Windows 7 Is the Next Windows XP 504
snydeq writes "Windows XP's most beloved factors are also driving business organizations to Windows 7 in the face of Windows 8. 'We love Windows 7: That's the message loud and clear from people this week at the TechMentor Conference held at Microsoft headquarters in Redmond, Wash. With Windows XP reaching end of life for support in April 2014, the plan for most organizations is to upgrade — to Windows 7,' indicating 'a repeat of history for what we've seen with Windows releases, the original-cast Star Trek movie pattern where every other version was beloved and the ones in between decidedly not so.'"
Does the OS really matter? (Score:5, Insightful)
At work I run 2 applications on Windows: A web browser (Chrome),and the MS Office Suite (Outlook, Word, and Excel (in that order). If Office was available on Linux, I'd be perfectly happy on Linux.
I really don't care what the underlying operating system is, as long as it stays out of my way (and it sounds like the new Win8 UI might be annoying).
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
You probably won't have to wait long, because Microsoft already has a fall back.
The Windows 7 interface worked acceptably well in early windows 8, even if you had to registry hack it into making an appearance.
I predict this will be their fall back position when they see sales tanking on everything except tablets.
They will flip a switch and presto-change-o the start bar will reappear.
People are not going to be reaching across their keyboards to smudge their screen on anything except tablets.
Its not going to happen.
Re:Win8 is just Win7 SP2 (Score:2, Insightful)
Why? I like it. I've not had any issues. Runs great, lets me get my work done and let's me do what I want to do and run apps I want - isn't that all OS's are supposed to do? I don't work for MSFT, but I do have MSDN subscription.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
'We love Windows 7:
Somehow they forget to add compared to Windows 8
This has to be intentional (Score:5, Insightful)
At first, I thought it was just a silly conspiracy theory that they released an intentionally crappy OS every other cycle, but I'm really starting to think they do it on purpose:
1) Release good OS with an expected lifespan of around 4 years
2) At 2 years release crappy OS. The people that bought the OS at 1) are not going to upgrade. All of the people purchasing new computers have no choice but to buy crap. While OS sales take a dip, it's not unmanageable.
3) Release good OS. People from 1) now upgrade, and people from 2) are desperate to get off the turd they bought. Money now pours in.
4) See 2.
Re:Does the OS really matter? (Score:2, Insightful)
^implying running any of that on a Mac would improve the situation
force feeding (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
Compared to other Windows, Windows 7 has been great. Compared to Linux...well, let's not pick on MS, they've made great, if not entirely monotonic progress. They may yet produce an OS I would use of my own free will, rather than being forced into it.
Re:Come on (Score:3, Insightful)
This must be the daily subthread where we 1) get the order of Windows release wrong, and 2) arbitrarily declare them good or bad to make the pattern fit.
Time for Linux... again? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the third time I've seen in recent history where Linux has the potential to provide an alternative to corporate and consumer use.
The first was when Vista came out - I was hearing people clamor that this disaster of an operating system was going to be the catalyst that would result in the rise of Linux on the business/mainstream desktop. But in the end people stuck with XP and Microsoft neutered any sitting-on-the-fence debate with Windows 7. So we failed.
Then netbooks started to become popular, and I was hearing people clamor that this was a perfect case for Linux on these low-powered devices, and once again it would rise the profile of Linux on user-facing systems. But initial netbooks were released with really shitty distros that were often half-broken and given first impressions matter, these distros did a really poor job of selling Linux. Microsoft was forced to extend XP though as Vista wouldn't work suitably on netbooks, but as far as users were concerned this was great news compared to regular preinstalled Linux distros, and now modern netbooks run Windows 7 just fine. So we failed again.
Now Windows 8 is out, and we have an opportunity to push the best desktop-focused distros that are out there. A third window of opportunity - will the various Linux interest groups fumble again? If history has shown us anything - probably. I'd like to be optimistic, but if Linux market share doesn't increase noticeably within the next year or two then I think it's obvious that there will NEVER be a Linux on the desktop moment.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows 8 isn't big and scary. It's just horridly designed.
