Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Windows Microsoft

Microsoft Reacts To Feedback But Did They Get Windows 8.1 Right? 543

MojoKid writes "Microsoft's Windows "Blue" 8.1 update has been long-awaited. Those who've been using the base OS since launch have no doubt been anticipating some of the enhancements that are coming. At the moment, Windows 8.1 is available only as a preview, and if you are looking to give it a try, there are a couple of things to be aware of. The most important is the fact that once you upgrade, you can't easily downgrade — so you may wish to try the update in a virtual machine or on a test machine if possible. In addition, your current product keys will not work, so you'll effectively be turning your activated OS into an evaluation (it's assumed that once 8.1 goes final, we'll be able to update using our original keys). That said, Microsoft's free update offers a slew of enhancements like a new Start Screen, the return of the Start Button, even quicker shutdown and restart, boot to desktop, quicker integrated search and Skydrive enhancements. All told, Microsoft's new OS release is a more than worthy successor for end users but now Microsoft really needs to work on getting developers on board."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Reacts To Feedback But Did They Get Windows 8.1 Right?

Comments Filter:
  • by JustANormalGuy ( 2969843 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:08PM (#44157435)
    I gotta say I'm impressed with Windows 8.1 preview. It is by far the best OS there is. I'm happy that the start button is back and that they've improved Start Screen. The performance upgrades are fantastic. Everything runs so smoothly.

    Windows 8.1 is by far the best Windows there is!
    • by h4rr4r ( 612664 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:09PM (#44157461)

      So how much are they paying for posts these days?
      I figure it must be down from the glory days of slashdot.

      • by JustANormalGuy ( 2969843 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:12PM (#44157495)
        $12 per post, $15 if lengthy
      • Soviet Microsoft requires that YOU pay to make positive posts...
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        You still haven't figured it out yet?

        Newsflash: Microsoft doesn't give a flying fuck what is said about them on Slashdot. Microsoft could cure cancer, create a sustainable moonbase, and bring world peace, and people here would be whining that they really liked cancer, the moonbase wasn't 100% open source, and the world peace was going to be worse than Microsoft Bob.

        Those posts are trolls. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. And you people keep falling for them EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

        Even when it's patently obviously a t
        • by jones_supa ( 887896 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:34PM (#44157835)

          Microsoft doesn't give a flying fuck what is said about them on Slashdot.

          Heh. Even Herb Sutter (from the Visual Studio team) has mentioned Slashdot in his talks at Channel 9 []. I'm sure microsofties occasionally bump on the comments on Slashdot too. This is a quite well-known technology website. I agree that the impact is probably still quite small, but it's not a complete "flying fuck".

          • by flyingfsck ( 986395 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @04:49PM (#44158895)
            Hey, don't use my name in vain. Especially when combined in the same sentence with Microsoft, it really hurts.
          • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01, 2013 @06:26PM (#44159861)

            We developers as Microsoft definitely read Slashdot. Most of us, dare I say. And when there is blatant FUD and misinformation, I myself have stepped in and corrected it with links and citations. If I am giving an opinion piece, I usually post as AC and identify that I work at Microsoft.

            But I don't go racing for the first post with some normative statements with a username of JustANormalGuy. This guy is obviously trolling Slashdot by pretending to be a shill.

        • by CFBMoo1 ( 157453 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:53PM (#44158139) Homepage
          I think you are confusing trolls with the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" crowd. My mother who is over 70 has had the same reactions people on Slashdot are having about the new Windows GUI. If she had her way she'd go back to Windows XP's interface cause she knew EXACTLY where everything was and didn't need anyone to change it. Windows 8.1 is just another mess for her to relearn how to do things. I'm sorry, as nice as Metro may be for phones and tablets, it has no place on the desktop.
          • by TsuruchiBrian ( 2731979 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @06:15PM (#44159765)

            I totally favor fixing things that aint broke. Sometimes people don't know things are broke until you show them a better way.

            What I don't like is lack of options. I don;t even care if Metro is the default. I should be allowed to turn it off as an option. There is no reason to force me to use it if I don't like it. I don't think they should remove it either. I'm sure some people like it.

            If windows 8 had the ability to turn off metro, it would be just like windows 7 with a few improvements, rather than a disaster.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Fu*k all you pretentious assholes that think they speak for all technical savvy users.

        I have been supporting Windows since Windows 3.11 Snowball so you can guess that I am one of the elderly folks on Slashdot. I get paid by a university to support applications used on Windows, OS X, and mobile devices. Guess what, I really like Windows 8.

        Why are so many of you afraid of change? After spending a hole 5 minutes customizing the new 'Modern UI' Start screen, I can find the apps I want much faster and with less

        • by rtkluttz ( 244325 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @04:28PM (#44158591) Homepage

          I can't believe I'm replying to the troll but heres a list. First and foremost. I don't and never will use a tablet or touch interface for real work so I don't want charms that are huge stealing my screen real estate, or windows that force full screen or any arbitrary size. I want windows that ** I ** can resize to any size I want and have multiples on the screen at one time. i want everything small and precise because I multitask... a LOT.... and with multiple large monitors. I DON'T want an app store that thinks it controls what I can and can't install on my own devices. I shouldn't have to be on a domain to bypass app store crippling of my machine. I say what software goes on and comes off of my own PC and no one else. For my users on the network, hierarchical menus for apps based on purpose is still superior when you are building systems for people so unsavvy they don't even know the name of an app to search for. I don't want cloud integrated into everything by default. As an add-on its just fine, but I don't trust other people and companies with most of my stuff and I surely didn't trust Microsoft even BEFORE this NSA mess. I also want things to work the same way every time. If I click on an icon I want it to start a new instance. Every. Time. I can manage my own windows and decide when I want new ones and when I want pre-existing ones. I don't want Windows trying to decide when I want to maximize a window by getting too close to the top. If I want it maximized, I'll click a button to do so and so on and so on and so on......

        • by osu-neko ( 2604 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @05:11PM (#44159169)

          Why are so many of you afraid of change?

          Once you've completely misidentified the problem, you'll never find the solution. But I'm sure it makes it a lot easier to dismiss criticism if you can pretend it comes from somewhere unreasonable.

          The fact of the matter is, people love change... iff it's change with significant benefits. People like changes for the better. I've heard "I wish this worked that way" a hundred times, and people are ecstatic when you come back and give them an update that makes it work the way they said. People love change if it's a genuine improvement. People only hate change when they can't see any point to it. They may not be formal about it, but everyone runs a bit of a cost/benefit analysis in their minds, and when there's an obvious cost for no significant benefit, or to fix "problems" that they never saw as a problem to begin with, they react negatively, because that's the logical response to a change of that nature.

          Why is that so hard?

          Irrelevant question. The important question is, "why is that even necessary?" It might have a good answer, but if you can't make that answer clear to people, expect them to react negatively when you ask them to do what they see as unnecessary things for little apparent benefit.

        • by malkavian ( 9512 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @06:30PM (#44159891)

          Hey, guess what.. I've been using computers since the days of the Commodore Pet. I was using and supporting microsoft since the days of MSDOS 3... And I was using UNIX before that.
          The bones I've had to pick with MS were originally because they had pretty shoddy tools, compared to the UNIX (for DOS), and no multi-tasking. Through the Windows 3 era, I thought it compared poorly to the Apple UI, and it performed absolutely shoddily when compared to OS/2.. I saw MS's marketing engine fire up, and scare people (needlessly) into just using their product, not by dint of superiority, just because they had cash to throw around. Dirty tricks really were the name of the game.
          With the advent of Win95, Microsoft actually had a GUI which I had to admit was well thought out. It did what was wanted in a simple and no fuss way. Sure, it was still a layer above DOS, but it was definitely usable, and actually comfortable.. They'd done their homework on that..
          Fast forward to now. They force a UI that's pretty decent for a tablet (quite like how it handles on a tablet) onto a desktop.. And I hate it on the desktop.. The idea of using it for Servers is filling me with dread.. The ergonomics of it are atrocious in that use case; I'm just glad you can do everything in Powershell.. That really is going to be the start of a move to 'Core' install, and just run things via powershell. It's mostly how I do it these days, but I do enjoy the flexibility of the Win7 GUI (I think Win7 is the best OS MS have put out to date). I like the tech improvements behind the scenes in Win8, but after using it, I refuse to install it on my home workstation, and work is never going to move to that version (apart from tablets/kiosks, where it shines).
          In an attempt to grab the niche market, they seem to be eviscerating their core one.. Which I really just don't understand.. The strategy that would work would be to have an API that works across all the forms (tablet, kiosk, desktop) with a GUI that you can swap between depending on your needs.. If Android releases get the desktop done nicely (and optimised for desktops, not tablets), then MS could be in with a bigger fight than it expects..

          In short, it's a good OS ruined by changes that alienate most people. Not just because they "have to learn something new" (which was their big thing about not shifting to Linux), but because it makes changes with no advantage, and quite frequently to their detriment.

    • by Austerity Empowers ( 669817 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:22PM (#44157655)

      Does the start button work like this: []

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I love Windows 8.1 too! It's so square that it makes me feel good about being square. I just adore the new square start button. Everyone would be so much happier if they just had this button as part of their day. And the new start screen is so awesome! It makes me feel like a race car driver, with all the blinking lights. My most favorite part of 8.1, though, is how Microsoft optimized the NSA uploads. It's now so smooth, I hardly can tell when the government is reviewing my files. I'm sure 8.1 is going to

    • Windows 8.1 is by far the best Windows 8 there is!

      Fixed that for ya.

  • by sconeu ( 64226 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:14PM (#44157539) Homepage Journal

    I downloaded the dev preview.

    Yeah, there's a Start button. Big deal. All it does is drop you into Metro -- pardon me. Into The-Interface-Formerly-Known-As-Metro. There's still no Start Menu, which is what the "I want the Start Button" was all about.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      What exactly do you want the start menu back for? The start button can be configured to send you to the All Apps window, which takes you to a sortable list of all your apps. Much more useful than an alphabetical list of folders with identical icons, IMO. You can turn off hot corners. You can boot right to desktop. They've brought back unified search. You can even pull up the (not full screen) search pane directly from the desktop, and search for files and applications in a unified view.

      What more exactl
      • Start -> Run -> cmd dropped you right into a DOS shell.

        To do this in Win 8.1, you need to:
        Start -> Metro -> ???

        • by Missing.Matter ( 1845576 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:33PM (#44157817)
          You press start and type "cmd". Typing on the start screen initiates a search. Alternatively press win+s to open the search panel, and type "cmd". Alternatively right click on the start menu and click run, then type cmd.
          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 )

            You press start and type "cmd". Typing on the start screen initiates a search. Alternatively press win+s to open the search panel, and type "cmd". Alternatively right click on the start menu and click run, then type cmd.

            Thanks. Just what I've always wanted in a modern GUI - more typing.

            • by bondsbw ( 888959 )

              How are any of those options "more typing"?

            • Spy Handler wanted a way to do what he did in Windows 7 start menu. I gave it to him. Don't want to type (if you're launching the command prompt though, this probably doesn't bother you) then just press the start button and click on "cmd". It's listed right there if you set it to open "All Apps" with desktop apps listed first. It's literally two clicks away (start -> cmd), wheras in Windows 7 it's 4 clicks (Start -> all programs -> applications -> cmd)
          • You press start and type "cmd". Typing on the start screen initiates a search. Alternatively press win+s to open the search panel, and type "cmd". Alternatively right click on the start menu and click run, then type cmd.

            No, you type "powershell". The old Command Prompt is deprecated.

        • by TMYates ( 1946034 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @04:01PM (#44158227)

          Start -> Run -> cmd dropped you right into a DOS shell.

          To do this in Win 8.1, you need to: Start -> Metro -> ???


