Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Windows

Windows 9 To Win Over Windows 7 Users, Disables Start Screen For Desktop 681

Posted by samzenpus from the now-will-you-try-it? dept.
DroidJason1 writes One of Microsoft's main goals with Windows 9, the next major version of Windows, is to win over Windows 7 hold outs. The operating system will look and work differently based on hardware type. Microsoft is looking to showcase the desktop for desktop and laptop users, while two-in-one devices like the Surface Pro or Lenovo Yoga will support switching between the Metro interface and the classic desktop interface. The new desktop will allow Modern UI apps to run in windowed mode, and have Modern UI apps pinned to the Start Menu instead of a Start Screen. There will also be a mini-start menu. Microsoft is looking to undo the usability mistakes it made with Windows 8 for those who are not on a touch device. WIndows 9 is expected around spring of 2015.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows 9 To Win Over Windows 7 Users, Disables Start Screen For Desktop More

Windows 9 To Win Over Windows 7 Users, Disables Start Screen For Desktop

Comments Filter:

  • hmmmmm (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:17PM (#47352697)

    Isn't that supposed to be windows 8.2?

  • Can they also put a switch in this to make Office usable? I can't stand that fucking ribbon interface that makes everything I used to do the most often 5 times more difficult.

    • Re:One switch to rule them all? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Tarlus ( 1000874 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:28PM (#47352835)

      Given that it has been their standard for seven years and over three iterations of Office, I don't think they have any plans to undo it.

      You can just customize it though, just add your commonly used tasks to the home tab of the ribbon and you're set.

    • Re:One switch to rule them all? (Score:5, Informative)

      by bhcompy ( 1877290 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:45PM (#47353035)
      Or just switch to Open Office or other derivatives. Like all of those that hated ribbons did nearly a decade ago

      • Or just switch to Open Office or other derivatives.

        That is exactly what I did. Unfortunately every once in a while one of my colleagues will send me a document (usually a power point presentation) that won't open in anything other than the newest version of office (and sometimes only the newest version on the same platform as their, to boot). They then get to listen to me cursing office for some time while I try to read their document.

        • Re:One switch to rule them all? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by roc97007 ( 608802 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @03:50PM (#47353651) Journal

          Or just switch to Open Office or other derivatives.

          That is exactly what I did. Unfortunately every once in a while one of my colleagues will send me a document (usually a power point presentation) that won't open in anything other than the newest version of office (and sometimes only the newest version on the same platform as their, to boot). They then get to listen to me cursing office for some time while I try to read their document.

          This happens often, even with people who are using older versions of Office. My daughter's high school used to do this all the time -- append docx documents, get complaints from parents, and then re-save in doc format and resend. I dunno what kind of deal the school gets for software, but most of us, unless we've stolen a copy from work, are using an old version of Office or in some cases a third party equivalent.

          So in your case, I'd do the same thing I did with daughter's high school teachers. Politely ask them to save the document in a less proprietary format and resend.

          Seriously, I don't think I ever received anything from them that couldn't be sent in RTF format, but that's another story.

        • Or just switch to Open Office or other derivatives.

          That is exactly what I did. Unfortunately every once in a while one of my colleagues will send me a document (usually a power point presentation) that won't open in anything other than the newest version of office.

          Just tell them "I'm sorry, but your file is in a non-standard format and I can't open it."

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by dbIII ( 701233 )
          I use libreoffice myself, but that doesn't stop people asking me all the time how to change the icon size in the ribbon and other stuff MS has hardwired in to annoy the crap out of people that want to tweak their interface.
          As for Win8 - one example - no easy way to force downloads of updates immediately after and install other than fucking search for "windows update"? The inbetween interface is broken since they've removed bits from the old start menu without adding them to either of the two interfaces. I

    • Can they also put a switch in this to make Office usable? I can't stand that fucking ribbon interface that makes everything I used to do the most often 5 times more difficult.

