only reason

[Gaygirlie]

No one sane uses physical media anymore. I sure as hell don't intend to, Netflix is far superior. And why should I find some other solution when I just said that I am already on Windows 8? I didn't lose anything by moving from 7 to 8 as long as I am using Start8, but I did gain slightly faster boot and the improved Netflix - app.

Re:The only reason

[jones_supa]

Why? Netflix seems to work for her just fine.

Re:The only reason

[jones_supa]

Wait, what? Windows 7 without Service Packs will not do modern partition alignment? Interesting, is this true?

Re:The only reason

[gfxguy]

This is what's getting me... and I use Linux almost exclusively, but it's always been the case that when someone complained, they were jumped on by a bunch of Linux nerds saying stuff like "but you can just disable that, install this, install that, tweak that config file, and you're all set!" Now it's like installing Classic Shell means the OS must be crap... it's not. For my Windows usage, I've experienced both 8.0 and 8.1, and just can't figure out what all the whining is about.

And it's always funny to see the same people that were berating people for needing the latest hardware years ago (in which Linux support always seemed to lag), to now often arguing people need to upgrade their hardware if you want this or that feature to work.

Hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Re:Microsoft learned the system requirements lesso

[meerling]

You can always inflate hardware requirements, but if it's not backed by an equally valuable increase in functionality, nobody is going to want it.

8.1 actually isn't bad, BUT

[Jahoda]

The fact that I have to install Classic Shell as my first step on any new Server 2012, Server 2012 R2, 8, or 8.1 system is still unacceptable. Yes, I realize this solves many of the problems of using the OS, but no *I* shouldn't have to do it. I was on the cusp of going ahead and telling folks "well, start menu is coming back, and really 8.1 has worked out some kinks...", as I suspect many /. readers were as well, but now this latest announcement of no start menu until Windows 9? Well, I guess 8.1 is a nonSTARTer. :drumroll:. Welcome to the new ME.

Re:8.1 actually isn't bad, BUT

[MightyMartian]

I do most of my access to our Server 2012 machines via Windows 7 remote admin tools and Powers hell. Why would you even bother logging in?

Re:8.1 actually isn't bad, BUT

[Jahoda]

Not all of us work in enterprise. A great deal of us support the SMB market (which is its own set of challenges), and there is much more need to directly interact with the server via GUI for these environments. I'm not saying that you're wrong, but the odds are good that if you're able to interact solely with powershell, your usage cases are much more specific.

Re:8.1 actually isn't bad, BUT

[Jahoda]

(by the way, I apologize if my response sounded douche-y, that was not what I was going for)

12.64 percent in only 17 months

[Anonymous Coward]

Still better than 1% in 20+ years (Linux)

Meanwhile at Apple WWDC

[Neo-Rio-101]

Apple is boasting an over 50% uptake in Mavericks userbase, I see.

Under the hood

[networkzombie]

For a site where I imagine everyone uses Bash to complain about a start menu missing is comical. I hated the start menu and I'm glad it's gone. I've replaced all my systems with Windows 8 ever since they added boot to desktop so I could run appliance systems. The improvements they made under the hood make my systems fly. Same with 2012. I suffer at work with multiple monitors on Windows 7 and lack of PowerShell options on Server 2008 R2. I guess I'm the only one who notices the improvements.

Re:Under the hood

[teh dave]

There's heaps of us who like Windows 8.x/2012, but Slashdot has its mind made up and every time there's a Windows 8 submission these idiots bring out their pitchforks while people like us just ignore it. So no, you're not the only one.

At this stage it looks like Microsoft could patch in a new Start Menu, throw in the option to use oh I don't know, KDE's menu or whatever your DE of choice is these days, put in a tool that converts fucking lead to gold, and donate 50% of their net profit to NASA, and people here would still hate it.

Re:Under the hood

[benjymouse]

There's heaps of us who like Windows 8.x/2012, but Slashdot has its mind made up and every time there's a Windows 8 submission these idiots bring out their pitchforks while people like us just ignore it. So no, you're not the only one.

At this stage it looks like Microsoft could patch in a new Start Menu, throw in the option to use oh I don't know, KDE's menu or whatever your DE of choice is these days, put in a tool that converts fucking lead to gold, and donate 50% of their net profit to NASA, and people here would still hate it.

This.

Dear Microsoft

[Ralph Spoilsport]

What did we want in Win8? Win 7 that WORKED. That's all, really. Simple stuff, like, maybe automatically calculating the size of folders. That would be nice. And maybe a scheduler that didn't have its head up its ass. Seriously. All this touch this and wooshy that WE DON'T CARE. WE NEVER DID.

we just want a computer that works. Perfectly and easily. Hard to do? Well, you CHARGE for your OS, so it's not like you don't have the green. But, no. You dreamed up Win8 and Metro and it sucks balls. No one wants it. It's bullshit. IF we want a tablet OS, WE'D BUY A FUCKING TABLET. Capeeeesh?

Now, kindly go back to the drawing board, fix Win7,and call it Win9, and we will all be happy and for a little while forget you're a bunch of assholes extracting wealth from a supine audience.

