Windows 9 set for release next year

Soldato
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Posts
9,315
I don't get it. What was the troubled part? After all, they were pushing hard to get people on it.

It didn't sell that well, and a lot of the Win 7 installed base refused to upgrade to it, despite MS pushing hard to get people to use it. The person in charge of Win 8 was pretty much sacked.

I think MS will make a few relatively small changes to appease those of us who dislike certain aspects of the UI, and give it a new version number as a marketing break from the bad reputation of Win 8. It's easier to market a new product as Win 9, rather than a Win 8 that has already failed with the customer base.
 
Associate
Joined
11 Oct 2011
Posts
1,328
Location
London
It didn't sell that well, and a lot of the Win 7 installed base refused to upgrade to it, despite MS pushing hard to get people to use it. The person in charge of Win 8 was pretty much sacked.

I think MS will make a few relatively small changes to appease those of us who dislike certain aspects of the UI, and give it a new version number as a marketing break from the bad reputation of Win 8. It's easier to market a new product as Win 9, rather than a Win 8 that has already failed with the customer base.

This is true, itll be much easier.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Posts
9,315
This is true, itll be much easier.

I think one of the big problems is that MS is competing against itself as so many customers are happy with Win 7. For MS to make big changes (such as forcing metro on desktop users), and getting rid of well understood favourites (such as the Start Menu), means that people don't feel that Win 8 offered enough benefit to upgrade.

It's not enough for MS to offer something good with Win 8, they have to offer something better than Win 7 to attract people who are more than happy to stick with what they already have.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jan 2007
Posts
8,944
Location
Manchester
One of the biggest problems with Metro 1.0 is that discoverability is just terrible, compounded by a complete lack of any tutorial out of the box.

They stripped out all of the "chrome" and now they're have to retrofit pieces here and there because they went too far. And the daft thing is, Windows Phone had already sorted a lot of these problems out.

The more I think about windowed metro apps on the desktop the more I'm warming to the idea, because I think it's a pretty big deal. There are quite a few metro apps that would actually work great on the desktop.

I do however think an additional view is necessary from a developer standpoint for this to work ; metro apps need to be designed for portrait, landscape, snap view, and now desktop view.

And as a bonus windowed metro apps should scale quite nicely and look great with very high resolution displays, which has traditionally been a problem for Windows desktop.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
76,634
Guess I probably put my Windows 8 exams on hold for abit :(

:confused:

Ms likes to release a new os every three years, so there's nothing panicky about w9 being released in 2015.

I bet the October this year rumour is nothing but pulled out of someone's crack.
Seeing as they always do a fairly lengthy alpha and then beta.

So we could get an alpha(developer preview) at build, then beta in the new year. That seems far more likely.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
16 Nov 2011
Posts
1,526
Location
Nottingham
Is it worth upgrading to 8.1 from 7? I didn't really like the interface for W8 but I think I can get used to it if there is a solid reason to upgrade.
If not I'll just wait to see what 9 is like.
 

R3X

R3X

Soldato
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Posts
3,553
long as it has classic desktop and classic start button from start... its an auto success

All we wanted was win7 lighter and faster and updated, was it really that hard MS ?

Hopefully they offer £29.99 deals or cheap update deals and will jump on it asap.
 
Joined
5 Oct 2008
Posts
8,978
Location
Kent
Is it worth upgrading to 8.1 from 7? I didn't really like the interface for W8 but I think I can get used to it if there is a solid reason to upgrade.
If not I'll just wait to see what 9 is like.

Not really any reason to upgrade. There are small tweaks (and you can always get the Start Menu back with 3rd party tools), but not worth the £90 or so license cost.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
76,634
Kind of depends if you want metro, I couldn't live without metro and the apps now. Going back to win7 feels like going back a decade.

I don't use outlook (office) and thus want to know when I get emails without opening up a website just like on phones/tablets. Same with weather. Netflix and audible apps are far better than the website/desktop equivalents, prefer YouTube through metro tube rather than website. Prefer several mapping apps on metro.
And to top of it off split screen is just fantastic. I know there's a cut down version on desktop and has been for years but its not the same. As well as auto split screen when opening links in emails etc.
And boot speed is very nice indeed.

So for me even at 90 it would be well worth it. And off course the desktop hasn't changed in the slightest and still looks and acts like so can game, use office etc. So like usual depends how you think you will use it.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
26 Dec 2003
Posts
25,666
Kind of depends if you want metro

95% of the planet don't want anything to do with it.