      I'll second that. (They could just offer an additional normal menu bar like the Mac version) It is their reluctance to back off of this and several other past design mistakes that makes me surprised they would even consider backing down from their Windows 8 Metro stuff.

    • Can they also put a switch in this to make Office usable? I can't stand that fucking ribbon interface that makes everything I used to do the most often 5 times more difficult.

      You'll really like Windows 8, then, because the ribbon is implemented for File Explorer and the Common Dialogs, too.

      • Not for me it isn't.

        Classic Shell to the rescue!

    • Re:One switch to rule them all? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by wbr1 ( 2538558 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @03:20PM (#47353349)
      I taught inmates with no past computer experience both versions of Office, 03 and 07. I hated 07, and the ribbons at first. It made my day to day tasks take much longer. However, I had to learn quickly as I was teaching it.

      I have to say that seeing people with no computer experience learn both. The ribbons are better. People grasped complex workflows easier, effecience was improved, and the learning curve was significantly reduced. Is this anecdotal? Yes. But I stand by it.

    • Can they also put a switch in this to make Office usable? I can't stand that fucking ribbon interface that makes everything I used to do the most often 5 times more difficult.

      Yep. The ribbon still sucks. It's funny how Microsoft wants me to buy new products, but wants to berate me for my preferences.

    • Can we give the ribbon thing a rest? It has been out for 7 years, you should have figured it out by now.

  • And here I'm hoping... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mashiki ( 184564 ) <mashiki@gmail.cBALDWINom minus author> on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:17PM (#47352705) Homepage

    That it goes x64 only, much like they said a year and change ago.

  • Touch Server (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Liquidretro ( 1590189 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:17PM (#47352709)
    So this means my virtualized headless server won't have a touch screen interface? Glad someone used some common sense.

    • Re:Touch Server (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:26PM (#47352801)

      No no no! This is Windows 9, not Server 2015. Server 2015 will still maintain the Modern interface and force you to use the start screen.

      • Re:Touch Server (Score:5, Funny)

        by rsborg ( 111459 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:53PM (#47353115) Homepage

        No no no! This is Windows 9, not Server 2015. Server 2015 will still maintain the Modern interface and force you to use the start screen.

        Your rumors are stale, Mr. Coward. From what I hear, Microsoft plans to integrate Kinect technology into Server 2015 as user testing has shown many data center workers have been using "hand gestures" when attempting to work with the Metro interface.

        • Re:Touch Server (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Darinbob ( 1142669 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @03:55PM (#47353709)

          It will allow you to shut down the server by pounding your head against the touchscreen equipped monitor.

        • Ha! I get the joke there, you made a funny. Windows in the datacenter, har har.

          -Charlie

          P.S. For those who don't get my joke, you should look up the marketshare data of Windows in the datacenter. No not the BS "Sales of OSes on servers" that MS commissions from Gartner, Forrester, and all the others who know where the checks come from, but share by installed socket. If you have access, look at it over the last 6-7 years, it is brutal. Make sure you get installed rather tha

  • Looks like MS is looking to continue the tradition of good odd-numbered Windows versions to make up for the bad even-numbered versions.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • I think that people are just being babies and looking for something to complain about. I'm not a big fan of the Windows 8 interface, especially when you don't have a touch screen (actually, I think it's awesome when you do have a touch screen), but after using it for a little while, I found that the interface didn't really hold me back at all. You hardly even see the start screen in your normal day to to day work when you're running desktop applications. It shows up when you push the start key, but after y

      • It shows up when you push the start key, but after you've typed in the name of the program you want to run and clicked on it ...

        So, I have to click, type a program name, then click again. Aren't modern GUIs great? And when you and Windows disagree as to the program "name" (i.e., the "search" fails)? [ A real example from Unity (admittedly, a while ago): I wanted the start Thunderbird, but had to type "email" for it to actually find it, even though the executable was actually named "thunderbird" - sigh. ]

    • I gotta call you on that, man. Windows 98 and Windows 2000 were awesome compared to Windows 95 and Me (Windows 99?). XP only narrowly avoided the odd numbered curse because it was named XP instead of 01 or 1. I guess they fired all the people that made Windows Me. Then they brought them all back to make Windows Vista and, after they'd learned their lesson with Vista, they had them make Windows 8.