The issues with the bootloader are one problem, that might pose a problem for linux, but are actually a relatively small part of what is problem with windows 8, because windows 8 is a badly designed mess.
A good overview of some of what is wrong with it http://www.pcgamesn.com/article/why-i-m-uninstalling-windows-8
This isn't a DRM issue, a compatibility issue (although there is some of that), it's not even particularly evil, at least not any more than anything else MS does. It's that it's a nightmare to use because the design is wildly inconsistent for no apparent reason, and it doesn't seem to actually get you anything for that. If you want to use 10 GB of my RAM that's fine if I actually get something out of it, if you're going to change how to shut down the machine, or how apps work etc. it's just unnecessarily confusing.
Re:Win8 is just Win7 SP2 (Score:5, Insightful)
Win 8 is an improvement over an already excellent Win7 with lots of cool new features. I'm running RTM Enterprise on a Dell E6520 laptop, and it's flawless. 5 minutes of training - some new shortcut keys, and I'm more productive than before.
I don't suppose those five minutes of training occurred in a conference room in Redmond, by any chance?
I'm just wondering how many of those 5 minutes were spent ducking flying chairs.
Re:Best Windows 8 Review Ever (Score:5, Insightful)
I love the people screaming about not knowing how to use the OS ... isnt that the whole point of these things, all you need is your finger and an idea?
"you dont know about alt+tab"
well guys, if I am going to operate the basic functions of my computer via keyboard, why the fuck do I even need a GUI or even a mouse? I am quite happy with sitting there with one thing per screen and using alt+Fx to switch tween applications,it runs a hell of a lot faster and I can still jump between programs without having to hit alt tab 6 times to jump from app 1 to app 6.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
One thing to consider is that for a large company every major upgrade of the user interface causes a lot of costs while people are learning the new features and how to find how to do it when their old familiar features has disappeared. I'm still annoyed by a few things in the new Office UI.
And the statistics Microsoft has collected saying for example that the Start button could go away - I don't think that they have realized that the statistics they got is skewed since many advanced users and company admins intentionally unticks the checkbox allowing Microsoft to collect data about your usage. That leaves them with statistics from a large number of home users that are more or less computer illiterate.
So if you look at how a moron works and design your tools after that then you will make tools for morons. But then you are actually a moron yourself.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, yes.
The reason large touch screens are not cheaper is because it is a relatively rarely-wanted feature. It just isn't useful in the cases of most desktops and large screen deployments.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
If Microsoft continued supporting Windows XP, those business would continue running Windows XP. No need to spend time and money to retrain staff, no need to change anything. Not every industry is like the IT industry.
Microsoft on the other hand NEEDS to keep moving the "goal posts", they need to change things (but not too much). Why? Because if they kept the goal posts stationary for too long someone could come up with a "Windows XP" compatible OS (you can see some already trying with ReactOS, I doubt they'll succeed but Microsoft really has to move).
If there are viable "Windows compatible" operating systems, Windows would end up like the IBM PC BIOS, with competing BIOS software. And BIOS manufacturers don't make enough money to make Microsoft shareholders, bosses, employees happy.
Most people don't know what BIOS they run, nor do they need to. To them the different BIOS all work the same and they just focus on using their applications.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Does the OS really matter? (Score:5, Insightful)
You know what's hilarious? The fact that MS Office documents often don't open correctly even between different revisions of MS Office.
So, you're fucked either way, but in one case, you are fucked for free and in the other it's $499 to get fucked.
Re:Win8 is just Win7 SP2 (Score:4, Insightful)
Who cares? What tiny percentage of the population would need to change their activation key that doesn't know how to do it from a CLI?