Re:Dear Microsoft

[bondsbw]

Somebody's panties are in a wad.

It amazes me how Windows is the only operating system on earth that MUST. HAVE. A. START. MENU. or omg I'mma kill someone.

Anyway, didn't Windows 7 work? That's all you guys have been screaming for the past few years. Then when I would come in and say "just use Windows 7"... crickets. So, if you hate Windows 8 so much then 1) Why are you using it? 2) Why not go back to Windows 7? 3) Why not put your money where your mouth is and support an OS with a great Start menu? (Let me know when you find one.)

Re:Dear Microsoft

[miffo.swe]

The same thing that users complains about in Windows 8 is something that is complained about loudly in the Gnome camp. Personally i love LXDE with its simple start menu (Win2000 style) and have never ever felt that other ways of starting apps could make anything i did simpler or faster. Most of the time things just get in my way because the various menu systems utterly fail to predict what i want to do.

Re:Dear Microsoft

[Gaygirlie]

A lot of /. readers fancy themselves as good programmers and one of the marks of a good programmer is often described as being able to learn a new programming language quickly. A good programmer has learned the "how" of programming, so the language is just a tool. The good programmer thinks "I need a loop here" and then picks the appropriate loop mechanism offered by the language. It would be the bad programmers who whine because Language X doesn't have Feature Y and then throw a tantrum like a toddler instead of figuring out how to accomplish the task in Language X. If we were to apply this concept more generally to just using Windows 8, the good programmers would have taken the 5-10 minutes it takes to master the bulk of the start screen, figured out any potential benefits to their daily workflow, and integrated them before simply moving on. It would be the bad programmers who spend hours whining about Windows 8's new start screen on places like /. instead of following the example of the good programmers. The bad programmers would also be the ones who are so shallow they can't even look past the surface of the OS to see the many technical improvements made.

You're oversimplifying things there and jumping to conclusions. A good programmer doesn't just adapt to this or that language and suck it up; no, they choose the right tools and language for task. Sure, you could code an entire OS in Fortran, but would that be the right language for that task? No, it wouldn't. So why would these "good programmers" stick with Windows 8's Start Screen if it doesn't suit them? It's a waste of time and productivity to use something that doesn't suit you and then trying to force your way of working to it.

I, for example, could certainly do all the things I already do with the Start Screen, it's not about being able to or not being able to. The reasons for why I don't use it are that it's an enormous waste of space, the transition to the menu and back is jarring and the old-style menu is simply more functional for my needs. I choose the method that suits my needs and workflow better than the other one, and that's the concept you seemingly fail to grasp.

Re:Dear Microsoft

[Ralph Spoilsport]

I use Windows 7. I am waiting for Windows 9. I'm not interested in a GREAT start menu - I just want one that works really well. IT doesn't have to be perfect - it has to be good enough.

XP...

[HockeyPuck]

Because I haven't figured out what platform to migrate my mother to.

here's why

[slashmydots]

Normal people hopped on 8.1 like it was the 2nd coming of Jesus. Unfortunately most people who bought Windows 8 are not normal people, they're uninformed idiots. So, when an update shows up as something marked as free software in something called a store instead of Windows Update, of course they're not going to hop on it or even look into it to see what it is.

Re:Talk about timing...

[Elbart]

They disabled nothing, upcoming patches will just require 8.1u1.

Sorry, that's me

[BoberFett]

I turn on my Windows XP box every other day just to mess with the statistics.

Actually it's because I still have my homemade porn on it, I haven't moved it to my new computer yet...

Re:Sorry, that's me

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you considered a distributed backup via torrent?

Re:Who cares?

[SpankiMonki]

It's a buggy OS from a thrashing dinosaur of a buggy-whip maker.

Which, at this point, describes the rest of the desktop OS alternatives.

I love windows 8.1

[ventriloquistw]

Windows 8 is seriously amazing!! I personally find OS to be a cheap version of windows. Just a bunch of useless apps in my opinion.

Re:Who cares?

[jones_supa]

The notifications system is quite broken with Fedora 20 KDE.

Re:Talk about timing...

[jones_supa]

Duh. Of course those machines will still receive the updates needed to get them to W8.1U1 patch level.

Re:I have my Start Menu back

[Jason Levine]

Please ignore my previous post. I had multiple Slashdot windows open and posted this in the wrong article. (This is what happens when you mix exhaustion and posting.)

Windows XP Moronic Statements

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows XP still has more than 25 percent of the pie, despite support for the ancient OS finally ending in April.

13 years does not make even a stale apple pie ancient. Call it like it is, but don't attempt to put us to sleep with disinformation like that.

Unfortunate???

[brunes69]

Neither of these things is "unfortunate". It is not "unfortunate" that hardware from 2005 is still working fine and useful to the user. In fact, it is excellent and what everyone should try to do when they build a piece of kit.

The only "unfortunate" thing about it is the fact that Microsoft stopped applying security fixes to XP.

Hmmm.....

[slapout]

So, the one's people like are XP and 7. Now, what do those two have in common?

Re:Talk about timing...

[waddgodd]

Actually, it is. I want to do ONE update to get current, not seventeen updates with powercycles in between.