Windows 8 Killing PC Sales 1010
yl-roller writes "IDC says Windows 8 is partly to blame for PC sales suffering the largest percentage drop ever. 'As if that news wasn't' troubling enough, it appears that a pivotal makeover of Microsoft's ubiquitous Windows operating system seems to have done more harm than good since the software was released last October.' According to a ZDNet article, IDC originally expected a drop, but only half the size."
My theory (Score:5, Insightful)
There hasn't been a damn thing in the last several years worth upgrading for. Gamers and developers aside, there has been nothing at all interesting happening in the PC world.
I'm still on a 2.0ghz C2D laptop and had no intention of upgrading anytime soon.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
Only thing I would suggest as an upgrade to that computer is an SSD. But that's about it. It really is amazing what an SSD can do to an older computer.
It depends on the spinning disk I suppose. I upgraded from striped 15K RPM SCSI drives. The SSD was noticeably faster, but not anything on the scale I was hearing.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Insightful)
- much faster random access
- improved battery life
- zero noise
- no mechanical failure
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
You had 15k rpm scsi striped drives in a laptop? Even if you did, you should have noticed these benefits: - much faster random access - improved battery life - zero noise - no mechanical failure
No, not in a laptop. Video editing is mostly why I like having the speed. So there's not a lot of random access. I'm working with 12 GB files. Noise is definitely better. Not that I found them too loud. I used to have some Micropolis Tomahawk drives years ago. Those sounded like jet engines spinning up. You still have flash wear out on SSD drives. Most spinning disks can last a very long time too. I have a few older drives that have been spinning for close to 15 years now.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Informative)
No, not in a laptop. Video editing is mostly why I like having the speed.
15KRPM U320 SCSI disks perform extremely well with high-bandwidth non-random workloads.
SSDs have much faster seek times; however, there is the possibility of greater write latencies, and eventually lower throughput -- due to read - erase - program cycle.
This is especially the case with non-write-optimized MLC type flash.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Insightful)
The key as always is what you are using the hardware for determines what type of hardware is best for you.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
I then built two desktops with the same SSD drive. All the same parts except one AMD and the other Intel. They are wicked fast because of SSD.
I used to tell folks that adding RAM would be their best speed upgrade, but now I tell them that an SSD is the best speed upgrade.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Funny)
I suggest that they add speed holes. I say they'll make the computer go faster.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, and make sure to slather on a thick coat of red paint. The red ones go faster.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Funny)
Re:My theory (Score:5, Insightful)
you also need stickers of all the things you add, they add an additional 10 hp per sticker.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Funny)
you also need stickers of all the things you add, they add an additional 10 hp per sticker.
You mean RallyArt and Evolution stickers? Also rip the Type R badging off an old Honda. That'll add a least 25 HP to your laptop.
Damned overclocking hooligans! Runnin' them souped up 8 core Xeons. and 6 core i7s. Mark my words, someone's gonna get themselves killed! Lolligagging all day, drinkin' orange and grape Nehi... braggin bout yer chrome, and cruisin the internet showin off all yer fancy puter hoohah!!! Git a job! Make somethin of yerself! Stop all that puter racin, an grow up!!!
Re:My theory (Score:4, Funny)
And a turbo button! (Score:5, Insightful)
Computers just aren't as fast without the turbo button.
Re:And a turbo button! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:And a turbo button! (Score:5, Informative)
Acually, the turbo button was for slowing down the computer. You left it in turbo mode all the time, unless you needed to run some poorly-written software that required the lower clock speed.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Informative)
Nope, Speed Holes [youtube.com]
Re:My theory (Score:5, Informative)
I used to tell folks that adding RAM would be their best speed upgrade, but now I tell them that an SSD is the best speed upgrade.
The problem with giving this advice to unsophisticated users is that they will use the SSD in ways that tend to shorten its service life. It can be quite a shock to these users when they go to boot their machine one day and find it dead. Their experience with traditional hard drives, which rarely fail so badly and suddenly that there isn't at least a chance to move data off, may earn them a nasty surprise when their data is lost. If you recommend an SSD upgrade you should probably also recommend a traditional external hard drive as a backup device, with regular automated backups, and at least warn them that SSDs have a limited number of writes and can become unreadable with little or no warning.
Re:My theory (Score:4, Insightful)
What are you doing to these things?
I have all my computers in my home using SSDs and so far the failure rates match my spinning disk rates. In the server room I see spinning disks fail far more often.
SSDs that fail from too many writes will still be readable. This morning the helpdesk folks, next office over, are dealing with another dead drive in a laptop, no laptop should come with spinning disks they are simply too shock sensitive.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, that's just not true - or at least not usefully true. A modern SSD should perform just fine far beyond the expected life of a laptop. Of course, anything may fail, but outside of a lab experiment even early adopters of laptop SSDs aren't finding themselves suddenly bereft of data. Exaggerating the risks just reduces credibility.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
I was waiting for laptops with a decent screen resolution.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Funny)
I'm waiting on a 24 inch laptop.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Funny)
I have one of those, I think theyre called "desktops".
Re:My theory (Score:5, Funny)
Fatty. Not all of us have laps that large. Not even all Americans.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Informative)
http://zareason.com/shop/Laptops [zareason.com]
Linux laptops, no Microsoft Tax.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Insightful)
1920x1080 isn't high resolution. I mean, it is, but not where it counts. I'm typing this on a 1920x1080 13", and the DPI is certainly high enough. But the problem is the lack of vertical screen real estate.
See, a high-end laptop from a few years ago would be 1600x1200, and when calling up a print dialogue from Adobe Reader, you would actually SEE the buttons at the bottom. And you could work on more than half a page at a time.
Now you get higher DPI, so pick your choice of either too small to read or not enough space. And no matter what you pick, you don't get more than 1080 pixels height, which isn't much more than the old 1280x1024, just much much smaller pixels.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
The things that are good about windows 8 (modularity of features and some options for speedy lightweight installs, for example) are not at all apparent to most end users.