  • Hah! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Bigbutt ( 65939 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:18PM (#47352717) Homepage Journal

    I finally got my Windows 7 system working reliably. I'm not budging until I have to.

    [John]

    • Re:Hah! (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:27PM (#47352825)

      If you've only just got windows 7 to work reliably then the problem isn't with the operating system.

    • Wouldn't it be more appropriate to say... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by hedgemage ( 934558 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:34PM (#47352909)
      Instead of saying "One of Microsoft's main goals with Windows 9, the next major version of Windows, is to win over Windows 7 hold outs." wouldn't it be more factual to say the main goal is to "overcome the design failures that prevented widespread adoption of Windows 8."

      As much as they love to pat themselves on the back for having such a "revolutionary" design, there is no better evidence that it Win 8 was a groupthink circlejerk than how no one who had the choice would use it.
    • Allow me to brag a bit: I've switched to Linux in 2006. Since then, I've made a complete hardware replacement twice. Each hardware replacement meant only about 2 hours of downtime while I was installing the packages essential for work and copying the whole /home and most of /etc directories from the old machine. After that, I was back in business pretty much exactly as I've left the old machine (minus some less important packages that were still installing in the background for another couple of hours). It'

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Smauler ( 915644 )

      I've just got my Vista system reliable again (not Vista's fault, overheating CPU, but it mangled the file system a little)... don't laugh, current uptime = 3049:16:45

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Aryden ( 1872756 )
      PEBKAC
  • Why is releasing a re-labelled version of Windows 7 going to take until spring of 2015? Are they making a crew of interns re-type the source?
    • You've obviously never used notepad as your primary IDE

  • It's too late (Score:3)

    by TechyImmigrant ( 175943 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:20PM (#47352735) Homepage Journal

    It's too late. Classic shell is better than the start menu ever was or ever will be.

    • I'm using Classic Shell too and I agree it does fix nearly everything that annoyed me in Win 8.x

      Many people on the other hand are still upset (exaggeratedly so IMO) with needing third-party applications to restore classic start menu functionality or are adamantly opposed to any sort of such work-around.

  • I suppose this is the next Tick in Microsoft's equivalent of Intel's Tick Tock development model. In Microsoft's case, they get redesign hubris with every other version, then spend the following version back-tracking and undoing all the things they did wrong.

    Much like Windows 7 pretty much was a fix-up of Vista, Windows 9 appears to be a "corrected" Windows 8.

  • Blank is to Blank... (Score:4, Funny)

    by CanHasDIY ( 1672858 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:26PM (#47352815) Homepage Journal

    So:

    Windows 9 is to Windows 7, what Windows 7 is to Windows XP.

    Why?

    Because Windows 9 is to Windows 8 what Windows 7 is to Windows Vista (which is Windows ME to Windows XP).

    Head == asplode.

    • before your head bursts, keep going....I think you can go all the way back to Windows 3.1 at least

      • Re:Blank is to Blank... (Score:4, Funny)

        by just_another_sean ( 919159 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:40PM (#47352977) Journal

        No way can you convince me that Window's had anything before 3.5!

        No seriously, I used 3.0, 3.1 and even 3.11 (for Workgroups) and had no idea what 3.5 was at the time but to this day I still love the fact that when you go deep enough on any version of Windows Server you find something that still looks a lot like it did in 4.0.

        Other than finally offering console only (Server Core) the UI for Windows Server could have remained at the Windows 2000 level and I would have been happy. Just the UI, I do like the actual improvements made under the hood and the introduction of new server technology but the UI was fine, why mess with it?

        (mumbles something about lawns, shaking his head as he wanders off...)