I've seen this argument from others, and it's completely moronic. It's something you do *ONCE* in the lifetime of the computer. There is no reason to build a UI for it.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sysadmin here:
We've migrated about 50 users (salesforce, most are aged 40 to 60) to Win7 from XP about 2 months ago. Here's what's happening for us:
* No major problems adjusting to Win7 (I've had a couple of quick questions, that's it).
* Running users as standard users is almost viable (we're having a lot of pain and suffering from all the crapware we have to install (Adobe Flash, Reader, Shockwave; Quicktime, iTunes; Java; etc, etc) -- almost everything on this list wants admin rights to update itself). Users can't install much or tweak much, so much less user-induced OS failure/slowness/malware. We're trialling SCCM for this, so we'll see...
* Win7 seems less prone to malware infection. I doubt it's anywhere near secure, but it's already doing a lot better than XP. (I'm forced to use Symantec for AV, which is about as much protection as a pincushion condom.)
* Device drivers for modern PCs on XP is a royal pain; Win7 is ok for now (a couple of bad device drivers for Win7 x64, but much better than XP x64 and good enough for use), and updating device drivers from Windows Update works about half the time.
* Imaging tools are much nicer.
* Sleep and hibernate seem to be more reliable. XP would fail to resume 1 in every 200 resumes or so.
So for us, Win7 is a major step up -- it isn't that it's good so much as it sucks much less than XP (which sucked much less than 98, etc.). Furthermore, ReactOS (last I checked) is far, far, far away from being a viable replacement. MS could sit still for 5 to 10 years and ReactOS would still be far away. Give those guys several more good programmers and the story might be different...
Re:Win8 is just Win7 SP2 (Score:5, Insightful)
The AC's comment was downvoted because he's an obvious Microsoft marketer (or allied company). Especially in his last sentence when he says Win8 is "slick" and he "likes where this is headed" and can't wait to get a Surface Tablet and Windows 8 Phone to "bring it all together".
Who talks like that? Bring it all together? Bring what together? The last time I heard those vague-type phrases was during a voiceover for a television ad.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Excellent News! (Score:4, Insightful)
Crap, when are you people from. We have been using 7 for two years already across several thousand machines. It is better with security, drivers, self repair, imaging and manageability. With GPO setup on a server you can tweak the newer UI to your liking without needing to roll back to Windows 95 mode.
Shifting is not that hard, letting the users stagnate just makes things sores when you are forced to switch because you can't get C64 keyboards anymore.
The same things happened when XP came out, pre SP1 GPO sucked and had all sorts of issues just like Vista and 7. Everyone has selective memories and just want to burry their heads and keep driving their Model Ts.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
XP worked and does work. It worked from the beginning.
Oh boy. No, it didn't. At the release it was just a bloated, slightly more unstable version of Windows 2000. However the biggest problem was the malware explosion, and Service Pack 2 finally got things at a sane level.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:4, Insightful)
And the Windows Server 2012 operating system also has the Metro interface, although once you are logged in it is straight to a command-line interface, but why does a server OS need a fancy GUI for logging in?
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
That leaves them with statistics from a large number of home users that are more or less computer illiterate.
Which is the group they are bleeding right now. That's who Windows 8 is aimed at, not losing that group.
Conversely the "computer literate" are (by numbers) the ones that have the strongest ties to Windows and Windows software. They are the ones who just stay put on Windows 7 for another 5 years or so while Microsoft works through the transition. They are the ones that once Metro apps and Metro hardware become widely available and heavily used switch. They are also the ones who while the most upset about UI changes, are the most able to adapt if they have to.
Re:Does the OS really matter? (Score:4, Insightful)
I believe he's calling bullshit on this comment made in your original post:
I really don't care what the underlying operating system is...
You appear to not care what the underlying OS is so long as it's Windows or Linux. If you truly didn't care then you'd consider using OSX as equally as you've considered moving to Linux or remaining with Windows.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
The mistake is not in the numbers of the devices "in the market."
The mistake is putting the devices in the same market in the first place.
Tablets and Desktop PCs simply fill a different role in computing. Tablets barely do anything useful at all as it is, until they've got a whole fucking lot more packed into them than they will in the foreseeable future anyway.