          Windows 8:
          Move mouse to bottom left corner and right click. Pick either command prompt or command prompt in admin mode

          Windows 8.1:
          Right click start logo. Pick either command prompt or command prompt in admin mode

          From that same menu I have quick access to options that took more than a few clicks to get to before. Also in 8.1, you can use this to shutdown or restart.

      • No, that's not all the 8.1 start button does, it tries to interfere with the smooth working of Classic Start Menu. You can't disable it and while Classic will overlay it's own button by default it doesn't quite cover it by default. Cue hilarious 'I missed the button by a pixel and ended up in Metro' adventures.

        To be fair though, I predicted Microsoft would use the returning Start button to block 3rd party Start Menus. I didn't predict they'd do it so badly it would be worked around almost instantly.

      • The Start menu is still much easier to use. Try using Windows 8 for a while and then go back to Windows 7. It's like a breath of fresh air. Everything is again quickly found from where you expect.
        • by Missing.Matter ( 1845576 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:46PM (#44158021)
          I do so every day. Win8 at hom, Win7 at work. Start screen has all my pinned apps, and I can display more than 30 at a time. It scales great with resolution. With the start menu, the more items on it, the further away your most used app is from the start button. How wonderful. I especially hate the "All Programs" list in the start menu. An alphabetical list of folders named after app publishers instead of actual applications, all with the same icon (why is it even there then?). And it's oh so customizable. You have to go into a semi-hidden directory to edit the folders, and then there's even two foldres to go into: the user folder and the global folder, which you need admin permissions to edit. Why do you need admin privledges to edit a user application menu?

          Oh and the hodgepodge of functionality. I love how in the start menu the oft used "search box" is right next to the shut down function, which is right next to a tiny tiny arrow which opens up lock computer/sleep functionalty. Why is the shut off button so large, when I do this function at most once a day? And next to often used functions like search and lock? Great UI.

          For me, the start screen is much more customizable, much more informative, and easier to use all around. If I want to launch an app and i'm on the desktop, I win+s to pull up the search bar and type the app name. If I don't know the app name, I open up the "All Apps" window and I sort and I can see all my installed apps at a glance instead of rooting through a tree of vaguely and uninformatively named folders.

          Going back is not a breath of fresh air, it's suffocating.
      • by gl4ss ( 559668 )

        maybe he wants it for the stuff that is in start menu. access to control panel for one. you know how stupid it is to drop into metro to launch an app in desktop? pretty stupid. but even more stupid is dropping into metro to launch control panel from which you launch the actual desktop control panel that has the stuff you were looking for.

        classic shell ftw.. the only thing I've needed metro has been going to boot in unsigned drivers mode...

        it's pretty easy to argue that start menu is better if you use deskto

        • maybe he wants it for the stuff that is in start menu. access to control panel for one. you know how stupid it is to drop into metro to launch an app in desktop? pretty stupid. but even more stupid is dropping into metro to launch control panel from which you launch the actual desktop control panel that has the stuff you were looking for.

          You don't have to do that at all. Want the control panel? Rigtht click on the start menu, it's right there. Want to launch an app? Press win+s and type the first few letters. Control panel can be launched this way, or you can make it even faster by launching the control panel item you want straight from the search pane. Try using it before commenting next time.

      • by pla ( 258480 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:56PM (#44158179) Journal
        What exactly do you want the start menu back for?

        Personally, I don't care so much about the formal start menu - I use either shortcut keys or just Win-R the program name for just about everything I don't have as an icon on my desktop. I suspect most people pining for the start menu really don't care about it specifically, but rather, the whole set of known OS behaviors that came with it:

        What do I (we?) want? I want the window manager to behave as a window manager. I want small, configurable iconic shortcuts that open programs for me in a window. I want a base desktop that doesn't look like Times Square at night (complete with its many flashing neon ads). I specifically do not want every program to open itself in a more-or-less-modal fullscreen style on my 30" WQXGA display. I have a monitor that big for a reason, and believe it or not, that reason has nothing to do with spending all day prettifying Word documents intended for a booklet layout. I want the "store" to mean I go to Amazon or Newegg in a non-MSIE browser. I do not, ever, want any attempt whatsoever at "upselling" by Microsoft, or worse, the few money-grubing OEM partners of theirs they haven't managed to alienate yet.