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Kaenneth ( 82978 )

      It's pretty simple actually.

      Versions that add support for major new hardware/API's suck, until driver/application developers catch up with the new tech (including Microsoft internal developers...)

      (1x) 1.0 > 2.0 > 2.1 I think I was still using an Amiga that generation... So I don't recall the details.
      (3x) So 3.0 > 3.1 > 3.11 (Cooperative Multitasking, Protected memory mode)
      (4x) 95 > 98 > 98 SE (Explorer, TCP/IP, COM interfaces)
      (5x) (2K/ME) > XP > XP SP2 (an actual, but underused secur

  • Why didn't they just listen to users? (Score:5, Informative)

    by ZorinLynx ( 31751 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:30PM (#47352867) Homepage

    I know, ridiculous, right?

    Microsoft could have avoided all this mess by simply listening to people who were beta testing and using 8 and complaining about the horrible start screen. I'm sure they got PILES of feedback, but they were so stubborn they even went out of their way to keep people from bringing back the traditional start menu.

    What happened to listening to your customers? To providing options? Historically MS has always been all about that, and *Apple* has been the "our way, or the highway" company. It was really strange to see things reversed for Windows 8.

    Also, MS really should break free of their "we are the only OS that exists" philosophy. Other operating systems support a wide variety of filesystems and networking protocols out of the box. Windows still only supports its own and assumes nothing else exists. It's time to knock that shit off, Microsoft.

    • It really makes me wonder if Ballmer was somehow the source of the problem. I feel like Microsoft has been a little less evil since the new guy took over.

    • Re:Why didn't they just listen to users? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by sttlmark ( 737942 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @03:09PM (#47353237)

      Sinofsky happened, that's why. I'm sure there were people who raised red flags internally prior to Windows8's release, but Sinofsky was so hellbent on making MS a "devices & services" company that he ignored any feedback that didn't mesh with his vision.

      Now he's gone, and MS has to undo his mess and spin it as innovation... So now we see MS shills writing things like this FTFA:

      In order to do this, Microsoft is working on including in Threshold lots of new features specifically aimed at "desktop" users, meaning those who interact primarily with their Windows computing device from a desktop or laptop PC with mouse/keyboard and optional touch.

      Note how "desktop" is in quotes as if this group is a fringe subset of its users instead of the 95% of its users who were completely alienated.

    • Microsoft could have avoided all this mess by simply listening to people who were beta testing and using 8 and complaining about the horrible start screen. I'm sure they got PILES of feedback, but they were so stubborn they even went out of their way to keep people from bringing back the traditional start menu.

      They were not listening because the feedback did not feed into their internal narrative. That narrative was that, to establish a position in tablets and phones, the UI had to be common across all ty

    • Win 8 was about forcing users to use Metro so MS could catch up in tablets and hybrids by leveraging the desktop. MS was behind Apple and Google on tablets even though they had a decade head start. But rather than allow users to pick Metro, MS probably feared that consumers would adopt it as much as they adopted the Zune. The Zune wasn't a bad product besides the poor color choice of brown. Sure the Zune beat out an iPod Classic, but it was not a "wow" product that offered anything significant over the

    • Re:Why didn't they just listen to users? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by NoKaOi ( 1415755 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @03:19PM (#47353341)

      What happened to listening to your customers? To providing options? Historically MS has always been all about that, and *Apple* has been the "our way, or the highway" company. It was really strange to see things reversed for Windows 8.

      The big difference being that, at least when Jobs was around, Jobs was almost always right about what a vast majority of the users actually wanted vs what they said they wanted. Yes, I know you want to say how much it sucked, but that's why I said a vast majority of users, certainly not all users. MS, OTOH, has generally gone for what users say they want rather than what they really want (anybody who has developed software for non-techy customers knows what I mean). They tried it Apple's way for Windows 8, but apparently they didn't have anybody pragmatic enough to understand real-life users.

      In other words, users said they wanted A, but Jobs knew they'd like B better. He made B, and 90% of them loved it. MS users said that wanted C, MS thought they'd like D better, they made D, and 90% of them hated it. The right answer for MS is probably not C or D, so they need to find the value of E.

    • Because Microsoft doesn't have a smegging clue about how to do *good* UI.

      Look at the retard that decided to put the Visual Studio 2012 menu is ALL CAPS. Who the hell reads a text in ALL UPPERCASE. This isn't the 1600's.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Because the Windows Store and Bing Search.

      The only reason they have been so stubborn about putting the Metro Start in front of everyone, even Server users, is to force them to look at the Windows Store tile(s).

      The store is a core part of Microsoft's bid to integrate a new revenue stream and a new way of bringing users into the fold of a subscription-based licensing model.

      Another reason is to force users to use the Bing Search to find anything they used to just double-click from the desktop or the single cli

  • While it is nice to see Microsoft undo a horrific mistake for once, lets not be too quick to forgive and forget. (And don't even start until the gold release of Windows 9 is sitting on user's desktops)

    The fact that Microsoft created this monster in the first place should tell you something about the remaining competence level there. You should be worried about their long-term stability. What is to keep them from pulling a similar stunt on you in Windows 10?

  • everyone and their grandmothers has windows 7 and won't be switching till whenever support ends for it (and everyone wonders why they didn't stop years before).

    • end of extended support is January 14, 2020; so for five and a half years we windows 7 users aren't going to budge

  • Windows 7 end of life... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by QuietLagoon ( 813062 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:39PM (#47352971)
    The end of life for Windows 7 is not until January 14, 2020 [microsoft.com]. Windows 7 is working OK for me.

    .
    Why in the world would I want to give Microsoft more money just to stay on the Microsoft Upgrade Treadmill©?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

      In case you're buying a new PC, you may wish to get 9 instead of 7 if it turns out to be good.

      If you're a business, you may wish to upgrade to 9 instead of 7 from XP. And maybe eventually to 9 at some point if you're already on 7.

  • Hmm... (Score:3)

    by sootman ( 158191 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @02:41PM (#47352987) Homepage Journal

    I wonder what reason they'll use to justify pulling it back out of Windows 10?

  • they're probably going to bring Clippy back or something like that

  • I know it might sound weird, but I like where things are at in Windows 8.1. Boots into desktop after login, transition to start screen is much less jaring when using the same background, configure the immediate left of the start screen with all your most used apps. It's very similar to the osx launchpad.

    If they remove it in win9, I may just configure it back the way it was in 8.1.

  • Yo dawg (Score:3)

    by silviuc ( 676999 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @03:21PM (#47353357) Homepage
    "I herd you like Windows, so we decided to put MORE windows in your Windows!" But seriously now, what those articles tell me is that Windows 9 will behave like Windows 7 does on my current HW...soooo why the hell would *I* want to upgrade?

  • So will they skip 10 and go straight to 11? (Score:5, Funny)

    by neo-mkrey ( 948389 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @03:30PM (#47353463)
    Insert Spinal Tap joke here:

  • I skipped Windows 7... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AnalogDiehard ( 199128 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @03:35PM (#47353517)
    ...and purchased a Mac Pro. My WIN2K machine started showing its age. HP stopped making ink cartridges for my printer. Upgrading required a completely new system as none my peripherals will work on Vista and higher. We started using WIN7 at work from XP and I just hated it. Since I had to buy a completely new system, a Mac Pro was only a little more money. And the migration to learning a new OS was easier than I anticipated. I have no regrets, especially seeing the stupid mistakes MS has made in WIN8.

  • Gone to Linux... (Score:4)

    by LVSlushdat ( 854194 ) on Monday June 30, 2014 @04:23PM (#47354005)

    Too little.... WAAAAAAY too late....

Slashdot Top Deals

Think of it! With VLSI we can pack 100 ENIACs in 1 sq. cm.!

Close