Aside from a few specialty purposes, people DONT WANT to be finger fucking their screens all the time. If you think repetitive stress injuries are an issue with mice and keyboards, just wait until all the fat ladies in HR are getting surgery to fix rotator cuffs from reaching a screen all the time.
The "PC is dead" prediction has been said a million times, and it's been wrong for every single one of those times.
Yes, Microsoft needs to have a tablet OS, but they also need a desktop computer OS. It's particularly stupid to drop the desktop branch at a time when FOS software is hiding in the corner waiting to take advantage of things.
Especially in an environment where MAJOR industries are lagging far behind in the OS upgrade loop. Really, it's 5 maybe 6 years long, releasing a new OS every 3 years is going to cause corporate users to skip OSs. As a web developer, I constantly run into SuzyMcMarketing clients who has windows XP installed with the default blue theme (ick!) and is using IE8. These companies are not going to upgrade for no reason. (They might, but the ones that have moved to Win7 just got done or are still doing it sure as fuck won't, especially if they just bought all new dual-screen hardware.. The IT folks in those companies are going to go "who's going to pay for that?" or simply say "fuck you" when someone brings up moving to Win 8.)
Vista was the last one skipped, and Win 8 is going to be the next one. That's all there is to it.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not about "Metro Apps" and "Metro Hardware" it's about usability and basic ergonomics.
It is simply too much of a PITA for ANYONE, business or home users, to use the Metro interface on a desktop or laptop, even IF they have a touchscreen. (FSM help you if you don't have a touchscreen!) The UI concepts DO NOT WORK with those form factors. And while many people are enjoying tablets and smartphones, there is still a great need for the more traditional form factors if you are doing anything other than multimedia or web consumption.
The "Desktop PC" paradigm in business is not going away any time soon. It is a well known and understood style and ergonomically works very very well. Metro just doesn't work in that paradigm.
I anticipate that we will see Metro and the touchscreen UI concept for Desktops go by the wayside within two years. Win8 will get patched to remove the Metro UI (With Metro Apps running in non-fullscreen windows instead) the Start button and Start menu will return and that will be the end of this abortive experiment in "blended" UIs.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:4, Insightful)
I predict this will be their fall back position when they see sales tanking on everything except tablets.
Microsoft won't see Windows 8 sales tanking. Once Windows 8 is released, Volume License customers won't have the option to buy Windows 7 licenses, only Windows 8 licenses. Volume Licenses come with downgrade rights so customers will be installing Windows 7, but Microsoft will be reporting Windows 8 sales.
Re:Excellent News! (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't care if they collected statistics on every single Windows user in the US. It wouldn't matter - the premise presented by the statistics which say "people don't use the Start Menu" is invalid.
It doesn't matter if 99% of the population doesn't use it 99% of the time. It's there, and it has a utility. There is still 1 out of 100 people who use it frequently, and the 99% still use it on occasion.
Case in point: I am a keyboard junkie. Windows is a 'toy' OS for me; I run games on it and run it in VMs for the purpose of work applications. I don't uncheck the 'statistics' button (though maybe I should) when doing an install. Yet, I don't think I use the 'start' bar but once or twice a day, if that. I'll hit 'start' and type what I want, and that's the extent of it. Otherwise, the file manager, etc. will remain open at all times for days on end.
What I don't use is the Desktop. But it doesn't matter, because some people do. That's the beauty of a well designed desktop environment - people use it differently. It's why KDE is popular, and it's why
Microsoft should take Windows 9x-XP as a clue. Yes, its basic operation was the only game in town for over a decade: start menu, task bar, task switcher, desktop, 3 buttons at the top of each window, multiple paths to the same functionality with no more than ~3 clicks to any single feature. They completely abandoned that concept, even though it's got to be the most heavily emulated UI out there. They threw that all to the wind with Windows 8, which isn't familiar or comfortable to anyone.