Soldato
The point is you should not need to.... Maybe a customer survey before the came up with the great idea of removing a key experience and function that has been a mainstay for years
Windows 8 Adoption Poor
- Thread starter philip2009
- Start date
The point is you should not need to.... Maybe a customer survey before the came up with the great idea of removing a key experience and function that has been a mainstay for years
I've asked you this a couple of times Jim and sorry to ask again but i'd love to get to the bottom of this perception of massive retraining program required for 8.
Install W8, remove all the metro apps for people that don't need them so the start screen is just a list of their normal win32 apps, disable the store in group policy if required, explain to them that when they start the PC they get a full screen menu of all their programs straight in front of them without even having to go rummaging through sub menus in "all programs" and although there's no blue dot on the desktop just move to the bottom from left corner the same as always to get the start list of programs again. Hell, even pin outlook etc to the desktop & task bar.
Enable metro, apps etc for the staff (task workers/exec/information workers etc) that need a touch / tablet device and manage them with normal group policy/sccm/antivirus/bitlocker etc the same as the rest of the estate rather than IT having to try to use mdm solutions to manage ipads etc for some staff.
I'm genuinely interested, what is the extensive retraining program you see there?
Last edited:
In the scenario I've highlighted to Jimlad (above) I'd be interested to get your view on what "large amounts of retraining" would be required.
Honestly I don't see it, it seems to be one of those things that sounds plausible but so far when you actually look at a "enterprise" build of 8 (rather than a vanilla install and run) I'm yet to find anything other than minor explanation needed. The advantage is then staff that are more advanced information workers or require touch based tablets etc can be provisioned off of a corporate build secured and managed along with the rest of the estate with bitlocker/app-v/app locker/SCCM etc.
Of course if a large enterprise is already on W7 then there's probably not any need to lift and shift across to 8 for the whole company, which is one of the reasons 8 will always have "poor" adoption numbers compared to 7, most companies have only just finished, or are still in the middle of their 7 deployments and will skip an OS as usual. W8 in the enterprise will be more tactical with it used to equip specific scenarios where touch/tablets are desirable or require alongside the majority deployment already on 7.
Last edited:
but that can be said about previous os's, there's a lot I should not need to do in previous os's to make thing better/easier but I still had to do it. that's just the way it is.
at least with win8 there's far less I need to do.
Last edited:
Caporegime
It is clearly obvious that companies aren't going to be happy needing to pay for and support a third party bit of software just to undo microsoft's whim. Look how long it's taken to move companies away from XP, if you put up barriers then business just won't bother, and your OS won't sell. Fortunately someone at Microsoft seems to have realised this at long last.
Caporegime
Why are people acting so butthurt? They aren't getting rid of Metro just giving people the choice
Because there is a group of forum members who have been telling everyone metro is here for good, it's the future, it's never going to go away and the start button is dead.
It would appear they were wrong.
Metro isn't going away as far as I can see, if you have a credible source that says it is please link it. If the start button returns and just brings up the metro screen the same as moving to the bottom left of the screen does now it's not exactly a massive change, just a visual cue.
All I've seen is discussion that you could boot to desktop, which is a minor change, the desktop is only 1 click away now, and talk of a start button being added. Note, start button, not start menu unless any one has seen different, I could be wrong.
If you allow boot to desktop adding a start button to access metro start screen makes sense as otherwise you potentially boot to a blank desktop with no visual cues what to do next.
Last edited:
Caporegime
My point was the death of the Win 7 UI looks far less certain.
Soldato
The Windows 7 UI never died. The start button went. That is all.
Soldato
The Windows 7 UI never died. The start button & menu went. That is all.
Soldato
what does this mean for windows 8?
if they allow boot to desktop and put a start button back on it, what does it actually mean?
it means we dont see metro on bootup (duh) and it means we have a button to click, as well as key to press or a screen-corner to hover over. That's it, that's all it is. It's a load of nothing. They could, also, add a start menu back. Then what? Like I've said all along, it doesn't change the workflow, it doesn't change anything I would do. I'd still hit the windows key and type in the name of whatever it is i was trying to find. Nothing changes.
It's actually so unimportant that I just can't see what the fuss is all about. What i will say though, is that I'm undecided on whether this is a win for common sense (in giving people a choice) or a loss for giving in to people who have trouble understanding even the most basic of concepts.Is that really such a good thing? I don't know.
if they allow boot to desktop and put a start button back on it, what does it actually mean?
it means we dont see metro on bootup (duh) and it means we have a button to click, as well as key to press or a screen-corner to hover over. That's it, that's all it is. It's a load of nothing. They could, also, add a start menu back. Then what? Like I've said all along, it doesn't change the workflow, it doesn't change anything I would do. I'd still hit the windows key and type in the name of whatever it is i was trying to find. Nothing changes.