The things that are absolute fails about windows 8 are the things that are completely in your face for most users.
Features from the first group won't successfully justify the antifeatures in the second group.
All M$ has to do is fix their UI and sales will go back up.
Re: My theory (Score:3, Insightful)
They will not go back up. People don't want, or need, a new computer.
Re: My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
People do not want or need a new OS. That's pretty much it. Hell, Win7 wasn't that big a step up, there wasn't even any compelling "must have" thing in 7 that justified going out and tossing the old crate.
You'll notice that Windows (and also the entailing hardware) sales numbers are a matter of necessity. Nobody really upgrades just 'cause MS creates a new OS. But sometimes, the new OS comes along with critical support that makes the change viable, if not necessary.
Win95 was just the big leap from CLI to GUI. Yeah, there was Win3.11 before, but it was little more than a frontend. Win95 was the big step ahead and people went and bought it because it really WAS a big step up.
Win98 was pretty much Win95 "done right". It had everything you wanted, like a working Winsock implementation. The internet became a big thing and 98 made TCP/IP connections easy.
Win2k was a bit of a hybrid of NT and 98, bringing the compatibility of 98 and the stability of NT together, so it was another big seller. And yes, I'm deliberately omitting ME. Notice how it didn't sell? Not just 'cause it was crap, but even if it had been halfway as good as 98, it didn't bring anything new that you needed. 2k also brought USB support (or at least, usable USB support...), so even if people didn't care about stability wanted to get it.
XP was a "what for?" for long for me, but it does have its advantages over 2k. Better WiFi support was one thing. A lot of other goodies, not only the improved DirectX support, was certainly part of its appeal. Security became an issue eventually, and XP saw the beginning of an attempt to secure Windows.
Vista and 7... well, they don't really bring any "must have" things to the user. Yes, the security is way superior to XP, but users don't care about such petty crap. It's not a selling point. Everything you'd want to plug into your computer already works with XP. Why upgrade?
8 has even worse problems in this area. There is no really compelling reason to step up, get a new system and a new computer (since the average user gets both at the same time). There is no "must have" feature that users want in those systems, nothing they need or at least want.
Re: My theory (Score:5, Informative)
Re: My theory (Score:4, Interesting)
Took me a week or two to get used to Win7. There's still a few stupid decisions, but overall it stays out of my way and lets me get work done.
We're upgrading all our XP desktops to Win7 this year and hoping that we won't have to upgrade the O/S again until 2016-2019. That is, assuming that the existing hardware (dual-core CPUs, with 4-8GB RAM and SSDs) isn't overly slow by then. Maybe by that point, MS will have released another "good" operating system - or they'll have cratered and release MS Office for Linux.
Re: My theory (Score:5, Informative)
XP64 was poorly supported by driver developers. For Vista and 7 MS mandated that both 32-bit and 64-bit drivers must be available at the same time, or MS will not sign any of them. This helped. Another factor is that in XP days 2 GB or RAM was all that most people had, and 64-bit bought you nothing. Today there is probably no new PC out there that has less than 4 GB of RAM, and 64-bit OS is a necessity. RAM-hungry applications also come now as 64-bit builds; a build for XP64 was unheard of.
Re: My theory (Score:4, Interesting)
While I don't disagree with what you wrote, GP AC is essentially correct.
Not 100% of the people who buy PCs want or need to do everything a PC can do. For many people the browser is the Internet, Facebook their home page, and that is all their PC has ever given them. For them, "the network is the computer". They have no want or need to do spreadsheets, PC games, or CAD. As the power, utility and grace of these new mobile platforms allows these people to to have this utility the PC gave them in a portable format they can take with them the less they need or want a PC - that the mobile device is also a media player and ereader, has all-day battery is bonus because those are features they want. As the mobile platforms become more facile, the larger this group grows and it has become a considerable fraction of former PC buyers - particularly in emerging markets. That the mobile platforms are less expensive is bonus.
Then there is the emerging markets thing. In many of these places a dollar goes a lot further than it does in the US, their power might not be as reliable, for many other reasons for a considerable portion of the public the $1000 PC and its voracious power needs never would have been appropriate. They can start with cheap phones with compute features in them, migrate to an inexpensive tablet, and stop. This market was a huge part of the PC's growth story the last few years, and that tale has come to an end.
Additionally as many other here have said the PC has been overkill for several years for the tasks most people put it to, so they don't need a new one. The cheap upgrade to Windows 8 tempted many Vista sufferers and doubtless they found the improved performance and responsiveness as good as buying a new PC as machines from that era were quite good, software notwithstanding. Those "upgrade" purchases are lost to PC sellers for a long, long time. SSDs come with software to migrate your OS and data to the SSD now, making an easy swap that makes an existing PC better than one you can get at retail, for a minor price less than swapping out the whole machine. This further delays the time when people might need to buy a new PC. For some, whose needs never will extend to more than a C2D or whatever they have with SSD, this is the End. Many of us have bought our last pc ever - or at least until this one dies. No more is needed. The failure rate is insufficient to sustain the PC market.
All these things have been true for a while and affecting the numbers a bit in small, deniable ways that could be written off as impacts from "economic downturn" but now people are finding out all over the world that their PC buying habit may no longer be necessary, that buying a PC is not required to join the technology revolution.
The PC is not required any more. You could plant a whiz-kid in a shack in Belize with nothing but a Transformer Infinity, a nice monitor and keyboard and mouse, solar power with battery, wi-fi Internet, a freezer full of hot-pockets and a credit card and through the magic of the Cloud he could still invent the Next Big Thing and run it for a year. He does not need a PC. Not at all. The magic is once again between his ears, not under his desk.
For these reasons and many others mentioned here even if Microsoft released a Windows Blue today with W8 features and a classic W7 user interface PC sales would remain in decline at least 7% in units against the year-ago quarter pretty much indefinitely. The era of unit growth in PCs is over, forever - or at least until we adjust to the fact that these new mobile things actually are personal computers and adjust the terminology accordingly.
