Confirmed: Windows Blue Will Be Free, to Be Called 8.1

Blackjack Davy · 18 May 2013 at 14:01

Infidelus said:
But back to the point, the old start menu isn't coming back, just a visual clue as to how to get to the modern UI.

Then that means I won't be going anywhere near Win 8 then, again. Guess that clears that up, then.

theheyes · 18 May 2013 at 14:11

Use one of the third party Start menu options?

mmj_uk · 18 May 2013 at 16:53

theheyes said:
Use one of the third party Start menu options?

Why? it's better to boycott and let MS see that they're wrong and fix it themselves.

theheyes · 18 May 2013 at 18:16

The problem is solvable with freely available software for those who want it.

I don't find Notepad particularly useful so I install 3rd party text editors. This really isn't any different.

Faustus · 18 May 2013 at 23:29

gareth170 said:
it won't happen

I very much think it will or else MS are going nowhere as a company other than into terminal decline. Most of the OEM's are putting huge pressure on MS to think again as Joe Public just doesn't like the modern UI. I've stuck with it since launch but recently installed classic shell on both my Windows machines. I hated every minute I stuck with tiles and the app screen It simply doesn't transfer well to the Desktop. Thankfully I use OS X as my main OS now so don't have to suffer the modern UI at all.

V F · 18 May 2013 at 23:57

Faustus said:
I very much think it will or else MS are going nowhere as a company other than into terminal decline.

Thats not progress.

Thankfully I use OS X as my main OS now so don't have to suffer the modern UI at all.

Then you should know. There's very little difference between the start menu layer and the dashboard layer for information. Only dashboard isn't a launcher but launchpad is.

ubersonic · 19 May 2013 at 00:10

Glaucus said:
Really looking forward to half and half split screen, now just need a 1080p tablet with ~12" screen to make use of it.

Will this be in addition to the current split ratio? or instead of? because I would much prefer to keep the current method as it works fine on the desktop (great for Skype).

theheyes · 19 May 2013 at 10:08

It's in addition to.

Mr Krugga · 19 May 2013 at 12:05

Why were people even speculating that the Service Packs in Windows will become paid for features all of the sudden?

chaparral · 19 May 2013 at 12:31

All I want is them to put the start menu back in as standard or an option to enable/disable it.....

Is that really to much to ask for...

theheyes · 19 May 2013 at 13:15

Mr Krugga said:
Why were people even speculating that the Service Packs in Windows will become paid for features all of the sudden?

Because it's not really a service pack, it's more of a feature-focused platform update.

I think since Apple charge for .1 updates the assumption was Microsoft would follow suit.

Montala · 19 May 2013 at 13:22

I am looking forward to seeing this, as at the moment Windows 8 is a bit of a pain to use on a desktop (or laptop) PC without a touch screen monitor.

It has to be worth a look anyway!

nightmare99 · 19 May 2013 at 14:45

Why were people even speculating that the Service Packs in Windows will become paid for features all of the sudden?

I believe it was actually because Microsoft confirmed that they would discuss pricing at Build and a lot of people mistook this for meaning that MS would charge existing W8 users for it when what it really means is they will discuss how much it will cost as an upgrade, standalone, for royalty oems & promotional offers etc.

Talk about being blown out of all proportion.

Glaucus · 19 May 2013 at 15:28

It wasn't that, they said they are going to go with yearly updates as the three year model no longer works in this model age, this one being free does not mean future ones will be. It's a transition period so it's all a bit up in the air.
I still think they will stick to their yearly update talk and will be charged at a small cost.

Martini1991 · 19 May 2013 at 16:18

Don't think it's going to be successful if they start charging for what should be service packs.
I mean, I don't understand the need, just call them SP 1, SP 2, SP 3 and bash them out a little quicker.

It'd be ridiculous, it would cause fragmentation etc.

theheyes · 19 May 2013 at 16:55

It depends on the strength of the app ecosystem. At the moment, a nominal fee would be a deterrent. In the future it could just simply be the price of admission. You have to assume that once WinRT matures and access to the app store is desirable in its own right then the equation changes.

I think it's telling that it's being delivered through the store. I would imagine that if in future they do charge for these point releases you will be licensed to upgrade all the devices you own (up to 5)

Martini1991 · 19 May 2013 at 17:13

RT couldn't handle an update fee quite frankly.
The Dell XPS 10 can be had for 250 quid now, that's quite telling into how dire the situation is.

Glaucus · 19 May 2013 at 17:14

There's no charge for RT anyway so there won't be a cost for any update to rt.

theheyes · 19 May 2013 at 17:38

WinRT meaning the runtime, not Windows RT.

ubersonic · 19 May 2013 at 17:54

Martini1991 said:
Don't think it's going to be successful if they start charging for what should be service packs.

SP1-SP2 is roughly equal to Lion-Mountain lion or Leopard-Snow leopard, so instead of having like OS/SP1/SP2 it looks like Microsoft are going back to the 3.0/3.1/3.11 method as Apple are their only real competitor and its working fine for them.