The Three Flavors of Windows 8 500
First time accepted submitter Kelerei writes "Windows 8 has been confirmed as the official name for the next x86/x64 version of Windows, which will be released in two editions: a home edition (simply named 'Windows 8') featuring an updated Windows Explorer, Task Manager, improved multi-monitor support and 'the ability to switch languages on the fly,' while a professional edition ('Windows 8 Pro') adds features for businesses and technical professionals such as encryption, virtualization and domain connectivity. Windows Media Center will not be included in the Pro edition and will be available separately as part of a 'media pack' add-on. A third edition, branded as 'Windows RT,' will be available for ARM-based systems."
RT Aplenty (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Original submitter here. :)
TFA mentions (and I quote): "the focus for Windows RT is development on the new Windows runtime, or WinRT..." -- so, I'm guessing that that's where the name comes from. I blame lack of caffeine at the time for leaving that out of the submission.
Bit of a bland choice though, in my opinion.
Re:RT Aplenty (Score:5, Informative)
No matter how many times I see it, RT is apparently going to imply realtime to me. I have to remind myself it means "Windows API 2.0" every time.
Re:RT Aplenty (Score:5, Informative)
Do you ever watch RT ( http://rt.com/ [rt.com] ) ? [The russian CNN/BBC/Al Jazeera]
Alleged "no-compromise experience" (Score:3)
Re:Alleged "no-compromise experience" (Score:5, Funny)
"All editions of Windows 8 offer a no-compromise experience."
No, we won't compromise about the start button. Nor the greasy finger interface on a desktop. Nor the AOL look and feel. Nor the inability to have multiple windows open at once.
Sheesh - this stuff almost writes itself.
To make Metro go away, press LWin (Score:3)
Re:Alleged "no-compromise experience" (Score:5, Insightful)
Especially in light of the fact that MS considers such basics as "network backup" as Pro features.
Re: (Score:3)
LoB
forgot the fourth flavor, the torrent (Score:5, Funny)
Does the fourth flavor, torrent, have pro + the media addon "slipstreamed" in or what?
I'm not about to actually use anything other than XP at home or work anytime soon, but its interesting to know about.
Move along, nothing to see here folks. (Score:3, Insightful)
We all know Windows 8 is going to be the next "Terrible Windows".
Windows 9 is where it is at. If they even survive.
Re:Move along, nothing to see here folks. (Score:5, Funny)
You're only running Windows 11? I'm running Windows 98!! ;)
Re: (Score:3)
Only 98? I've been running Windows 2000 for years!
Re:Move along, nothing to see here folks. (Score:4, Funny)
You're still running firefox 11? That's sooooo mid-march!!
Continuing to split versions? (Score:4, Insightful)
I just cannot fathom why at this point that Microsoft still does not grasp how important security is.
Nothing makes this more clear than withholding advanced encryption features or even virtualization from the general consumer version.
This continued split of versions at this point is just absurd, and confusing to the market. You'd think by now Microsoft would learn to simplify - I guess not. Must be nice being a monopoly that scores of companies have no choice but to ship whatever you put out.
Re:Continuing to split versions? (Score:5, Insightful)
I just cannot fathom why at this point that Microsoft still does not grasp how important security is.
Nothing makes this more clear than withholding advanced encryption features or even virtualization from the general consumer version.
They're in the business of making money, not providing important services.
This continued split of versions at this point is just absurd, and confusing to the market. You'd think by now Microsoft would learn to simplify - I guess not. Must be nice being a monopoly that scores of companies have no choice but to ship whatever you put out.
Back in the day, "only one version" was one of their arguments against using Linux.
Re: (Score:3)
They're in the business of making money, not providing important services.
Then they should simplify since Apple shows it does a better job of making money.
Back in the day, "only one version" was one of their arguments against using Linux.
The thing is, there doesn't have to be "just one version" I have nothing against the separate media pack for instance... it's just the separate shipping versions that scream out the inability to focus on anything.
Re:Continuing to split versions? (Score:5, Insightful)
Must be nice being a monopoly that scores of companies have no choice but to ship whatever you put out.
