We'll you could just buy it now when it's still cheap and upgrade later, I doubt it'll be any cheaper than 14.99$/€/£ soon
Yeah, I'd say "take their arm off" on the upgrade but don't update just yet (no-one with sense uses an MS OS before SP1) - they'll iron-out the kinks and we'll have a much better picture of what's going on in 3 months-or-so.
Also - I NEVER EVER 'upgade' anyway - clean install every time, if you're going to do it, do it properly - don't drag all your crap and baggage along with you.
The "upgrade" code can be used with a clean install of Win8 too, or so I'm told.
That said, I'd suggest holding on for now too. Keep the code and install next year, if ever. Right now, the Metro UI is infuriatingly bad outside of a touchscreen device. I almost got into a fight with my girl yesterday because she was forced to use it in my laptop.
I do have the ClassicShell installed. The desktop interface is mostly annoyance-free, it's just when you're yanked into the formerly-known-as-Metro UI that your entire experience is disrupted.
The standard defense of "people don't like change" does not convince me. I'm used to adapting to new interfaces. For me, Metro just doesn't cut it. It's a bad PC port of a tablet UI. It's like trying to use Photoshop with a joystick.
Yeah, the "you'll get used to it" or "you can hack it to work like W7" arguments are bollocks - the simple fact is that the Metro stuff is junk for laptops/desktops and will be a dead duck in tablet terms within 2-3 years anyway.
I suspect MS already realised they've driven at full speed into a dead-end - they're got zero chance of turning the tide that is people not using laptops/desktops anymore because they have smartphones and tablets - they'll thrive as they have before, from short-sighted risk-averse IT managers buying everything they offer (see also Oracle) but the end is in sight for MS as any sort of leader in IT terms (if they ever were one).
It's not basic, and it's not intuitive at all. Please note I'm not talking about just opening the metro start screen, I'm talking about using one of the metro apps for whatever reason - the PDF reader, for instance, or the photo browser.
The interface is completely revamped all of a sudden, and familiar actions are done in unintuitive, arcane ways. Often with invisible cues that a new user can get extremely annoyed finding out without assistance.
For instance, closing the current window (click on the right corner? No, you have to hold the mouse on an invisible spot in the upper middle and drag it down), changing tabs in the browser (you have to first click the right button for them to appear, and by the way, the address bar is now at the bottom for no good reason!), returning to the Metro start screen without the keyboard (you gotta click an invisible spot in the left corner), switching to another app (move the mouse to the corner, then slowly drag it down without pressing anything, your open apps will then appear... hopefully). Many actions are hidden behind a right button click, and these options don't appear near the mouse cursor as they should, it's always in a fixed bar across the edge of the screen. FFS, even the button for shutting the computer down is hidden in a completely obscure place that demands knowledge of an invisible clickable area!
I mean, I could go on and on. I'm just citing these annoyances by memory from yesterday's events. The whole implementation of the UI is a disaster, and I can't fathom how there can be people defending it outside of a touchscreen device.
Last edited by Maknol; 13-11-2012 at 04:07 PM.
There is this thing called 'emotional branding', and it describes how people get emotionally involved with brands. Emotional responses are quick and occur before rational thought. Moreover, the natural tendency is for people to use their rational mind only to justify their emotional responses. So, when it comes to decision making and beliefs, emotions trump reason.
So if a company is lucky enough to get people emotionally involved in their brands, the reaction of those people to criticism of that brand will be fast, emotional, and highly resistant to reasoning. Kind of like when somebody criticizes another's child, or even religion.
You see it all the time in comment sections, amazon reviews, forums, coffee shops, families, your own head, etc.
TL;DR version of mine
Buy Windows 8 if:
- you have money to spend
- you want to upgrade your OS from Windows Vista and later
- you want a little improvement in performance than Windows 7 (i.e. faster boot speed, ARM etc)
- you think you will use whatever new things Windows 8 will offer (Touchscreen-Metro, Windows Store etc)
No need to buy Windows 8 if:
- you have no money/better usage of money for other stuff (maybe games?)
- you don't really care about little bits of new stuff Windows 8 will offer compare to Windows 7
- you're getting along with Windows 7 just fine
Reference: My experience with Windows 8 trial for 1 month, then I switched back to Windows 7
The point I'm making is that there's no obligation to use the Modern UI apps on the desktop. They're designed for a touch screen. You're free to use whatever else you like. Picking on the address bar being at the bottom of the screen under the ModernUI version of IE10 is nitpicking - it's down there because the onscreen keyboard pops up underneath it. That's pointless for a desktop app, but it's not designed for the desktop, so don't use it.
The benefits for the desktop are primary under the hood in the way of performance improvements, rewritten subsystems, etc. If that isn't a drawcard for you, don't update. But the constant complaining about the new UI seems to largely complain because it's different and as if the new apps are forced onto you. They're not - just unpin or uninstall them, or ignore them. Problem solved.
Steven Sinofsky leaves Microsoft
the guy behind windows 8's vision just got fired. Bodes well for the OS!Steven Sinofsky, president of Windows and Windows Live Division, is leaving Microsoft effective immediately, reports All Things D.
The move is claimed to be a result of growing discontent within the software giant, with a number of executives reportedly unhappy when working with him due to his failure to be a "team player." Such a move has striking parallels with Scott Forstall's recent exit from Apple.
Sinofsky held his current position since 2009, but he joined Microsoft in 1989, more than 20 years ago. All Things D says responsibility for Windows will now be split between two of Sinofsky's reports: Julie Larson-Green, who will head up Windows engineering, and Tami Reller, who will take care of the business side.
To help answer that question, I talked to Patrick Moorhead of MoorInsights, who has worked with Sinofsky on multiple occasions and talked to others he works with. The upshot is that its possible Steven Sinofsky is another Scott Forstall: an ass-kicker who gets stuff done at a cost.
He was a very alienating character. He alienated partners, he alienated ISVs, he alienated other people at Microsoft, and left a trail of disenfranchised people, Moorhead told me.
Its very similar to the recent departure from Apple of Scott Forstall, he added. Ive worked for people like this they end up getting a lot of things done amazing things, actually but they hurt a lot of people.
Read more at http://venturebeat.com/2012/11/13/wi...khUj2bpqHWb.99
He was an asshole who was told to leave. More common in the IT industry then you expect.
My general impression is that if you don't keep a (competent) project lead at least to follow through with his devised plan, it means the original strategy is being abandoned or contorted by a committee of people with their own agendas into a new form that probably won't work.
Given how excited people are about the Lumia 920 and Surface Pro, it seems like they've got a real shot at it. If Microsoft weren't impressed with the vision of Win8 they would have delayed it and scrapped it ages back. Instead they invested in putting out their own tablet. Clearly they do have at least some confidence in it.