I bet even if W9 abolishes Metro altogether you'll still be the first to upgrade and yet continue to preach to everyone about brilliant W8/Metro was.
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
76,634
They won't get rid of metro, it will evolve. I expect it'll be more like win7 was to vista. Minor tweaks and people loved it. Why, a lot of it was down to the almost three year timescale, for two reasons, people got use to it and drivers where released. that was the biggest issue. With win8 people aren't use to it and the app store was tiny and pretty rubbish except for a few stand out apps, the app store has always improved massively and by the time win9 rolls out should be looking good.

What would be nice is horizontal splits as well as the current vertical splits. Slight change in scaling for large monitors. And even better support for multi monitor. Being able to pin stat screen to one screen permanently for example.

How on earth can you put a percentage do it, have you looked at steam stats recently.

People mistake metro doom and gloom with pc doom and gloom.
People simply aren't upgrading as much as they were and those that do upgrade are generally buying ios/android devices. Corporations on the other hand always have huge lead times before implementing anything new.


Do you honestly believe they are just going to close down their app store, admit defeat and roll over and die?
As that's what you and others are saying you want to happen, with out a modern o's to compete in the mobile market that is what will happen. We've already seen massive companies replacing existing infrastructure with tablets, especially for mobile staff.

Even if win9 is loved, don't expect great pc sales. It'll be a continues decline of conventional pcs until it hits a certain level, where it will level off. mainly due to corporations still needing conventional pcs. Many homes no longer need or have desktops and rely on laptops and now even that is starting to change in favour of smartphones, tablets. Most people do not need huge cutting edge computers anymore, they just need a bit of document work and the rest is media consumption.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
31 Oct 2011
Posts
2,545
Location
Leyland
Two things I like about windows 8.1 is the ability to mount virtual drives without the need for third party software like PowerISO and I like the way it handles multiple file transfers better than windows 7 without the need for more third party software.
I clicked the thingy that lets you boot straight to desktop, i rarely see the metro screen (or whatever its legally called these days).

Yes i agree 7 was a complete and utter success and i loved it but that was comparing it to Vista, which is like comparing a punch in the face from Mike Tyson(vista) to a shag from Rachael Riley(7). So although 7 to 8/8.1 was not ground breaking there are significant improvements. I can not think of anything i miss from 7.

I guess it all depends on the end user, but i feel a lot of haters are just jumping on the band wagon. I probably will move to Windows 9 but only if Microsoft ran the same deal they did with 8.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2012
Posts
8,333
used [or at least can remember using] every windows os since 95, needless to say my opinion is this:

xp and before all basically the same in terms of use

vista: heard it was bad, used it for 4 years no issues

7: currently the only option if I had the choice, until w9 proves itself good or bad

8: forced to have it on the laptop hated the ui, upgraded to 8.1 in the vain hope of getting a more familiar and useable experience, was disappointed. i'll give it points for the speed of booting and programs [including many not meant to agree with it running better than on 7] but i'll take away equally as many points if not more for the metro bs and the fact its always stuffed with random updates, news and software i'll never use just like modern smartphones and the 'intuitive user interface' meaning I can never find the program I'm after and final nail in the coffin is all the hidden buttons that would make life easy if you could afford a week to sit and memorise their function and position
 

Hxc

Hxc

Soldato
Joined
29 Oct 2004
Posts
12,501
Location
London
Yes i agree 7 was a complete and utter success and i loved it but that was comparing it to Vista, which is like comparing a punch in the face from Mike Tyson(vista) to a shag from Rachael Riley(7). So although 7 to 8/8.1 was not ground breaking there are significant improvements. I can not think of anything i miss from 7.


This is the crux of a lot of the problem; there was very, very little wrong with vista. It had driver problems at the start and the file copy bug, but virtually none of the issues were with the operating system itself. Blame terrible driver support and badly coded applications (for the mass of UAC prompts), not Vista.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jan 2007
Posts
8,944
Location
Manchester
Metro isn't inherently bad. When people say they prefer the "desktop" on the desktop, and I include myself in that category, they pretty much mean they prefer resizable/overlapping windows as opposed to full or vertically segmented areas of the screen. The former really is better if you're doing certain kinds of desktop tasks.

If the rumours about windowed metro apps are true, then it wouldn't be that hard to implement a metro style desktop (think Start screen but instead of tiles you have windowed apps). You could even scroll/swipe left to right for virtual desktop functionality.

Metro/WinRT is much maligned because of its execution, but given time to evolve there is no reason it can't actually solve a lot of long standing problems with Windows.
 
Back
Top Bottom