        In short, I want Windows 7. And if five years from now that means I have to run Linux to get it, I damned well will.
      • It's a simple thing really.
        People want floating windows, not things that forces a context switch and changes the whole screen. Some people have wide screens and run multiple application in parallel. The paradigm that made Microsoft Windows popular is to use floating windows to organize your multiple applications working concurrently.

    • by vux984 ( 928602 )

      No, the "I want the start button" was all about normal users confronted with the desktop, and no idea what to do with it. Have you seen all those youtube videos of putting someone in front of Windows 8, and watching them have no idea what to do? This is for them.

      The return of the start 'button', to get them to the start screen restores the discover-ability of functionality.

      No, its not quite the same interface, but the functionality is there.

      Its an open question whether or not the functionality is better or

    • What? Are you saying that you want the Start Button to have some action when clicked? If it was so important, you should have documented it at the requirements.

      You asked for a button, MS gave you a button. Content yourself with it.

  • by michaelmalak ( 91262 ) <> on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:15PM (#44157555) Homepage

    more than worthy successor Windows 7?

  • Yes and no (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ErichTheRed ( 39327 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:15PM (#44157559)

    It's pretty obvious that someone high enough in their business-customer focused product guys heard enough Start button complaints to get that put back. I know a lot of people wanted the menu to return, but that was doubtful given how much Microsoft wants to see the Store and the whole Apps thing succeed.

    They have made a lot of tweaks to make using Windows 8.1 on keyboard-and-mouse PCs much easier, and I'm happy for that. One thing that I desperately want back is the "themeable" user interface on the desktop. I'll even give up the Start Menu for that. I want to be able to choose between the new "Windows 2.0" desktop, the "dated and cheesy" Aero Glass theme I like in Win7, or even go all the way back to "Windows Classic" like I've been able to do since Win2K. That's just the in-box themes too -- lots of vendors used the theming code in the OS to completely transform the desktop. I was really hoping for Aero Glass to make a return (or even Aero without the Glass acceleration.) Unfortunately, it looks like they're still not listening to people on that front.

    • Re:Yes and no (Score:5, Insightful)

      by JDG1980 ( 2438906 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:19PM (#44157613)

      I really don't understand why MS insists on locking down the themes. The engine is fully capable of using whatever theme the user wants, but for unknown reasons this is restricted to the one included theme digitally signed by Microsoft. There is no good reason for that. Why should we have to hack a DLL to get a feature that the OS already supports?

      A lot of the issues with Win8 would go away if theming was permitted. (For instance, the one thing I find most annoying about Win8 is the centered title bar text – this breaks the way I've read window titles since Win95.)

  • Meh (Score:5, Informative)

    by Guspaz ( 556486 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:17PM (#44157567)

    Start8 (boot-to-desktop, Win7 start menu, remove hotspots) slapped on top of Win8 solves most of my complaints about Win8, and ModernMix makes Metro apps (like Metro Netflix, since it can view SuperHD content) helps with Metro-only apps.

    Start8 already has a beta out for Win8.1, to account for the fact that there is now a built-in boot-to-desktop, and that there is a system start button that needs to be removed before the fake one can be added. I'll undoubtedly get Win8.1 to get the improvements, and let Stardock fix the major annoyances for me.

  • I was holding off buying a Surface RT until there was base support for POP3 mail - does anyone know if the new Outlook RT allows POP3?
  • by Quantus347 ( 1220456 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:20PM (#44157619)
    Since when is fixing a fuckup that everyone bitched about so mmuch they were forced to reverse course an "enhancement"?
    • Since when it's not? It does make the product better, not worse...

      Or, better, it would if it actualy included a start menu.