The good news is that the tech economy is booming like never before. More units of smart connected devices are being sold than ever before, with unheard-of 50% quarter over year ago growth. They are being used more as well, people interacting with them more hours each day and more frequently, and almost always online - in more and more interconnected an
Re: My theory (Score:5, Funny)
Speaking of fixing things, whenever you attempt to type a capital S it turns into a dollar sign.
It could be the basementdweller virus. You should run a scan.
Re: My theory (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you no respect for tradition?
I agree. I remember this from back on Compu$erve even.
Sincerely,
90125,423
(or some such number)
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
MIcrosoft doesn't want to fix their UI. They want to train users in their touch UI.
The tablet space is an attractive market, and Microsoft wants to use their power on the desktop to win the tablet war.
This won't win them any friends in corporate IT, but corporate IT is so tied to Microsoft that they could release the next version with MS Bob as the interface, and businesses would still be forced to buy it when they upgrade. The only reason corporate IT is slow to upgrade now is that XP (and now Windows 7) is good enough, and corporate upgrade cycles are slow. Businesses skipped Vista, and went with 7. They'll skip 8 no matter what. When they are ready to upgrade again, Microsoft can just release a "Pro" version which enables a "classic" interface, and leave regular consumers with an interface that trains them to use MS tablets.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Informative)
The only reason corporate IT is slow to upgrade now is that XP (and now Windows 7) is good enough,
Corporate IT is happy with ThinPC, aka Windows Embedded Standard. It's a de-goobered 7. It's not de-goobered enough in my estimation, but that's a matter of taste, I guess. ThinPC SP1 gives you a desktop that users don't have to re-learn, is more amenable to policies from hell (you can even choose not to install IE, for example) and all applications behave as if you have 7. It will probably also have a longer support lifetime than 7.
What I consider de-goobered enough: Windows FLP. I would *love* to see a ThinPC version of Windows trimmed back as far as FLP is. Stick FLP in a VM and Thin PC in a VM, and compare speeds. You'll see what I mean.
--
BMO
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
Corporate IT is happy with ThinPC, aka Windows Embedded Standard.
Almost.
In reality, the elephant in the room is not much bigger than your thumb.
MK809 II Android 4.1 Mini PC HDMI Dual core 1GB RAM 8GB Bluetooth MK809II 3D + Fly air mouse RC11, US$34.47 / piece
Plenty of SMEs in Asia are replacing their Windows desktops with these little gadgets plugged into a screen and USB hub with mouse and keyboard attached. They do the same job as a Windows box for a little over $35, and with far less fuss and effort to maintain.
Microsoft isn't dumb - they have more than enough clever people to see the writing on the wall for their 85% OS profit margins, in fact I doubt MS could even afford to support Windows on their share of a $35 computer. W8 is indeed a lame duck product, intended for a market that's in a race to the bottom, as will be their next PC Office product.
Microsoft HAS to migrate their customers away from Windows to survive.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
I have friends that ask me if I can put window XP on their new windows 8 computers. No one seems to really like it.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
I often wonder what will happen first: Microsoft/Apple realising the error of their ways and making a useful UI, or users collectively sighing and sucking up the crap they are given.
Fortunately, in the *nix world, we have a choice.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Insightful)
I often wonder what will happen first: Microsoft/Apple realising the error of their ways and making a useful UI, or users collectively sighing and sucking up the crap they are given.
Put it this way, how many corporations have dumped their awful flash-sites? How many websites have you seen give up those hateful JS pop-ups, slide-outs, rolling banners, jiggly follow-me sidebars...? Or the "HEY WOULD YOU LIKE TO SUBSCRIBE INSTEAD OF ACTUALLY READING THE PAGE YOU CLICKED ON?!!! [Yes] [No but please ask me every fucking time]" pop-overs? Or "links" that are JS triggers that don't work like links, even though there's perfectly standard coding for JS pseudo-links? Or...
How many websites of major newspapers don't use third-party ad-hosting because they have an entire fucking in-house marketing department for their print edition, thus solving 95% of the problem with people using ad-blocking software?
How many major game companies stop requiring always-on net connections, or other obnoxious DRM, after having yet another first-week horrorshow on the authentication servers, which didn't stop pirates anyway, and instead decide to stop treating gamers who actually paid for the software as criminals?
How many....
Well, you get the idea. There's something about the corporate mindset that tends to just double-down on stupidity.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Informative)
corporate IT is so tied to Microsoft
I work for a multinational company, very structured, AMAZING levels of bureaucracy and I thought we were joined at the hip, neck and everywhere else to Microsoft products - yet I was amazed to hear they are moving this company (200k+ employees) over to Gmail for emails and contacts as well as a bunch of other things. Until I heard that, I would have bet body parts to say that they would never move off their current technology.
Having said that, we are still on XP rather than having skipped Vista to Win 7.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Informative)
This pretty much means you aren't in any industry that has government contracts
Not true. I work for a government research lab and we switched to GMail last year. Check it out: https://www.google.com/enterprise/apps/government/ [google.com]
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
The government is deeply into free software. NSA developed Security Enhanced Linux in 2003. NASA pretty much invented cloud, with Linux. Open-source recently got recognized as "commercial product" for procurement. Of course no government supercomputer runs Windows.
Yeah, you can brag that Microsoft's plants have put in procurement provisions for Office, but the government is quickly slipping off your chains.
Re:My theory (Score:4, Interesting)
Indeed. About the only place you will find Windows in the government is for standard office machines, where the expectation is that is what the user is familiar with. Everything else (serious business) is some variant of Unix (for older systems) or Linux.
Re:My theory (Score:4, Informative)
MS doesn't want to fix their UI, the Blue leak proves that. The UI is what people hate about win8, therefore win8 will conintue to drag down PC sales. The OEMs must be screaming at Redmond.
The tablet space is an attractive market for now, but that fad will pass in 2 years when the general public realizes that touch UIs suck.
Corporate IT is about the only friend MS has left, if not now then soon. And it won't be long before corporate IT begins looking elsewhere for future solutions because win8 throws a huge retraining cost in their face: Metro.