It's no coincidence that most businesses are still on XP/Server2003. I do not look forward to the day our firm "upgrades". Microsoft's only competitor is their past selves, and they often still can't compete; the only way they know to upgrade you is to eliminate support contracts for older versions of Windows, not provide any additional value. Paying money without getting value is a big suck for the economy...
Re: (Score:3)
We are about halfway between XP/Server2003 and Win7/Server2008 R2. I get pretty bummed out every time I have to deal with the XP/Server 2003 boxes. I can say a lot of bad stuff about Microsoft, but their current operating systems are pretty darn good.
Re:Continuing to split versions? (Score:5, Funny)
I know, it's crazy. What you really want is some sort of Open Source operating system that's modular, whereby you can put together the parts you want.
Or if that's a little too complicated, you could have people who build pre-made packages and distribute them to users based on their needs.
Pity nothing like that exists.
Re:Continuing to split versions? (Score:4, Insightful)
Either you're trolling or you are vastly overestimating the general public computer abilities. Do you really expect Joe six-pack to setup a virtual machine to run his browser in? Even if he has a knowledgeable friend who sets this up for him, now try to explain to him why he can't apply a wallpaper he downloads or install a game without copying it from the virtual machine to is computer (which, by the way, defeats to large extent the usefulness of the virtual machine in the first place)? As for encryption, I'm not really sure of how it protects a computer from viruses and random malware, but I do know that it makes it much more difficult to recover data in case of hardware failure, sometimes impossible if the encryption depended on some certificate which had to be backed up (which wasn't done, because the user didn't know about it). You can argue that Microsoft should offer a simpler line of products, but I don't think those features are particularly useful in regards to security for the general public.
Re: (Score:3)
It is only a fraction of the public, the geeks, which understands that the hardware is capable of all these things and it is Microsoft's artificial limitations
Re: (Score:3)
MS Office and Windows are monopolies.
Just because alternatives exist, doesn't mean they are not monopolies.
x86 (Score:4, Insightful)
The early rumors were that Windows 8 would be x64 only (like Server 2008 R2). From an end-user-with-a-lot-of-32bit-apps perspective, I'm glad to see they're supporting x86. From a sys-admin-who-hates-having-two-architectures-per-print-driver perspective, I can't wait until x86 is dropped altogether.
Re:x86 (Score:5, Informative)
And how many of those apps will really not run on a 64-bit OS? I've not come across anything in the last couple of years that won't work under 64-bit Windows 7 unless it has a moronic installer check that it doesn't need or is something ancient that needs the 16-bit subsystem to function.
Re:x86 (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Windows 8: The Playskool OS (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
but flat-out stupid things like Safe Mode access being disabled by default! "System Restore" or "System Repair" should NOT be the only option you have when something goes wrong!
I am anxiously awaiting stories about Windows 8 tablets crashing and what users do with the device at that point. I'll be ROFLMAO If it's just permanently bricked (no install media for WinRT according to the blog).
Re:Windows 8: The Playskool OS (Score:5, Informative)
... Speaking of hoops, you have to jump through a few of those just to get to what in previous versions of Windows were basic system resources, like the Control Panel, My Computer, etc.. Seriously, it's like it's designed for idiot children...
you can access control panel in windows 8 faster than you ever could in any version of windows. Move mouse curson to bottom left corner, and instead of left clicking, RIGHT CLICK. You will be treated to a nice context menu, of witch one of the many option is "control panel". Also the my computer icon has been replaced with the new windows explorer icon. If you click the windows explore icon you get the EXACT same window as if you had opened "my computer". You just have to learn to not be a giant man baby about windows changing things around to notice.
Oh, lookie! (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft is trying to "appropriate" another established term to create an air of legitimacy of their products and imply capabilities that they do not have.
RTOS is a common name for a "Real-Time Operating System", systems that are commonly used on ARM, and, as their name implies, have real-time capabilities that Windows, of any flavor, never had and likely never will. Please note that "RT" was used for this purpose since at least 1973 (RT-11 operating system by DEC).