  • by fallen1 ( 230220 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:20PM (#44157633) Homepage

    Pretty much mirrors my own. Although I would add in an extra side of "fuck you"... []

  • by jones_supa ( 887896 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:28PM (#44157747)

    No one is interested in the Modern UI apps and the Start screen is harder to use than the Start menu. It's a jumbled mess of icons which steals your whole screen and you have to move your mouse much more than before. Actually, I have noticed that many resort to just typing the application name they want to use into the search bar as the GUI is so clunky to use.

    The minimal performance improvements, improved file transfer dialog, improved task manager, ISO mounting and DirectX 11.2, are not big enough features to justify an upgrade. All those features are good enough in Windows 7 already. Those improvements could have been released as a free Platform Update for Windows 7.

    • by vux984 ( 928602 )

      Actually, I have noticed that many resort to just typing the application name they want to use into the search bar as the GUI is so clunky to use.

      That's how people were using the old start menu too. That's how its supposed to be used.

      You pin apps you use the most either directly to the taskbar or in a taskbar toolbar. For stuff you don't use much you use the start screen, and the type-search is how it was intended to be used.

      The minimal performance improvements, improved file transfer dialog, improved task

      • by Endo13 ( 1000782 )

        Actually, the most compelling Windows upgrade was from ME to XP. There's still things that are more logical and better in XP than any version since.

      • by JohnFen ( 1641097 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @04:13PM (#44158379)

        That's how people were using the old start menu too. That's how its supposed to be used.

        That's how some people were using it, but for a lot of people, that's the clunkiest possible way to do it. In what world does it make sense to have to remember the name of an application you don't use regularly?

        • by vux984 ( 928602 )

          In what world does it make sense to have to remember the name of an application you don't use regularly?

          Ah, so in the event you don't know the name of the application, you will need to scan for it in a list, where you will attempt to recognize its name and or icon, right?

          So then you feel it would be better if that list should in be a non-resizable small popup window in the corner of the screen organized in a hierarchical structure usually headed by either the name of the company that produced it or some va

      • by tftp ( 111690 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @07:53PM (#44160563) Homepage

        That's how people were using the old start menu too. That's how its supposed to be used.

        The start menu, from Windows 95 and until Vista, had no integrated search. You cannot say "that's how its supposed to be used." It became an option in Vista and 7, but not too many people (per my personal observations) even know that the built-in search exists. Some users that I know do not touch the keyboard unless they must, like for typing an email - and even that they do with one finger, "hunt and peck" style. You can't expect them to remember names of applications. Hell, I don't remember most of the names of applications on this very box. I have better things to remember than that. For those applications that I do remember about, "quick" does not return Quicken, but "quicken" does - how would MS explain that? BTW, QuickTime is not returned either - except the "About QuickTime." This is garbage. Typing is only a tool for some power users, and it has limited value as you cannot know what applications are installed on a given PC that you just connected to. You use the hierarchical menu to find out.

  • by gestalt_n_pepper ( 991155 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:31PM (#44157789)

    I put time and money and effort into making salable sofware products. What Microsoft has told me repeatedly is that I don't matter to them. At all.

    What would motivate me, as a developer, to invest 1 more minute in a platform that's almost guaranteed to go the way of VB6, Winforms, Silverlight or XNA? Want to go to the web as your customers are demanding? Recode. Want to upgrade that game? Recode? Want to keep that nifty Silverlight app going. Find another platform and recode. Only C++ developers were extended the fundamental courtesy of running unmanaged old code along with .net. Everyone else is essentially told "tough shit." Worse, half-hearted efforts like the VB6 upgrade or WPF/Winforms hosting aren't developed to actually *work* and so end up wasting even more of your time.

    VB6 should have upgraded with one click, or run between tags as unmanaged code. Winforms should either have actually been hostable in WPF, or come with a one click upgrade to an ASP simulacrum of Winform code. VBScript and JScript should have migrated to and rather than the syntactic abomination that is Powershell. Those would have been the right decisions, had Microsoft given a shit.

    When Microsoft finally realizes that the word "Recode" IS ALWAYS THE WRONG ANSWER when a developer needs to migrate to another platform, they might actually get some interest in their products. Not before.

    Common courtesy and consideration of the financial needs of real developers would go a long way. The ISV world is not made of C++ elite. It's made of people who have to get some work done and make a living - who do not, and will never aspire to the at the top of the programming heap. That's your core audience, not the 20-something genius you hire from Kazakhstan. Cater to them and their ilk, and them only and you will fail.

    Like you're doing now.

    • by gl4ss ( 559668 )

      funny thing about them EOL'ing products is that they do them even if they are using them.

      so how much life do the silverlight.* and xna.* have left in windows phone?

  • by Endo13 ( 1000782 )

    Let me know when I can use it on a desktop without ever seeing any part of Metro for any reason, AND has some improvement over 7 that makes it worth buying. Until then, I have no interest in even trying it.

  • Still no classic start menu.

    But then again how often do you really use the start menu? I run windows 7 on my general desktop and between pinning apps to the taskbar and using fences for some groups of icons on my desktop, I really have no need for a start menu. The downside is some programs come with help files, utilities and other ancillary programs that are better off stuck in a folder of an alphabetically arranged list. But those are a simple windows key -> type name and hit enter when the search find

    • by Endo13 ( 1000782 )

      I use the start menu quite frequently.

      • by LoRdTAW ( 99712 )

        To each his own I suppose. Most of the software I install which gets lost in the start menu is usually some utility I need for a file conversion or evaluating something. I used to let them pile up but now I uninstall them unless they were incredibly difficult to find. I find that on my windows PC its mostly games and a few programs that I run on both windows and Linux.

  • I don't know if they could get it much faster, after I installed the update to my bios fully supporting UEFI, I was right around 7seconds on the OS after post on a 1st gen SSD. Where they're going to trim and get a faster boot time even from that I have no freaking clue.

  • but now Microsoft really needs to work on getting developers on board.

    Come again? Unless they completely broke the OS from the cloud down, they already have somewhere around 80% of developers actively working in their environment.

    Oh! Riiight - By "8.1", Microsoft doesn't mean "Win7-plus-1.1 and we fixed the useless bullshit we did in Windows-FisherPrice-edition", it means they gave their latest defective-by-design codebase a facelift so as to not completely alienate those of us who will use 7 until M
  • by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @03:49PM (#44158057)

    You know about all the bitching and moaning. It is just about a new UI, that really isn't that big of a deal, especially for a group of people use to using a bunch of Operating Systems.

    I haven't read many comments about Windows 8 with problems with more important things such as Driver Compatibility, Unexpect crashes, other technical problems, or Slowness.

    It just sounds like a bunch of Whiny people who wants to get an Apple or Defend Linux, or are so old or autistic that they cannot handle any change.

  • It took me forever to get it installed on my clean system due to likely high download demand. I thought it ran slower than Windows 8.0, and iTunes hung like crazy when opening. Other programs will likely need updates when this upgrade goes final. They added shutdown to the right click start button menu. I cannot understand why they NEVER thought about making a SHUTDOWN TILE in the first group of tiles. that would have saved them a bunch of early adopter complaints.

  • Microsoft may have "reacted" to feedback. But they sure as hell didn't LISTEN to it.

  • by bluescrn ( 2120492 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @04:24PM (#44158535)
    Amazed so few people notice/care about the real issue here. It's not about UI fails and touch/mobile focus - that's a minor issue.

    It's about Microsoft moving from a 'general purpose computing' model to an 'app store computing' model. Where everything has to be code-signed, approved/censored, and taxed at 30%+.

    They are doing this by gradually phasing out the desktop and applying pressure to users to use Metro, by making it harder to avoid - whilst the desktop gradually has functionality stripped out (first the Start menu, now the control panel)

    This is why we should absolutely reject Win8. Not because the new start screen is annoying.
  • use their desktop monopoly to gain a foothold in the tablet market. And if there were an antitrust regulator left anywhere on earth that still had the intestinal fortitude to go after Microsoft, they would be getting fined for it.

    "Getting developers on board"... yeah, on board the doomed ship SS Surface.

Our business in life is not to succeed but to continue to fail in high spirits. -- Robert Louis Stevenson