All three points are the result of a two intertwined phenomena: Microsoft's hubris and paranoia. I still think OEMs will finally bring about the Year of the Linux Desktop in 2015, all because of win8.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
People keep claiming the tablet market is drying up but every where I go they're becoming more common. I was at an annual job fair last week and I was amazed to see most of the people at the booths had tablets. Maybe one in four had a notebook. The penetration in the business world is picking up pace so far as I can tell. Touch may suck, but then again so does the QWERTY keyboard.
Re:My theory (Score:4, Insightful)
I doubt Win8 is the sole cause for the decline in PC sales. Quite a few manufacturers still offer Win7 by default (I just bought a brand new custom built Laptop, Win8 was an optional upgrade). I think it has to do more with the fact that hardware really is outpacing software these days and the only reason I even bought a new laptop was to play games when I travel. My old one works just fine still for the purpose I bought it for and my older ones are still quite usable and are now dedicated Linux machines.
The upgrade every 6 months or die cycle has long been toast.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Insightful)
The tablet space is an attractive market for now, but that fad will pass in 2 years when the general public realizes that touch UIs suck.
I'm not sure where you get the idea that touch UIs in general suck. They do suck on desktop/laptop machines where you're reaching up from the keyboard to touch the screen. They also suck for applications which involve significant typing, so are not good for programming, or writing that company report, or your next novel, or where you make significant use of other input devices with precision control, such as in photo editing, 3D modelling etc.
But that still leaves a LOT of the stuff that people spend a lot of time doing. They're really good for browsing and reading (or watching video, or pretty much any content consumption). They're fine for applications which require only small amounts of input, so all that tweeting, updating facebook, Skype etc. I now find that I'm spending more of my screen time at home in front of a tablet or large screen phone than I am at laptop or desktop computer. Partly, that's because I don't currently have time/energy for any out of work programming projects. The only things I really do sat at a computer is email where a keyboard is more efficient, banking/sorting finances (which with the right software would be fine on a touch screen tablet I just currently have it set up on desktop) and photo editing.
It's not just home use either. Every single work colleague I know who spends time involved in management committee meetings either has or wants a tablet. It's not just to look cool; flicking through minutes and meeting documents on a tablet is easier and more efficient than using a laptop, and it does save on the volume of printed paper.
The win8 interface is horrible and confusing on a computer. The 70 yr old woman who's in the process of buying my house came round a few days ago apologizing for not responding to emails; her computer had broken and she'd been all round town looking for a shop which would sell her a new laptop with win7. Failing to find one she was waiting to get her old machine fixed instead. Seeing behaviour like that, I am not at all surprised that new PC sales are hurting. Win8 is becoming as toxic a brand for MS as Vista.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:My theory (Score:4, Insightful)
The things that are good about windows 8 (modularity of features and some options for speedy lightweight installs, for example) are not at all apparent to most end users.
The things that are absolute fails about windows 8 are the things that are completely in your face for most users.
Features from the first group won't successfully justify the antifeatures in the second group.
All M$ has to do is fix their UI and sales will go back up.
Well, there are two large factors in the decline of Win 8 sales. One being people dislike Windows 8, as too different. The other thing is people aren't all buying a PC to replace their old PC. Mac sales are up as are tablets and smart phones. People who only needed their PC to keep in touch or exchange photos no longer need a PC, so they aren't going to buy one.
Like a refrigerator (Score:5, Interesting)
PCs are now like refrigerators. They are not obsolete, they are (for most people) essential household appliances. Just like your refrigerator, you don't need to replace your PC every year. Your PC may not last 10-15 years like your 'fridge, but 5 years is perfectly reasonable. Just like your 'fridge, you only need to replace your PC if it breaks, or goes out of style.
The "death of the PC" has been overhyped. The PC isn't dead, it's just mature. Sales will stabilize at a sustainable level, barring some radical innovation. I'm a little afraid that people are really going to screw up the refrigerator trying to make it into something it isn't, trying to solve a problem that is unsolvable.
OBTW, this will happen with mobile devices also. Mobile devices get beat up a little more, so they will tend not to last as long, but in the not two distant future the only legit reason to upgrade your phone/tablet will because the old one broke. I know several people still using the iPhone 3GS (4 years old).
Re:Like a refrigerator (Score:5, Insightful)
Slashdot car analogy time.
The PC will be like a truck, mobile like a car. There are people that need trucks, there are people that don't need trucks and want one anyway, but most people use a car.
A/V work is for trucks. But most people are in cars just running little errands or driving for fun.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Insightful)
Starting abou 2009-2010 the lowest end computer could play Youtube/Facebook/Netflix out of the box without any upgrades. Those are the killer apps of the home PC experience... and also things that a $150 android Tablet excells at. Your kid can still type up their book report on the old family Pentium 4 from 2002, but a $150 tablet outclasses it in every other way in both features, connectivity and speed for consumer use.
PCs hit a price floor at around $350 due to the size and cost to ship, along with the various modular components. The $80 tablet (not sale price, the MSRP price) is a thing now, in five years the $50 tablet will exist, and people will look at you like you're crazy if you buy a $150 tablet. Google is about to announce their new $149 Nexus 7.
Re:My theory (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:My theory (Score:4, Informative)
Errrrr... I wouldn't go that far. Circa 2002, a high-end best-of-breed corporate laptop was a 500-800MHz P-III with 512mb. Just *try* watching a 1080p30 HD Youtube video on that. My 2GHz Thinkpad T61p can barely play 720p30 h.264 without falling flat on its face and gasping for breath. Anything can play 480p60 MPEG-2, but high-profile 720p60 and 1080p30/i60 h.264 can bring even mighty computers to their knees and leave them stuttering & dropping frames.
And don't even get me STARTED about Ajax and sites that try using Javascript to build the entire DOM from scratch in realtime. A site like Amazon (or Slashdot, in desktop mode, attempting to post) will bring even a Galaxy S3 to its knees & make the soft keyboard choke on every other touch.