Let's look back to Microsoft previous efforts on this path. Many years ago they pulled out of nowhere the "Digital Nervous System" advertising slogan, apparently for no purpose other than to create confusion with DNS, Domain Name System. More recently, again, out of nowhere they called one of the descendants of their unholy marriage of OLE and DDE, ".NET", what would be a really stupid name if it wasn't a standard top-leven domain, and sounded somehow related to ".com", a typical term for an Internet-based business. On top of this, Microsoft was extremely persistent in inventing trademarked terms that sound generic -- "Windows", "Word" are actual trademarks, and "MS SQL Server" is constantly mentioned as "SQL Server", even though the former is a Microsoft trademark and the latter is a generic name for a database server using SQL language that covers dozens of Microsoft competitors.
How about a lawsuit from all RTOS developers (including at least two flavors of Linux-based ones)?
Re:Oh, lookie! (Score:5, Informative)
What about "Office Open XML"? If that's not intentionally causing confusion with a competing product, I don't know what is.
Four versions (Score:5, Informative)
Sounds familiar (Score:5, Funny)
After installation, a glowing hologram of Clippy appears and gives the user three choices.
Red flavor - Destruction. Win8 destroys itself to revert back to the previously installed OS. Network port is permanently disabled.
Blue flavor - Control. Keeps Win8 installed, but presents only a command line interface. Network port is permanently disabled.
Green flavor - Synthesis. Keeps Metro UI as a fancy DOS shell. Network port is permanently disabled.
Need one more flavor... (Score:3)
Windows Releases Split - Stable & Development (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft is finally warming up to the the Linux Kernel release version branch split system in terms of purpose and usability.
Windows XP = Stable
Windows Vista = Development/Experimental
Windows 7 = Stable
Windows 8 = Development/Experimental
"the ability to switch languages on the fly" (Score:3)
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Informative)
Oh look, a shill post in the first message.
You're supposed to wait a bit so as to not be so obvious. /tip
--
BMO
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Informative)
I was going to accuse you of giving a knee-jerk reaction against anyone saying something good about Windows 8, but then I checked OP's post history.
This is literally his only post, so yea, shill.
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
You've been running Windows 8 on the Desktop? I'm not ranting, I'm interested. What's your setup? What do you do "normally"?
I'm asking because I'm more of the "tiled window manager" and "I want my windows where I want them" type, and I can hardly imagine working with something like Gnome 3, Unity or Metro (hell, I have trouble working with Explorer)...but that doesn't mean that I'm resistant to learning the benefits of those system.
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:4, Interesting)
If you never use the metro apps, the goofy start screen just acts like a giant start menu, even with incremental search
Yes, but with the huge disadvantage that it's annoying to access. Instead of being a button on the screen, it's a full screen waste of space. Accessing it with a mouse is generally unreliable in my experience-- you have to hover your cursor near the edge of the screen, and it often doesn't actually pop up when you do that.
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:4, Interesting)
I actually like the window management on Gnome 3. I miss the compiz grid feature, but gnome 3 is the first window manager that I actually use the "virtual desktop" feature...I use two monitors, and Gnome 3 only does the virtual desktop thing on one of them. that leaves the other for e-mail and IM windows that i want to keep visible all the time.
I've used unity and metro (in the consumer preview), and found them lacking. I think we've reached a point where we have so much choice, It doesn't really bother me that the Desktop paradigm is being experimented upon.
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Informative)
I'll say this: if it weren't for Metro I would unquestionably recommend Windows 8 as an upgrade to Windows 7 and especially Vista/XP. The UI's generally clean, they've updated many of the things that needed updating (like the task manager or the file transfer dialog) and boot times are improved.
However, the forced inclusion of Metro through their "start screen" idea is flawed at best, a deal-breaker at worst. No, it's not utterly unusable, as some people might say, but it is a lot less convenient than the start menu. It's a needless downgrade from something which took less space, less mouse movement, fewer clicks and especially which fit with the aesthetic of the rest of the OS better. As it is there's a fairly jarring jump between the appearance of the desktop and the Metro tiles, making it feel like you're running two different OS. If the start screen let me use Windows programs more efficiently, it would've been good (and it's entirely possible to make it do so, Microsoft just didn't do it). As it is, programs take way too much space for no reason, getting access to things takes too many clicks, many traditional features are locked behind a "pretty" UI and it generally feels a bit schizophrenic.
However, my biggest gripe isn't actually the start screen, it's the "Charms". Whereas the bottom-left corner opens up the start screen, the right border opens up the charms panel, which has things like wifi strength and such; that much is good. However, in order to do the extremely unusual action of shutting down or hibernating the computer, you have to go into Settings, then Shutdown, all of which AFTER having opened the Charms menu. How's that for intuitive?
Make the start screen more efficient and put a prominent power button in there and I'll be a lot warmer to the OS. As it is Windows 7 still does the job well enough to stop me from moving on. Oh and, the fact they've shoved Metro in Windows Server 8 (even with the "desktop experience" pack disabled) is utterly insane.
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Informative)
Make the start screen more efficient
You might be interested in this [msdn.com] blog post, which tries to address concerns that the new start screen is less efficient. For example, you complain about things being further away and larger, but according to Fitts law, this exact combination maintains the efficiency of the menu, and if fact the math works out so that it's more efficient for a higher number of items. Further, the shape and grouping capability of the new start screen, which is only possible because it's a screen instead of a menu, make it possible to take advantage of different types of memory recall like spatial memory. After using the new start screen for a while, I find it much more useful than the start menu.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Except - how many people in a work environment have their data reported? Most competent IT departments don't allow such feedback to be sent.
Which means that the samples were comprised mostly of home users, which are a very different set than the productive business users and developers.
And in fact, most knowledgeable home users would disable the feedback as well as a matter of course.
But - nothing I'm going to say here is going to change Windows 8 at this point. MS has chosen a course, and has committed t
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:4, Informative)
Except - how many people in a work environment have their data reported?
Microsoft addressed this exact question in this [msdn.com] post, reposted below:
@Andrew wrote: "I'd like to point out that this data you collect is most likely from non-corporate users, you're basing all your statistics around home users and not business users. Most enterprises will turn off the CEIP by default in Group Policy as a security precaution and to prevent chatter from the network."
Andrew, while it’s true that some enterprises choose not to enable the CEIP (Customer Experience Improvement Program, which gives us anonymous, opt-in feedback about how people are using Windows,) we still receive a huge amount of data from this program, including from enterprise customers. In addition, knowing the region, language, edition, and deployment attributes of the product allows us to further refine the data as needed. We often refer to this data as a full "census" (again noting that the data is opt-in and anonymous) as the number of unique data points is magnitudes beyond a "sampling."
In addition to the CEIP program, we have a wide variety of channels to our corporate customers to understand their needs. For example, we collect feedback continuously during direct engagement with customers (such as during on-site visits and in our briefing centers around the world), from advisory council and early-adopter program members, and at public events such as TechEd and //build/. We also work closely with industry analysts (via consultations and their research) and execute a wide range of our own research studies directly. From these interactions, we know the kind of functionality and control that enterprises want over the Start menu and we are definitely taking these into account as we are designing and developing the changes for Windows 8.
When you look at the data, we can see that enterprise customers do, in fact, have some different experiences with their Start menus:
While 81% of home users have the default links like Control Panel, Games, and Documents on right hand-side of the Start menu , fewer than 2% of our enterprise customers have this experience.
Most people have removed some items in this part of the Start menu (with Games and Media Center entry points most often removed).
Enterprise users are launching pinned Start menu apps 68% more often than home users, but the usage of pinned items is still less than 10% of the sessions.
What are we doing with this information?
In general, individual enterprise customers are using Start menus that their administrators have customized. Using this research and our engagement with the enterprise community, we are working on special features that can help address the need for customization in the Start screen. For example, enterprises can remove items like Games and Help & Support from the Start screen. For Windows 8, we support deployment scenarios that include Start screens with a layout of tiles that matches their business group’s needs, allowing for an even greater number of pinned apps to be pre-defined for their users. We also support the managed lockdown of customization of the Start screen so that it is consistent across the corporation. These features have been built especially for our enterprise customers, taking into account the existing functionality that we have provided in the past and the needs that we perceive they will have in the future. And as many know, tech-savvy individuals can use these customizations as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Good for **YOU**
Me and many other people, according to Microsoft usage statistics. Usage in the start menu has dropped tremendously since the introduction of the start bar. What exactly do you use the start menu for anyway? At its core it's just a box with shortcuts on it. Fast desktop-wide searching has removed my need to ever use the "all programs link" and jump lists have removed the need to ever use the documents links. The only other useful function is pinned apps, and they go on my start bar anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, what sort of software developer would ever need to look up documentation or consult an email while they were coding?
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
there's no reason to have multiple windows up, since they'll just distract you from what you're doing
Not necessarily. If you have a big monitor, and you have your email up along with another app, it could prevent distraction if you can just glance over to see what your new message is. Same with IM windows, etc. Personally, I focus on one window at a time because my eyes are sensitive and I have a relatively small monitor. I'm just saying that a desktop OS shouldn't make that decision for you. A mobile OS, yes.
Re: (Score:3)
You don't have to get extreme with options, but clearly some people are going to want to see more things on-screen simultaneously than others. Oh well, guess we will have to see how that plays out.
Re: (Score:3)
Except that you don't get a choice if you need to run Windows apps on an up-to-date OS.
So complain to Microsoft, or get a better OS. If I like hardwood floors and you like carpet, why complain to me because your installer only knows how to install hardwood floors when you could just find a new installer?
And if you want a lack of distraction in any OS, all you have to do is close your unnecessary windows.
Yes, I'm doing it wrong. I'm so stupid. How dare I like a window manager that does something for me?
There are things in life that shouldn't require tradeoffs.
Good luck with that.
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Funny)
but you'll focus better without them.
Glad that MS knows exactly how I'll focus, and what will make me focus better. Looking forward to coding on my giant monitor with no distractions from documentation, other code snippets, test windows and the other tools that I use on a day to day basis.
In fact, I'm shocked. Shocked! That I've ever been able to get any work done during my entire career, what with all those other windows cluttering up my workspace.
Reason GP was voted up (Score:3)
Congratulations on discovering that not everyone works the same way. Why was this voted up?
Maybe because Windows' and Gnome 3's insistence on "one window to rule them all" shows that they haven't made this same discovery?
Cheers,
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe because Windows' and Gnome 3's insistence on "one window to rule them all" shows that they haven't made this same discovery?
You're missing what I'm saying. Some people like this style of window manager. If you don't like it, use a different window manager that fits what you you like.
It's like with video players. Some people like media centers like XBMC, some people like minimal players like VLC. Are you going to go around complaining to everyone who likes VLC because it's hard to use your remote control, and there's no library, etc., or will you just accept that some people want a library and some people just want a player?
I wou
Re:Reason GP was voted up (Score:5, Insightful)
So - given that for certain games and software development (yes, I do develop under Windows as well as Linux), what desktop choices, exactly, do I have with Windows 8? Where is the option for the Windows 7 look and feel?
Oh, wait. It doesn't exist.
So, no, I don't have a choice. And given how tightly the desktop is bound to the OS in Windows, I won't. There might be some mods and add ons that I can use, but not from MS, and probably not with the complete blessing of MS.
Re: (Score:3)
The idea is basically that if you want to use something like your browser, email, an IDE, etc., there's no reason to have multiple windows up, since they'll just distract you from what you're doing.
But if we take our Ritalin it shouldn't be too bad. Seriously, I've never once heard a complaint about someone being distracted because they had more than one window open. Indeed, if a person has problems with multiple application windows, I can't imagine their travails with a browser and all those links and tabs and stuff.
Re: (Score:3)
That's just BS designers like to spill all the time. Most PC users *will* have more than one thing visible:
An IRC or IM on one side, where I can glance at what being written/etc.
Some filecopy/transfer or alike on another side.
Some download in progress, or something alike.
Documentation relevant to what I'm doing
Music player?
The *main* window.
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
The idea is basically that if you want to use something like your browser, email, an IDE, etc., there's no reason to have multiple windows up, since they'll just distract you from what you're doing.
Multiple windows aren't a distraction for me, they are a requirement. My normal working environment is a large terminal window to develop my code in, another terminal for actually running the code, a third terminal is usually open to examine logs related to testing the code. If I'm working on something web-based I'll also have a browser for testing the code. I need documentation open, which is usually in the form of several browser tabs and maybe an email or 2 open in Thunderbird tabs.
These windows are all related to a single project - the only alternative to having them all on screen at once would be to keep switching between them, whcih would be very distracting and counterproductive (I do have to do this when working on small-screen devices such as my 15.4" laptop, and I find it hard work).
Windows 7 and GNOME 3 (and possible others) have quick gestures for putting two windows on half of the screen each, but the idea is that generally you don't need more than that (although it would be nice if they had a way to handle it), and most things can just be left in a random place in the background (IMs, email, whatever you're not doing at this moment).
I use and like Gnome 3. But I place windows manually and wouldn't want it any other way. My browser is left maximised on my secondary (only 15") monitor, but nothing else ever gets maximised. The only time I've used the "half screen" maximisation feature is when comparing 2 network dumps in 2 separate Wireshark instances - it's handy for this, but I use it so rarely that I really wouldn't miss it.
I've come to the conclusion that having a desktop environment that supports a multitude of devices (from tiny-screen phones all the way up to massive-screen desktops, etc) is a Good Thing, but we have to stop forcing the paradigms of one type of device on another. On my phone, I want my browser maximised pretty much all the time because the screen is small, but on a desktop with a 24" screen I almost never want this. But I don't think there is a hard rule about whether to maximise or window applications: small screen sizes will tend to want most things maximised, big screen sizes will tend to want most things windows, but in all cases there are exceptions. In the middle, there are things like 10" tablets where you're often going to want things maximised, but there are considerable numbers of cases where you don't. For example, I often wouldn't want my instant messager maximised on a tablet (but sometimes I would), whilst I would usually want my browser maximised (but sometimes I wouldn't).
Since it seems to be very fuzzy whether to maximise or window things, I'm not sure what the best approach is for picking defaults. On the one hand, it sounds nice to try and heuristically figure out the probability that the user will want a certain application maximised on a certain sized screen, and therefore either maximise it or window it by default depending on what the calculated probabilities suggest (and give the user the ability to override this, possibly feeding back the user's override decision into the heuristic so it learns). However, on the other hand, this seems to violate the principle of least surprise - I usually like my computer to do predictable things in response to my mouse clicks, which such a system inherently prevents.
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
While I will admit that the technical underpinnings of Windows 8 and Server 8 are a pretty reasonable improvement over 7/2008 R2, the Metro UI is a big step backwards in terms of desktop usability for all but the most basic users and the way they've included some bits of it - seemingly at random - in the server platform is mystifying to me.
If the whole Metro tiles thing was just a front-end to make it easier for average users to find, organise and launch their applications then I'd be fine with it, but it's not, it's a whole new suite of "apps" in addition to all the existing desktop versions, only without silly things like multitasking included.
Put it this way, as someone who has been using Windows in one form or another for close to 20 years, I really shouldn't have to spend 5 minutes trying to work out where the hell they've moved "Shut Down" to because it's behind a totally un-signposted hotspot at the bottom right of the taskbar and then a non-obvious icon labelled "Settings" and finally the "Power" option under that (Yes, Alt-F4 still works, but that's hardly the point, or useful over a windowed RDP session).
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Metro is about MS making a homogenous look and feel across all possible platforms, and thus, having to go to the least common denominator (cell phone interfaces) for all of them.
It's about attempting to leverage their PC market share to make a push into the tablet and cell markets.
Once you realize this, the rest follows naturally.
Re: (Score:3)
Why exactly does a desktop have to look the same as a smartphone? Explain why my 27 inch screen has to have the same look as my teeny smartphone screen? I paid good money for the pixels, and I am going to use them
Making a common OS between tablets, smartphones and PC's that has the interface best suited for the device, rather than use the lowest common denominator be the design standard? Windows is already the champion of many many versions.
It's about at
Re: (Score:3)
These are the users you need to persuade if you ever want linux to become popular. These users are the majority, They just want their computer to work, like a toaster. They don't care about how the innards work nor do they want to learn about it. ...and these users will NEVER install their own operating system, they will be stuck with whatever was delivered with the computer no matter how much it frustrates them.
Mass adoption is antithetical to general computing (Score:5, Insightful)
When have you ever heard a linux proponent say they want it to become popular? I think the most I'd ever hope for would be that those who want to use it find it useful. That sort of goes against the whole 'computing appliance' idea; that trend is actively harmful to general purpose computing. Also, 'freedom to choose; includes the choice to use a buggy, virus-laden OS, and good riddance to that entire category of user, in my opinion. Increased corporate sponsorship is one thing, but the only thing that Joe Average does is complain about how things should work.
Linux users: post if you actually want linux to see widespread adoption in the home market. Also note whether you think that this could happen without linux becoming a walled garden.
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
My point is that even though Metro may indeed be bad, people will get used to it and someday may start saying how much better it is than whatever comes next.
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:4, Interesting)
The fact that the start-menu is so messy that it needs a search is just face-palm bad.
I found the search feature to be the best thing added to the start menu since it was added to Windows. It actually made the damn thing usable again. I don't even bother navigating the menus now, I just type in the name of whatever I want and there it is (well not even the full name, usually a few letters is plenty). The really unfortunate part is it took so long to add this feature, because it would have made it functional from day 1. Even back in Win95 the start menu became cluttered (but at least in 95 it was an alphabetized clutter by default).
Re: (Score:3)
I found the search feature to be the best thing added to the start menu since it was added to Windows. It actually made the damn thing usable again. I don't even bother navigating the menus now, I just type in the name of whatever I want
So, uh, kinda like opening a bash prompt then?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's the fundamental problem.
The start menu may be flawed in some ways, but it is the evolution of years of interface feedback.
Metro is not an evolutionary jump. It is Microsoft, for what I perceive as more marketing and business reasons than usability reasons, attempting to force a misguided UI on PC users. I'd note that the Win 8 interface is probably great for tablets and cell phones; however, for the very reasons that it is, it is awful for a PC.
And it's way more than the start menu. It's the dista
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, evolution... http://i.imgur.com/avgcv.jpg [imgur.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe you're right. The sales figures will tell in the end, neh? Remember, though, no amount of spin can make a long term impact on what people think about what they consider their tools. Their toys, entertainment, politics, fashion sense, what they think is beautiful - yep. But their tools - no, people know what works.
Personally, I'll keep myself on Win7 as long as possible, and hope that Win9 goes back up to the high standard that Win7 presented.
Re:Can't wait!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
The sales figures will tell in the end, neh?
True. The same thing was said about Office when they introduced the Ribbon. The consensus on Slashdot was, and still is, that the ribbon is a productivity nightmare, and no one would upgrade from Office 2003. In fact it was seen as the dawn of new age for Open Office, as Slashdot assured that users would switch in droves when confronted with the new UI. Of course at launch, Office 2007 sold twice as many copies as 2003, and sales continue strongly with Office 2010 selling over 200 million licenses to date. In matters concerning how the general public will receive a product, I tend to bet against Slashot's collective opinion (see also: iPod, iPhone, iPad, Linux).
Re: (Score:3)
My point is that even though Metro may indeed be bad, people will get used to it and someday may start saying how much better it is than whatever comes next.
Funny kind of progress...
Re: (Score:3)
I have no issues with radical UI changes. I'm one of the few people (it seems) with positive things to say about GNOME 3. But I think GNOME got a lot of things right that Microsoft screwed up in their consumer preview. e.g. in GNOME 3 even if you don't know you can mouse into the
Re: (Score:3)
How many people have a dual socket system at home and are not considered a computer professional?
Suck it up and deduct the expense from your business taxes.
Re: (Score:3)
I've had a few. Yeah, I was a computer professional at the time, but these were systems I had at home. None of them ran Windows, sure, but they could have.
Power users like their computers powerful. I bought the first Tyan dual-proc board for the Athlon MP for my home desktop (which I ran until I replaced it with a dual-core Phenom system years later). Prior to that, I had a couple dual Pentium Pro systems and a dual Pentium II box. I've had a fair share of old Sun equipment with multiple processors as well.
Re:No domain connectivity for Home edition...again (Score:5, Insightful)
Product differentiation = tiered profit structure. Makes perfect sense, and those who don't like that can get their Windows from the usual sources.
Windows BTW IS "free" if your time and effort to pirate it, install it then fend off viri and malware is worthless.
Screw that. I'd rather run Linux than Windows, so I do. If an employer chooses to inflict Windows on me, they can pay for it.
Re:Don't forget Windows 8 Enterprise.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Really wish MS would stop with all of the micromanaged 'versions' of Windows. It adds complexity where none is needed. A home user doesn't need those features but it doesn't hurt to include them. A business user probably doesn't need media center features but again it doesn't hurt to include them. I don't know what their 'game' is here as I don't see a profit motive for splitting up all of these offerings. Are they seriously hoping someone will buy two different versions to get everything they need?
Also, what's with the X86/X64 offerings? Any decent OS should allow you to just boot into the proper kernel. Requiring a dedicated install to switch between x86/x64 is just stupid not to put too fine a point on it.
Re:Don't forget Windows 8 Enterprise.... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't see a profit motive for splitting up all of these offerings. Are they seriously hoping someone will buy two different versions to get everything they need?
Ever hear of price discrimination? The different versions are not identical, but close enough. Microsoft expects businesses to pay more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination [wikipedia.org]
Re:Don't forget Windows 8 Enterprise.... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm wondering why they include x86 at all for WINTEL platform. Why not just say "we think that x86 computers cannot run Win8 acceptably so we are removing this as an option to prevent people from even trying" But then again, they think they can get it to run acceptably on ARM so ...
Windows 8 should be Balmer's last failure.
Re:Don't forget Windows 8 Enterprise.... (Score:4, Informative)
Some Atoms are still 32-bit, aren't they?
Also, if you want to run old 16-bit apps you still need 32-bit Windows or some kind of emulator.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
All currently sold netbook/nettop Atoms are 64-bit. Yes, you can get 32-bit embedded Atoms. See here [cpu-world.com]. Click on the 32-bit filter. You'll notice all models starting with E, those are embedded ones. Ignore them. N270 and N280 are from 2008 and I don't think you can get those anymore. The ones starting with Z are, like the E series, thought for non-PC platforms.
Those starting with N are for "notebooks" (netbooks, whatever the name du jour), those starting D are for "desktops" (nettops...) 64-bit all o
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It has the ability to play media - there's a Metro app for that. It's just not WMP.
It does have an RDP client (two, even - a classic desktop one, and a new Metro one). It doesn't have an RDP server, though. Same as Win7 Home.
It doesn't have GPO, but it does have other means of limiting what the device can do.
Re: (Score:3)
It's mostly the same restrictions as on Vista/7 Home (with respect to GPO and RDP). You have probably always used Pro/Enterprise/Ultimate, so you didn't notice that.
The only real difference here is the lack of WMP.
Re: (Score:3)
Tablets can be used in an "AD environment", just not a full-featured domain members (then again, if you use iPads today, they're not domain members, either).
By the way, if you really want a tablet to behave exactly as a domain-joined PC, that's also possible - you just need an Intel tablet; those things run full-featured Win8. To be honest, other than (presumably) price, I don't know why anyone would care about Windows on ARM, given that you can't install third-party desktop apps on it. ARM used to be much
Re:Don't forget Windows 8 Enterprise.... (Score:4, Informative)
Are they seriously hoping someone will buy two different versions to get everything they need?
Yup. One license included by the OEM on the cheap machines the small business orders, then another license (and fee) for the version with the features the business actually needs.
Also, what's with the X86/X64 offerings?
My understanding is that the x64 version also runs the Windows-On-Windows system, which provides the backwards-compatibility for 32-bit software. That means a different registry structure, different drivers, different libraries... A separate installation seems to be the easy way.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Really wish MS would stop with all of the micromanaged 'versions' of Windows. It adds complexity where none is needed. .
The burden of complexity isn't placed on the user anyway. If users order a computer, they get it with whatever is installed. Businesses either don't need active directory and order whatever anyway, or would have an IT person order them. It's in Microsofts best interest to have at least two versions. A less expensive home version to encourage people to keep using windows, and a more expensive business version to milk more money from businesses who will probably never escape Microsoft office/exchange/whatev
Re:Did MS learn something from Windows 7 "flavours (Score:5, Insightful)
The customers I support will continue to buy whatever the cheapest version is and then get pissed at me when I can't join it to their domain.
Re:Did MS learn something from Windows 7 "flavours (Score:4, Informative)
Or make a plain "Windows 8" for home users and "Windows 8 Pro" for business/power users.
That's what they did. The third version is for ARM processors, which obviously needs to be different.
Re: (Score:3)
Windows RT : as in... Windows Russia Today? [wikimedia.org]
No, it's the "arty" flavor of Windows 8, meant to compete with the Mac.
Re:Fine Print (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Pointless, expensive, expensive and pointless.