It's actually so unimportant that I just can't see what the fuss is all about. What i will say though, is that I'm undecided on whether this is a win for common sense (in giving people a choice) or a loss for giving in to people who have trouble understanding even the most basic of concepts.Is that really such a good thing? I don't know.
Indeed, although I do tend to think in the long term the traditional desktop will change beyond recognition. Of course what we see now as the metro interface will evolve substantially as well.
There are fundamentally changes going on in computing and the underpinning of Windows that influence this outside the scope of this discussion I suspect. WinRT (not the device) will over time replace win32 as the app model in the same way that Windows now no longer supports 8 & 16bit windows on windows code from the past. Most people didn't even notice the drop of support.
Win7 is the first step in a change that will take 5 years +, it's much more than just a few Cosmetic UI changes and it has to happen if Windows is to survive as a major OS for the future.
Caporegime
It's goes beyond the start menu. There is still the gem bar, the right sided app switching bar, the crappy integration of the desktop with metro apps/menus, having apps/programs that do the same job.
It seems very rough around the edges.
Last edited:
Soldato
james.miller said:
Indeed. That's pretty much exactly how I feel, and mirrors pretty much how I use Windows.
But those are all additional features. You can use them if you want, but for the day to day use of the PC, it doesn't need to affect you at all if you don't want it to. I use the desktop for 99% of what I do and the Modern UI apps rarely get a look in with the exception of the the News & Weather apps, but it's all there if I feel like using it.
It certainly hasn't made me any less productive. I don't disagree that it's not perfect, but it's new, and I'm sure Microsoft will adjust the features as time goes on to make the user experience better for those that really seem to be struggling with such a simple change. If my mother can use Windows 8 on a daily basis and jump between the desktop and Modern UI interface without issues, then anyone can.
Minstadave, I'm curious... are you a relic? I mean how do you get on with smartphones or any touch devices? I can't see you as one of those people that buys a new phone every 6 months for the latest technology. Because sometimes reading your posts, it wouldn't matter if Metro was gone or whatever Microsoft changed you would complain about it.
You don't sound like somebody that loves to tinker and play with new stuff no matter what it is. "My way or the highway!"
Minstadave sure can't. He's been stinking up a fuss since release and can't seem to try or understand logic. He doesn't even have an open mind. He's not even willing.
You don't sound like somebody that loves to tinker and play with new stuff no matter what it is. "My way or the highway!"
Minstadave sure can't. He's been stinking up a fuss since release and can't seem to try or understand logic. He doesn't even have an open mind. He's not even willing.
Last edited:
Soldato
All they appear to be doing is making the new UI more discoverable. This is being mis-reported as 'bringing back' old elements.
If you take the recently updated Mail app for example, it has a persistent icon to invoke the search charm when you press it.
If you look at the new 8.1 builds you see further evidence of including more persistent icons in the UI to give people clues. The 'all apps' button is a great example of this - it's been moved from the context menu to having it's own permanent spot on screen.
The rumoured 'Start button' will just be an extension of this. It's there for discovery, and not a regression back to the old UI.
If you take the recently updated Mail app for example, it has a persistent icon to invoke the search charm when you press it.
If you look at the new 8.1 builds you see further evidence of including more persistent icons in the UI to give people clues. The 'all apps' button is a great example of this - it's been moved from the context menu to having it's own permanent spot on screen.
The rumoured 'Start button' will just be an extension of this. It's there for discovery, and not a regression back to the old UI.
Future is always uncertain,you only have to look at Microsoft track record and see every new OS what features did not make it (ie in Vista,Win7, Win8 for example) and was removed etc ,as to start button that was probably down to a lot of users that could not handle a simple start button missing so Microsoft did a backtrack,not the first time and it won't be the last,the big question you should be asking is will Microsoft keep on a hybrid OS because they can't accomodate all modern hardware with Win 95 to Win7 UI on its own,it won't cut it,personally I think they should either redesign a new UI from scratch for Win9 etc...or improve on Metro etc..eitherway its progress.
Problem with Win95 to Win7 UI is you can only go so far before nothing really changes and it shows it age and restrictions especially with modern hardware ie touch devices,you know the old saying "you can only shave a wookie so many times" and 18 years is a long time and the UI is showing its age.
The truth is if they did redesign a modern new UI for Win9 for example that was good you would still get people that could not handle it(they can't even handle a simple start button missing let alone another new revamp in UI) who's fault is that?.....User or Microsoft for keeping the old UI the same for far too long?
One last point we all get news from the net from all over the place,I've posted links as you know so if Microsoft did backtrack so what ,don't shoot the messengers,we at least can handle the changes and adapt ,too bad a lot of others can't,I just hope it does not hold back progress,Win9 and 10 will be interesting and I wonder what users will be throwing fits over next generation of operating systems.