Re:My theory (Score:5, Interesting)
There hasn't been a damn thing in the last several years worth upgrading for. Gamers and developers aside, there has been nothing at all interesting happening in the PC world.
I'm still on a 2.0ghz C2D laptop and had no intention of upgrading anytime soon.
Except memory.
I settled on Win 7 Pro so I could cram 32GB of RAM onto my mother board. Life with Photoshop and some other hungry apps is quite a lot easier when you aren't paging like a paging fiend on national paging day.
As for the interface, I wanted to stick with familiar, not revolutionary. Win 8 reviews worried me. Generally Windows releases have departed from the previous one with less emphasis on keeping the system familiar. First things I do is turn off the Mac imitation peek, which I find extremely irritating. Gone also is the Aero/Glass look for the Classic look. I bought this to do work on, not bother me and try to look futuristic.
No, this is Microsoft's doing. (Score:5, Insightful)
Look, PC sales are on the decline. This we all know. So MS decided to tackle tablets in a big, audacious way in order to increase their relevance in the post-PC era. And it might have worked...
HAD THEY NOT BEEN SO ARROGANT AS TO REMOVE THE GODDAMNED START MENU AND FORCED OLD PC HARDWARE TO USE THEIR TOUCHSCREEN UI!
Seriously, how difficult would it have been to do a quick hardware check upon install and say "hmmm, it looks like you have a keyboard, mouse and non-touchscreen monitor. Let's make Metro an icon on the classic desktop and boot to explorer.exe with a mouse-friendly start menu by default."
Personally, I think Windows 8 offers several welcome improvements over Win7. I installed the OS, downloaded and configured Classic Shell, and haven't so much as whiffed a Metro screen in at least 2 months on my PC. It's great for me, but I'm not your average Windows user! The masses are clueless and if you give them enough reason to dislike your product, you're doomed.
MS, you successfully borrowed Steve Jobs' arrogant decision-making skills, but failed to deliver on the other half of the equation: an overall better user experience.
You can't argue with success (Score:5, Insightful)
One could argue that Apple didn't deliver a better user experience either.
Not against anyone that has used an iPad.
But they packaged it in such a shiny package with rounded corners that the user simply didn't care.
If that were true the far cheaper (and equally rounded) tablets would have vastly surpassed the iPad. But instead the iPad maintains a huge lead.
Quite a few of the ipod/phone/pad "interface" things, while different, are absolutely not functional
Just what exactly are you thinking of? Most of the conventions are quite functional. A number are superior to desktops (I far prefer pan/zoom and things like drawing on an iPad).
Desktops are better at some things, yes. But to pretend the iPad is not good at anything is to ignore a world of real-world experience that contradicts.
Apple sales as well (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: Apple sales as well (Score:4, Informative)
You might want to look a bit closer. The IDC report said that apple sales went up 7.5%
Re: Apple sales as well (Score:5, Informative)
No, that's just incorrect - here are the actual reports.
The IDC report says Mac sales were down 7.5%:
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24065413#.UWZPFVfJLz9 [idc.com]
There is a different report, by Gartner, that says U.S. Mac sales were up 7.4%, but a) that's not the IDC report and b) it's not worldwide data, it's for the U.S. market only:
http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2420816 [gartner.com]
Re:Apple sales as well (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Apple sales as well (Score:4, Funny)
Too bad for MS (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do companies make the same mistake (Score:3, Insightful)
Over and over again? It's the same as what IBM did with the PS/2 MicroChannel in the '80s and Intel with Itanium in the early 2000's.
Just because you have majority market share doesn't mean you can treat your customer base like a cattle drive. They have to be coaxed, not ordered to move. Show them the mountaintop, but also show them how they can migrate with minimal disruption to their applications, data and working style.
Re:Why do companies make the same mistake (Score:4, Interesting)
So true.
The Windows "8" team needs to set aside their inner city, dorm room 620p -1080p console for 5 to 10 year loving colleagues and sell "this" years and "next" years improvements - every year.
Intel has amazing CPU power on offer.
Nvidia and AMD have generations of medium and top end GPU ability to sell.
Solid-state drive (SSD) are reqady, RAM is cheap.
Show the world what Windows 8 with DX 11.1 can do. Get fans, developers and consumers dreaming of games beyond 1080p junk.
MS was always good at this, pushing colourful images/vids onto friendly fan and review sites, getting game dev code/help out to developers, making the PC an easy place to dev for vs Apple or Linux or Sony or
Amazing 2k quality at a reasonable price should be so easy to sell vs what? ios? PS3? a Mac Pro? Porting a game studio to opengl on Linux
Clean up the code base, forget making life so easy for PC and console developers. Run with quality over 5-10 years of code and art stagnation.
Make sure this never happens with the Win 8 team:
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2013/04/sony-indies/ [wired.com]
Note how Sony tries to be helpful, reach out to the next gen, guide them with the best free win 8 code tools, massive amounts of free online code help.
Make writing games, artwork, sound and releasing on Windows 8 easy, profitable and fun.
If a developer does not have to worry about the drama of the OS they are selling on they will put that effort into making a great game.
Bull (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bull (Score:5, Insightful)
I suspect smart phones and the like are doing more than anything else to kill the market for PCs. You don't need a PC to be a dog on the internet anymore.
Are tablet PCs counted as PCs or tablets? (Score:5, Informative)
Definition of Insanity (Score:5, Interesting)
If Windows isn't working, how about trying something else guys?
The answer is staring them in the face: Set up a foundation, share the expenses of development of a Linux desktop (Ubuntu or Mint).
Ubuntu/Mint is fine, it's just making sure the manufacturers are using all compatible hardware (or writing a driver for the odd device).
Prerelease only to consortium members.
It's either that, or sink on the M$ ship.
Re:Definition of Insanity (Score:5, Interesting)
The "definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result" quote is only applicable if you "did the same thing" more than once and got poor results.
Windows 7 was working. People would have upgraded eventually. It wouldn't have been a blowout, but this is a mature industry now. You can't expect blowouts unless you really innovate. In other words, Microsoft was getting good results, "did something different" and got poor results. The saner course of action is to go back to what they were doing, namely working on making their desktop robust, working to make it more secure, maintaining as much backward compatability as possible, and maintaining their Office suite and other products that have solid traction at corporations.
If they wanted to get into mobile the "sane" way, they should have parallel tracked it like the X-box. When they introduced the X-box, they didn't turn the desktop experience into a console experience. That was their fundamental error--deciding that a mobile UI with lots of eye candy was the future, and imposing that on the rest of us.
As for going OSS/FS, it's like telling Apple to release their OS separately. The response to that is "Apple is a hardware company", likewise, "Microsoft is a software company". Of course neither company is "pure" hardware or software; but they both get their "bread and butter" from one or the other.
Definition of insanity? Doing something different just for the sake of it, especially when that something is contrary to your historicly successful business model and you are sitting on more than enough cash to help you make much better plans.
Jumped the shark (Score:5, Interesting)
Windows is bad enough, but Windows + Ballmer is a disaster. MS could save itself with some new management.
Windows8 can be tamed, but why should you have to? (Score:3)
You can fix Windows 8 by adding Classic Shell or something similar, and then it acts a lot like 7, and you can avoid TIFKAM. But Microsoft never admits to a mistake. They are probably doubling down on it in Blue, rather than fixing it. It's a sure sign of too much monopoly power.
So if you need a new PC, then it's possible to live with 8, but it's true that PCs don't get obsolete as quickly as they used to. Unless you are a hard-core gamer and need the fastest performance, a 4-year-old system is likely to suffice. Especially on the desktop, which is easy to upgrade. Laptops are more likely to physically wear out, though some well-made ones last a long time. Mine's over 6 years old, runs XP, is on its fourth battery, and the keys are worn down, but it still works pretty well.
Re:Windows8 can be tamed, but why should you have (Score:4, Insightful)
My laptop has win8, I only use it in desktop mode and works just like win7 did.
I'm sorry, my /. interpreter may be broken .. are you saying that you wish you hadn't upgraded?
Re:Windows8 can be tamed, but why should you have (Score:5, Insightful)
wait, you don't like the start menu button because it takes up space, yet you tolerate the full screen metro bullshit? In fact, the start menu itself takes almost no space at all unless it's accessed.
Having search boxes on menus and windows is just a crutch that demonstrates the design sucks. The point is to see what you're looking for and interact with it in a graphically intuitive way. Switching back and forth from keyboard and mouse (or touch) is clunky, slow, and stupid.
Re:Windows8 can be tamed, but why should you have (Score:4, Interesting)
Stop this please. You don't need any addons to make win8 work in desktop mode. You don't need to use any of the metro apps either.
Agreed almost 100%.
The only difference is that you get a full screen "start menu" when you hit the windows key.
Exactly. But...
a) The default start menu out-of-box is a cluttered mess of live-tile garbage. It only takes a few minutes to turn off the live tiles and/or remove most of them from the start menu outright, and after you do this the start menu is perfectly fine. It might make some sense on a tablet, it might be reasonable on touch capable laptop, but its just silly on a full on desktop.
b) Its annoying to HAVE to hit the windows KEY. A lot of people are used to there being a button. And there is really no good reason whatsoever for there NOT to be a "start" button on the desktop taskbar. If you are using the desktop, then you are using a mouse. If you are using a mouse then there should be a button for an important function like this. So all I want is a button to launch the full on start screen. I know I don't actually NEED it, I know I can use the key or I can even use the hot corners, but a lot of the win8 grief would be alleviated if they'd just given people a button to push.
c) Hot corners -- just SUCK. They are ok on a touch device, but not on a desktop. They aren't intuitive when using a mouse.
And worse, they are a royal PITA to operate when the desktop isn't "full screen" such as when running in a Virtual Machine, or a Remote Desktop window, or when there are multiple monitors and the "corners" aren't necessarily the corners. Apple started this nonsense and OS X is my LEAST favorite OS to remote into by far -- seems a large number of people have the dock set to autohide and getting it to show up remotely can be a pain, not to mention the window min/max animations are always horridly laggy... but i digress.
Re:Windows8 can be tamed, but why should you have (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple started this nonsense
Except that on OS X the hot corners are fully optional. I don't use them myself, for example. I know where to configure them if I ever want to, but like you I just don't see the point and so I don't, and everything works just fine without.
That's the difference. Giving a user options is fine. Forcing the user unto something that you think is great just sucks, because users are different from each other and definitely from the developers.
Tablets can do it better (Score:5, Insightful)
Win8 Experience (Score:5, Interesting)
Win 8 so bad you're going Linux with Win in a VM? (Score:4, Interesting)
I haven't run Win 8 and lots of folksI know haven't either. We aren't MS haters - we're pragmatists and pretty much comprise a group of users who have used every MS OS (OK Nobody ran ME) since DOS. If a company can produce a product so crappy that it does that it really makes you wonder what the hell is wrong with management.
The $64000 question is what does MS do now? The best I can think of is make the Win 8 'Aqua' style interface better - hell throw the Windows 7 UI in there. That way they could keep working on the tile based stuff but not alienate everyone.
Unfortunately they've pretty much managed to alienate a huge number of users.
I use Linux entirely for work, and Win 7 on my machines at home when I'm not running Linux. I'm thinking about a new laptop for home but don't want Windows 8. I think I'm actually going to just do Linux on that laptop now steam is available for Linux. If I need Windows I'll run it in a VM. I'm curious who else has come to the same conclusion. Windows in a VM and Linux as your main OS because Win 8 seems so crappy.
Re:Win8 Experience (Score:5, Informative)
... Speaking of the interface, Microsoft should seriously fire the people who are responsible for this garbage ...
They did.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-57548751-75/controversial-windows-boss-steven-sinofsky-leaves-microsoft/ [cnet.com]
The biggest problem is lack of options (Score:5, Insightful)
If I buy a new PC (I did buy one instead of build last year before windows 8 came out- for a quick gift to a friend in need) I would not hesitate to buy one with Windows 8 on it. I know how to install a program that'll make it friendlier for every day use. Or if I want I can put 7 back on it or a linux distro if I want. But for the average person, I see nothing but frustration from people.
PC makers need to give options. 7 or 8 should be available. People will say that Linux should be available too, and I won't disagree, but I don't think it will give an overall good user experience from most PC makers. But that's not what this is about.
This is about MS forcing vendors to force their customers to be guinea pigs for windows 8's new paradigm that totally sucks. Sales are down? GOOD. Maybe they'll get the message:
THE NEW WINDOWS 8 GUI SUCKS.
Microsoft removed the biggest anti-Linux argument (Score:5, Insightful)
"People won't switch to Linux/Android/whatever because they don't want to have to learn a new system."
Microsoft: "I know, let's make everybody learn a new system!"
Suddenly they've given their core customers a reason to look at their competition that they didn't have before.
Re:Microsoft removed the biggest anti-Linux argume (Score:5, Interesting)
I find that most people I switch to Linux love it. I do make sure before I switch them that they don't have any windows specific programs that they need or play games. If people just web browse and facebook then really they hardly notice anything except that the computer runs much better and faster and it doesn't require a re-install every couple of months. I'm talking computer illiterates here too. I have advised some to stay on windows though, mostly gamers.
The "lightweight" person that you mention (Score:5, Interesting)
is now the vast majority of non-business computing users.
They want:
(1) Web (95% of needs)
(2) Office (5% of needs, and even then, only at a very rudimentary level)
Didn't you notice when all of the big-box stores shut down and the software aisles at the Wal-Marts and Costcos got emptied out? Yes, there was a time when people had a shelf full of CDs and DVDs that they wanted to install on their "next computer."
Those days are long gone.
The baby boomers in my extended family are happy to be free of the complexity. They tell "remember when" stories about how hard computing used to be, and how confusing computers were before you could just do everything that you needed to do online, in Firefox (most of them switched to Firefox during its heyday and are now solidly married to it, even if other options have become competitive). Most of the things that used to be standalone applications they now do online:
- Email (Google replaces Outlook)
- To-do (Todoist, Toodledo, etc. replace Outlook)
- Calendaring (Google replaces Outlook)
- Contacts management (Google replaces Outlook)
- Personal data management (Evernote replaces the file system)
- Reference (Wikipedia replaces endless varieties of CD-ROM encyclopedias)
- Entertainment (Social Gaming and YouTube replace CD-ROM gaming and multimedia)
- Document editing (Google replaces Office)
- Digital photos (Flickr/Facebook+Smartphone replace assorted "old" consumer digital photo apps+USB digital camera)
- Music (Pandora replaces MP3 collections on hard drives)
I teach a bunch of college kids at local U, and have done now in two states over the better part of a decade. In 2006, kids showed up with Thinkpads. Now they show up with iPads.
In 2006, departmental policies often still required hardcopies of submitted work and installs of university-site-licensed educational software. These days, assignments are required to be submitted through online portals (Blackboard, Canvas, etc.) in digital form and devices like iPads are the *suggested* college study equipment. The Real Serious students get a bluetooth keyboard and the Pages app, but most of them type onscreen into Google Drive to do their work.
Seriously, the applications argument is dead—just like the PC. Specialized fields and roles will still require it, but I suspect that over time even those will go the way of the dodo as mobile devices get more and more processing power and more and more users move to them—which will tend to produce as web apps or mobile apps those things that used to be PC apps.
Completely Agree... (Score:5, Interesting)
Why own a large device pretending to be a smartphone, when you can just use a smart phone?
I mean, if it were set up out of the box to be used for business and, well, PC gaming out of the box, then I'd be interested in a system with Windows 8... but instead, it's an OS that is very ashamed of being a PC, and every time I access it's configuration, I'm going to see whole-screen interfaces, and other throwbacks to pre-3.1 Windows concepts that phones need to use, and for some reason are pushed everywhere in Windows 8.
Why would I use a system that is reluctant at best, to serve as an OS the way I'd like to use it? I'll stick to Windows 7 for my PC games, and I can't imaging any of the businesses I've ever worked at wanting to switch to 8 either.
But I'm sure there's some folks that like Metro. I mean, Microsoft had to be focus testing with someone - I just can't imagine who'd select that interface as the better to use.
Ryan Fenton
Um (Score:3)
Duh?
Nothing like an article stating the obvious. MS just won't give in- they continue to ignore users, businesses, reviewers, just about everyone. Treating your customers like enemies is not good for your business, MS. You are not quite the monopoly you once were.....
The Era of Endless Upgrades is Over (Score:3, Interesting)
Tell me why I need a PC again? And while you're at it, tell me also why in hell I would need Windows 8? Or even Office 2010?
The PC is the wagon wheel of the computing world. It did it's job, but save for niche markets the average non-gamer doesn't need or want one and so it very naturally is fading into history. That's how it goes.
FLASHBACK! (Score:4, Funny)
Big surprise!
Bloatware, mobile, and good enough (Score:5, Insightful)
Basically everyone who buys a nice machine from wherever boots it up and is presented with a pile of icons and popups that confuse/scare/annoy the crap out of them. Usually the browser is infested with "helpful" toolbars. The search engine has been redirected this way or that. And some crap like Norton pops up and tells them that they are going to die if they don't give them money. The Apple PC market is doing OK and I think that people are willing to pay the huge bucks because they turn the damn thing on and it works, no threats, no weirdness. I am not saying that the Mac is way better but that people would basically be just as happy turning on their Windows machine and being greeted with a default one icon for connecting to the internet unimpeded, no Asus Game world, Trial this or trial that.
Then there is the fact that most people are consumers not generators of content. Thus a tablet or larger screened smart phone will get them all the cat videos they can eat. These smartphones aren't cheap and thus will eat up many people's technology budget.
And lastly there is the point that many people who have a PC of some sort can keep it running and running. If they have a laptop their mobile phone might have reduced their porting it around and increased its lifespan even to the point where they don't care that the battery has 5 minutes of life when unplugged. If they have a desktop then the lifespan is even better seeing that most repairs (if any) should cost less than $100. My mother is using a desktop running Linux that is about 8 years old. She has a nice keyboard, nice mouse, nice B&W laser printer, and a nice monitor so she is quite happy. It runs gmail and can play youtube videos at full screen; an upgrade would be a foolish waste of money.
In the past people upgraded their computers because they had some application that really wouldn't run on their old computer. Now about the only non professional (Photoshop, IDE, etc) application that demands an upgrade is the OS itself. So if you need an OS that can run a browser and some sort of Office Suite then why would you upgrade your OS.
In the past I can remember getting Windows 95 and bouncing around when it booted up for the first time. It was such a vast improvement over 3.1.1. Then when I finally had a machine that could handle 2000 I was happy again. XP waited for a long time until some application or another wouldn't run and then I left the Microsoft embrace so got to largely avoid Vista on. Even with the Mac about the only reason I have upgraded my OS is that the latest versions of XCode wouldn't run on the slightly older versions of the Mac OS.
As for games I just about lost my mind when I finally got a 3DFX card. But if anything gaming is probably the last thing keeping people buying the latest and greatest in the PC market. Personally I have long given up making my PC game friendly. I have an XBox for that.
Personally if I were running MS beyond looking past a world where the OS and office suite drive the bus I would have a super research project where you create the killer app that requires that you have a PC with 100GB of ram and a crazy new processor.
But maybe this whole PC dying thing is missing the point. Way in the past an IBM PC "killed" my commodore 64. And apple seems to be racing, with other, to a smart watch goal. This will mean that your average person will have a computer on their wrist, a computer in their pocket, computers in their car, computers in their work, multiple computers hooked up to their TV, and maybe(or maybe not) a computer on a desk at home. Yet if we scroll back say 13 years to the dot com boom most people had at most 1 computer that they paid well over $1000 for and a home network was exotic.
Companies shouldn't' like where this is going (Score:4, Interesting)
Soon Microsoft is going to point and say that that Desktop PCs are failing because CONSUMERS don't want desktops any more, they want "phones" and tablets instead. When the fact is that nobody happens to want desktops WITH WINDOWS 8.
Go back to the beginning of what made the IBM PC great. It was spreadsheets, databases, word processing, and boring financial programs. These were, and still are very much critical to businesses. These needs are not going away!
An operating system package that is only optimized for looking at LOLCats and clips of Family Guy, is not going to go over well with any business that has a clue. And Windows Blue shows Microsoft has no intention of backing down on this.
So what happens when you need to do a desktop oriented tasks and there are no desktops left because Microsoft killed all desktops?
Doesn't mention Mac sales declining too (Score:4, Insightful)
I bought a computer to avoid Windows 8 (Score:4, Interesting)
Worry that Windows 7 installed machines would become unavailable, and worry about UEFI or whatever the booting is, got me to replace my pretty old desktop which only ran Linux because Windows stopped booting for some reason, with a $425 ASUS. I violated the warranty to put a cheap nVidia graphics card in and to repartition the disk to run Ubuntu as well (the new Unit stuff, unfortunately similar to Windows 8), and ran decrapifier on Windows. Only problem is that the sound is very quiet (in both systems) which is probably a hardware problem, and stupid Windows does not recognize my serial keyboard unless I also leave a USB keyboard plugged in (the serial keyboard works for the BIOS and for Ubuntu), and Ubuntu has an equally stupid bug where it swaps my monitors until the first time I move the mouse between them.
Any case, I wanted to say that Windows 8 actually *caused* a sale recently. I wonder if people like me, trying to upgrade to the best thing available that did not run Windows 8, caused any increase in desktop sales, slightly offsetting the overall reduction.
Its not all bad. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just add the start button back.
http://stardock.com/products/start8/ [stardock.com] is my fav but does cost $5, http://www.classicshell.net/ [classicshell.net] is free.
5 more dollars to put all those "apps" back in a window with an icon on the taskbar http://stardock.com/products/modernmix/ [stardock.com]
And here is a great article for switching default apps back, getting rid of the swipe screen, etc.http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/software-and-web-apps/how-to-make-windows-8-look-like-windows-7-50009546/ [cnet.co.uk]
Tell people you are a Consultant and you can charge them to do this stuff for them.
And just when you think you've charged everyone money for fixing what Microsoft broke, Microsoft will do you a solid and sell them all something else they hate and will pay you to "make work like it used to."
Oh and if you think Microsoft is desperate and just burning money to be like Apple, you're right. They are offering a $100 an app for up to 15 apps for college students to write pretty much anything and fill their apps store with crap for Win8. Google for one of their App Camps and make yourself some quick cash.
Re:Mobile computing replacing regular computing? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry bub, nobody's gonna call. You're not the mass market, you're a niche. Funny how things change over time. Tablets are becoming the mass market Internet device. Professionals will still buy PCs but everyone else, all those people who bought a PC to get 'online' in the 90s and upgraded to play games in 2000, they just don't need a PC anymore (they never did but it was the only good option).
It's just the way it is. The PC industry is going to consolidate soon. Hardware makers will still make servers and workstations and some will make tablets but the general purpose home PC is going away.
Re:So... no Win 7? (Score:4, Informative)
Microsoft isn't selling Windows 7 licenses anymore. PC manufacturers can't get new Windows 7 licenses to install on to their new computers. Their only option is to buy a windows 8 professional license and use the downgrade rights that come with the professional edition license to install Windows 7. This adds $100 to the cost of the windows license and therefor adds $100 to the price of the computer. They had this same issue with Windows XP when Vista came out... you had to pay more for the computer just to get XP because you had to buy the professional edition of the OS.
Re:Windows 8 doesn't allow windows... (Score:4, Informative)