For Microsoft its clear they have to decide where their future is ie hybrid OS or various OS choices for desktop,tablets,phones etc...
From my point of view I tend to think let Windows 8 be Windows 8 and Windows 7 be Windows 7, choose the one that does things the way that suits you best. I'm afraid I don't get the need to try to turn Windows 8 back into Windows 7 or insist Windows 8 is "wrong". If you prefer 7 then stick with it, it's a fine OS but don't try to stifle change, innovation and progression by mandating nothing should ever change other than minor tinkering.
The world of Personal Computers is already changing massively and Windows has to change with it or be left behind. Otherwise MS may as well have stopped with Windows7 and got out of the OS business completely.
Whether it's Windows 8, 8.1, 9 or 10 the Windows 7 UI is being deprecated one way or another and I doubt that in 10 years it will be around at all other than for certain (probably virtualised) backwards compatibility legacy apps. Just my opinion though and hey, what do I know
I genuinely think that Windows 8 is a great desktop OS and works well if you take the time to learn some of the new features and ways of doing things. It's not a monumental task and well worth the effort if you're even remotely interested in technology. Sure there will need to be changes and fine tuning, the same as Microsoft (and others) have done with every OS since the year dot. You do have to approach it with an open mind and not with the intention of trying to turn it back into Windows 7 though, after all, what's the point, you already have 7.
Having said all that I don't think this thread looks like it's going to go anywhere to be frank, people are too entrenched and will refuse to acknowledge any other point of view.
I hope I've added to the conversation with a relatively open mind and highlighted some of the elements that I think are important. I really don't think it's as easy as a black and white set of facts, not least because it involves people individual taste, preferences and skill sets.
As an aside, and feel free to tell me to mind my own business, Minstadave, you have some great points and Windows 7 is a great OS, but your posting style on Windows 8 is pretty aggressive and so people tend to stop listening to you and just give you a hard time back. Of course, that may actually be the response you're after
Unless something that I just can't resist comes up I'm going to step out of the thread now because I'd only be repeating myself and I'm not sure anyone is persuading anyone else at this stage.
Good to have a open debate though, I've enjoyed it
The world of Personal Computers is already changing massively and Windows has to change with it or be left behind. Otherwise MS may as well have stopped with Windows7 and got out of the OS business completely.
Whether it's Windows 8, 8.1, 9 or 10 the Windows 7 UI is being deprecated one way or another and I doubt that in 10 years it will be around at all other than for certain (probably virtualised) backwards compatibility legacy apps. Just my opinion though and hey, what do I know
I genuinely think that Windows 8 is a great desktop OS and works well if you take the time to learn some of the new features and ways of doing things. It's not a monumental task and well worth the effort if you're even remotely interested in technology. Sure there will need to be changes and fine tuning, the same as Microsoft (and others) have done with every OS since the year dot. You do have to approach it with an open mind and not with the intention of trying to turn it back into Windows 7 though, after all, what's the point, you already have 7.
Having said all that I don't think this thread looks like it's going to go anywhere to be frank, people are too entrenched and will refuse to acknowledge any other point of view.
I hope I've added to the conversation with a relatively open mind and highlighted some of the elements that I think are important. I really don't think it's as easy as a black and white set of facts, not least because it involves people individual taste, preferences and skill sets.
As an aside, and feel free to tell me to mind my own business, Minstadave, you have some great points and Windows 7 is a great OS, but your posting style on Windows 8 is pretty aggressive and so people tend to stop listening to you and just give you a hard time back. Of course, that may actually be the response you're after
Unless something that I just can't resist comes up I'm going to step out of the thread now because I'd only be repeating myself and I'm not sure anyone is persuading anyone else at this stage.
Good to have a open debate though, I've enjoyed it
OS X and iOS are already there. Most of their user base is griping of it stagnating and very little changing. Most of the gripe mainly comes from some different looks for Calendar and such but overall so many are wanting change.
This happened in Formula 1. Sky were interviewing the lead Pirelli guy yesterday and the fact him saying fans wanting tyre degradation, now they have the fans complaining it's too much. Insert slider here on how much change.
Last edited:
Caporegime
You're a massive drama queen. Please stop crying like a fanboy after my posts, it's a little lame.
If you really need to now I'm into tinkering, I build all my own pcs, I've run every OS since win 3.1, I've had android/psion/windows mobile/iOS smartphones. I still think Win 8 is a poor. Mostly because I want to use my OS as I like, and not roll over for a cheap reskin of a very good OS that makes it less useful.
Now if you want to single out me again kindly bring some debate rather than trolling.
Last edited: